HiSilicon Kirin 970 vs Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G
Both the HiSilicon Kirin 970 and the Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G are powerful processors, but they have some distinct differences in their specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 970, it features a combination of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A73 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This processor utilizes a 10 nm lithography and is equipped with 5500 million transistors. The instruction set for the Kirin 970 is ARMv8-A, and it has a thermal design power (TDP) of 9 watts. One notable feature of the Kirin 970 is its built-in neural processing unit (NPU), which enhances its artificial intelligence capabilities.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G is equipped with 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. With a 6 nm lithography, this processor is more energy-efficient compared to the Kirin 970. Similar to the Kirin 970, the Tanggula T760 5G also has 8 cores and an ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, it has a lower TDP of 5 watts. The Tanggula T760 5G also has an NPU for neural processing tasks.
In terms of performance, the higher clock speed of the Cortex-A73 cores in the Kirin 970 may offer slightly better processing power compared to the Cortex-A76 cores in the Tanggula T760 5G. However, the Tanggula T760 5G's lower TDP and smaller lithography size may provide better energy efficiency and heat management.
Both processors support advanced instruction sets, enabling them to handle demanding tasks efficiently. Additionally, the inclusion of NPUs in both processors enhances their AI capabilities, allowing for faster and more efficient AI-related tasks.
Ultimately, the choice between the HiSilicon Kirin 970 and the Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G will depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user. The Kirin 970 may excel in raw processing power, while the Tanggula T760 5G may offer better energy efficiency and heat management.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 970, it features a combination of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A73 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This processor utilizes a 10 nm lithography and is equipped with 5500 million transistors. The instruction set for the Kirin 970 is ARMv8-A, and it has a thermal design power (TDP) of 9 watts. One notable feature of the Kirin 970 is its built-in neural processing unit (NPU), which enhances its artificial intelligence capabilities.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G is equipped with 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. With a 6 nm lithography, this processor is more energy-efficient compared to the Kirin 970. Similar to the Kirin 970, the Tanggula T760 5G also has 8 cores and an ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, it has a lower TDP of 5 watts. The Tanggula T760 5G also has an NPU for neural processing tasks.
In terms of performance, the higher clock speed of the Cortex-A73 cores in the Kirin 970 may offer slightly better processing power compared to the Cortex-A76 cores in the Tanggula T760 5G. However, the Tanggula T760 5G's lower TDP and smaller lithography size may provide better energy efficiency and heat management.
Both processors support advanced instruction sets, enabling them to handle demanding tasks efficiently. Additionally, the inclusion of NPUs in both processors enhances their AI capabilities, allowing for faster and more efficient AI-related tasks.
Ultimately, the choice between the HiSilicon Kirin 970 and the Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G will depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user. The Kirin 970 may excel in raw processing power, while the Tanggula T760 5G may offer better energy efficiency and heat management.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.8 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 | |
TDP | 9 Watt | 5 Watt |
Neural Processing | HiSilicon NPU | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 8 GB | up to 16 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 3.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G72 MP12 | Mali-G57 MP6 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 750 MHz | 850 MHz |
Execution units | 12 | 6 |
Shaders | 192 | 96 |
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 | 2160x1080 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 20MP | 1x 64MP, 2x 24MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@30fps |
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 | 1.2 Gbps | 2.7 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 1.5 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 | 2017 September | 2021 February |
Partnumber | Hi3670 | T760 |
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 675 vs Samsung Exynos 990
2
Apple A16 Bionic vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G vs Samsung Exynos 7884B
4
MediaTek Helio P65 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
5
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G vs MediaTek Helio G35
6
Google Tensor G3 vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 690 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8100
8
HiSilicon Kirin 955 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 821
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 1 vs HiSilicon Kirin 935
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000 Plus