HiSilicon Kirin 970 vs MediaTek Dimensity 810
The HiSilicon Kirin 970 and the MediaTek Dimensity 810 are two processors with impressive specifications and capabilities.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 970 features 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, while the Dimensity 810 boasts 2x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 cores and 6x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Both processors have 8 cores, offering a balance between efficiency and performance for various tasks.
The instruction set for the Kirin 970 is ARMv8-A, while the Dimensity 810 uses the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. This means that the Dimensity 810 is more advanced and may offer better compatibility with modern software and applications.
When it comes to lithography, the Kirin 970 adopts a 10 nm process, while the Dimensity 810 utilizes a 6 nm process. A smaller lithography generally indicates a more power-efficient and compact processor.
The number of transistors also differs between the two processors. The Kirin 970 has 5500 million transistors, while the Dimensity 810 boasts a higher count of 12000 million transistors. This indicates that the Dimensity 810 can potentially handle more complex calculations and tasks due to its increased transistor count.
In terms of thermal design power (TDP), the Dimensity 810 is slightly more power-efficient than the Kirin 970 with a TDP of 8 Watts, compared to the 9 Watts of the Kirin 970. Lower TDP means less power consumption and potentially longer battery life for devices utilizing the Dimensity 810.
Both processors also feature neural processing units (NPU), which enhance artificial intelligence capabilities. The Kirin 970 has a HiSilicon NPU, while the Dimensity 810 simply mentions "NPU" without specifying the manufacturer. This suggests that the Kirin 970 may offer more optimized and efficient AI performance.
Overall, while both processors offer great performance and capabilities, the Dimensity 810 stands out with its more advanced lithography, higher transistor count, and slightly lower TDP. However, the Kirin 970 retains its relevance with its optimized NPU and efficient power consumption.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 970 features 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, while the Dimensity 810 boasts 2x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 cores and 6x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Both processors have 8 cores, offering a balance between efficiency and performance for various tasks.
The instruction set for the Kirin 970 is ARMv8-A, while the Dimensity 810 uses the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. This means that the Dimensity 810 is more advanced and may offer better compatibility with modern software and applications.
When it comes to lithography, the Kirin 970 adopts a 10 nm process, while the Dimensity 810 utilizes a 6 nm process. A smaller lithography generally indicates a more power-efficient and compact processor.
The number of transistors also differs between the two processors. The Kirin 970 has 5500 million transistors, while the Dimensity 810 boasts a higher count of 12000 million transistors. This indicates that the Dimensity 810 can potentially handle more complex calculations and tasks due to its increased transistor count.
In terms of thermal design power (TDP), the Dimensity 810 is slightly more power-efficient than the Kirin 970 with a TDP of 8 Watts, compared to the 9 Watts of the Kirin 970. Lower TDP means less power consumption and potentially longer battery life for devices utilizing the Dimensity 810.
Both processors also feature neural processing units (NPU), which enhance artificial intelligence capabilities. The Kirin 970 has a HiSilicon NPU, while the Dimensity 810 simply mentions "NPU" without specifying the manufacturer. This suggests that the Kirin 970 may offer more optimized and efficient AI performance.
Overall, while both processors offer great performance and capabilities, the Dimensity 810 stands out with its more advanced lithography, higher transistor count, and slightly lower TDP. However, the Kirin 970 retains its relevance with its optimized NPU and efficient power consumption.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
2x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A76 6x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 10 nm | 6 nm |
Number of transistors | 5500 million | 12000 million |
TDP | 9 Watt | 8 Watt |
Neural Processing | HiSilicon NPU | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 8 GB | up to 12 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.2 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G72 MP12 | Mali-G57 MP2 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 750 MHz | 950 MHz |
Execution units | 12 | 2 |
Shaders | 192 | 32 |
DirectX | 12 | 12 |
OpenCL API | 2.0 | 2.1 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2340x1080 | 2520x1080@120Hz |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 20MP | 1x 64MP, 2x 16MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | 2K@30FPS |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP9 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 1.2 Gbps | 2.77 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 1.2 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 5.1 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS QZSS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2017 September | 2021 Quarter 3 |
Partnumber | Hi3670 | MT6833V/PNZA, MT6833P |
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
Apple A17 Pro vs Unisoc Tanggula T740 5G
2
Samsung Exynos 7904 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 820
3
Unisoc Tiger T612 vs MediaTek Helio G36
4
MediaTek Helio G80 vs Samsung Exynos 7880
5
MediaTek Helio G35 vs Unisoc Tiger T616
6
MediaTek Dimensity 9200 Plus vs MediaTek Dimensity 6020
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 vs Samsung Exynos 9810
8
Samsung Exynos 850 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 712
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs MediaTek Dimensity 820
10
MediaTek Dimensity 900 vs MediaTek Helio A25