HiSilicon Kirin 960 vs Unisoc Tiger T618
The HiSilicon Kirin 960 and Unisoc Tiger T618 are two processors that are worth comparing based on their specifications. The Kirin 960 is equipped with 8 CPU cores, consisting of 4 Cortex-A73 cores running at 2.4 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores running at 1.8 GHz. On the other hand, the Tiger T618 also has 8 CPU cores, with 2 Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz and 6 Cortex-A55 cores also running at 2.0 GHz.
In terms of architecture, the Kirin 960 utilizes ARMv8-A instruction set, while the Tiger T618 uses ARMv8.2-A instruction set. It is important to note that the Kirin 960 is built on a 16 nm lithography, whereas the Tiger T618 is based on a more advanced 12 nm lithography. This implies that the Tiger T618 may have improved power efficiency and potentially better thermal performance.
Another notable aspect is the TDP (Thermal Design Power) rating. The Kirin 960 has a TDP of 5 Watts, which indicates that it is designed for more power-restricted devices, such as smartphones or tablets. In contrast, the Tiger T618 has a TDP of 10 Watts, suggesting that it may be more suitable for devices that can handle higher power consumption, such as laptops or mini PCs.
Furthermore, the Tiger T618 sets itself apart by its inclusion of a Neural Processing Unit (NPU). This specialized hardware component can significantly enhance the processor's ability to handle artificial intelligence tasks, such as machine learning or image recognition. This feature offers a significant advantage for applications that heavily rely on AI algorithms.
In conclusion, while both the Kirin 960 and Tiger T618 offer multicore CPUs and ARM-based architecture, they differ in terms of lithography, TDP, and the inclusion of an NPU. The Kirin 960 operates on a 16 nm lithography, has a lower 5 Watt TDP, and lacks an NPU. In contrast, the Tiger T618 utilizes a more advanced 12 nm lithography, has a higher 10 Watt TDP, and incorporates an NPU. These specifications are crucial factors to consider when selecting a processor for a specific device or application.
In terms of architecture, the Kirin 960 utilizes ARMv8-A instruction set, while the Tiger T618 uses ARMv8.2-A instruction set. It is important to note that the Kirin 960 is built on a 16 nm lithography, whereas the Tiger T618 is based on a more advanced 12 nm lithography. This implies that the Tiger T618 may have improved power efficiency and potentially better thermal performance.
Another notable aspect is the TDP (Thermal Design Power) rating. The Kirin 960 has a TDP of 5 Watts, which indicates that it is designed for more power-restricted devices, such as smartphones or tablets. In contrast, the Tiger T618 has a TDP of 10 Watts, suggesting that it may be more suitable for devices that can handle higher power consumption, such as laptops or mini PCs.
Furthermore, the Tiger T618 sets itself apart by its inclusion of a Neural Processing Unit (NPU). This specialized hardware component can significantly enhance the processor's ability to handle artificial intelligence tasks, such as machine learning or image recognition. This feature offers a significant advantage for applications that heavily rely on AI algorithms.
In conclusion, while both the Kirin 960 and Tiger T618 offer multicore CPUs and ARM-based architecture, they differ in terms of lithography, TDP, and the inclusion of an NPU. The Kirin 960 operates on a 16 nm lithography, has a lower 5 Watt TDP, and lacks an NPU. In contrast, the Tiger T618 utilizes a more advanced 12 nm lithography, has a higher 10 Watt TDP, and incorporates an NPU. These specifications are crucial factors to consider when selecting a processor for a specific device or application.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
2x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 16 nm | 12 nm |
Number of transistors | 4000 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 10 Watt |
Neural Processing | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 6 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 1866 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G71 MP8 | Mali-G52 MP2 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 850 MHz |
Execution units | 8 | 2 |
Shaders | 128 | 32 |
DirectX | 11.3 | 11 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 2.1 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2400x1080 | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 20MP, 2x 12MP | 1x 64M |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@60fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.6 Gbps | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 0.1 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2016 October | 2019 August |
Partnumber | Hi3660 | T618 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Flagship | Mid-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 Plus vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000
3
Unisoc SC9832E vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730
4
Samsung Exynos 850 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
5
MediaTek Helio G85 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632 vs Unisoc Tiger T700
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Plus Gen 2 vs HiSilicon Kirin 955
8
Samsung Exynos 9611 vs Google Tensor G1
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 vs MediaTek Dimensity 700
10
MediaTek Dimensity 1000 Plus vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1