HiSilicon Kirin 970 vs Unisoc SC9832E
The HiSilicon Kirin 970 and the Unisoc SC9832E are two processors with different specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 970, it has an architecture consisting of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With a total of 8 cores, this processor offers a balanced combination of high-performance and energy efficiency. It supports the ARMv8-A instruction set and comes with a lithography of 10 nm. With 5500 million transistors, it has a relatively high transistor count, indicating advanced technology. The TDP (Thermal Design Power) of the Kirin 970 is 9 watts, suggesting that it is designed to deliver powerful performance without excessive heat generation. Additionally, it features the HiSilicon NPU for neural processing, enhancing its capabilities in AI-related tasks.
On the other hand, the Unisoc SC9832E features an architecture with 4x 1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With only 4 cores, it is a more basic configuration compared to the Kirin 970. Like the Kirin 970, it also supports the ARMv8-A instruction set, but it differs in terms of lithography. The SC9832E has a lithography of 28 nm, which is larger than the Kirin 970's 10 nm. This suggests that the SC9832E may not be as energy-efficient as the Kirin 970. The TDP of the SC9832E is 7 watts, indicating a lower power consumption compared to the Kirin 970.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 970 and the Unisoc SC9832E have distinct specifications. The Kirin 970 offers a higher number of cores, a more advanced lithography, and features the HiSilicon NPU for neural processing. However, the SC9832E has a lower TDP, suggesting it may have lower power consumption. These differences indicate that the Kirin 970 is more suitable for high-performance tasks, while the SC9832E may be more suited for simpler, power-efficient applications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 970, it has an architecture consisting of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With a total of 8 cores, this processor offers a balanced combination of high-performance and energy efficiency. It supports the ARMv8-A instruction set and comes with a lithography of 10 nm. With 5500 million transistors, it has a relatively high transistor count, indicating advanced technology. The TDP (Thermal Design Power) of the Kirin 970 is 9 watts, suggesting that it is designed to deliver powerful performance without excessive heat generation. Additionally, it features the HiSilicon NPU for neural processing, enhancing its capabilities in AI-related tasks.
On the other hand, the Unisoc SC9832E features an architecture with 4x 1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With only 4 cores, it is a more basic configuration compared to the Kirin 970. Like the Kirin 970, it also supports the ARMv8-A instruction set, but it differs in terms of lithography. The SC9832E has a lithography of 28 nm, which is larger than the Kirin 970's 10 nm. This suggests that the SC9832E may not be as energy-efficient as the Kirin 970. The TDP of the SC9832E is 7 watts, indicating a lower power consumption compared to the Kirin 970.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 970 and the Unisoc SC9832E have distinct specifications. The Kirin 970 offers a higher number of cores, a more advanced lithography, and features the HiSilicon NPU for neural processing. However, the SC9832E has a lower TDP, suggesting it may have lower power consumption. These differences indicate that the Kirin 970 is more suitable for high-performance tasks, while the SC9832E may be more suited for simpler, power-efficient applications.
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
CPU cores and architecture
| Architecture | 4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 1.4 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
| Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
| Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
| Lithography | 10 nm | 28 nm |
| Number of transistors | 5500 million | |
| TDP | 9 Watt | 7 Watt |
| Neural Processing | HiSilicon NPU |
Memory (RAM)
| Max amount | up to 8 GB | up to 2 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR3 |
| Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 667 MHz |
| Memory-bus | 4x16 bit |
Storage
| Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
| GPU name | Mali-G72 MP12 | Mali-T820 MP1 |
| GPU Architecture | Mali Bifrost | Mali Midgard |
| GPU frequency | 750 MHz | 680 MHz |
| Execution units | 12 | 1 |
| Shaders | 192 | 4 |
| DirectX | 12 | 11 |
| OpenCL API | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
| Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
| Max screen resolution | 2340x1080 | 1440x720 |
| Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 20MP | 1x 13MP |
| Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@30fps |
| Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) |
Wireless
| 4G network | Yes | Yes |
| 5G network | Yes | Yes |
| Peak Download Speed | 1.2 Gbps | 0.15 Gbps |
| Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 0.05 Gbps |
| Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 4 (802.11n) |
| Bluetooth | 4.2 | 4.2 |
| Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
| Launch Date | 2017 September | 2018 |
| Partnumber | Hi3670 | |
| Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
| Positioning | Flagship | Low-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Dimensity 9200 vs Apple A16 Bionic
2
MediaTek Dimensity 9300 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 vs Samsung Exynos 980
4
Apple A19 Pro vs Samsung Exynos 9825
5
Google Tensor G5 vs Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G
6
HiSilicon Kirin 930 vs Samsung Exynos 9609
7
Samsung Exynos 7420 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8300
8
MediaTek Dimensity 1300 vs Unisoc Tiger T618
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8020
10
MediaTek Dimensity 9300 Plus vs Apple A10X Fusion