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.
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 | Bifrost | 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 |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Helio P90 vs MediaTek Helio G80
2
MediaTek Dimensity 8100 vs Samsung Exynos 8895
3
MediaTek Dimensity 9200 Plus vs Apple A11 Bionic
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 vs Samsung Exynos 7880
5
Unisoc Tiger T606 vs Samsung Exynos 9610
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 685
7
Samsung Exynos 850 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000
8
Unisoc Tiger T710 vs MediaTek Helio G85
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 1 vs Apple A17 Pro
10
Samsung Exynos 990 vs HiSilicon Kirin 980