HiSilicon Kirin 980 vs Unisoc Tiger T616
When comparing the HiSilicon Kirin 980 and the Unisoc Tiger T616 processors, there are significant differences in their specifications.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 features a more powerful configuration with 2x Cortex-A76 cores clocked at 2.6 GHz, another 2x Cortex-A76 cores clocked at 1.92 GHz, and 4x Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. This offers a total of 8 cores, providing a strong performance capability. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T616 has a configuration of 2x Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz, combined with 6x Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz, also totaling 8 cores. While the Tiger T616's configuration is somewhat lower in performance compared to the Kirin 980, it still offers a decent level of processing power.
Moving on to the instruction set, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set, while the Unisoc Tiger T616 uses the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. The Kirin 980's use of the ARMv8-A instruction set positions it as a more advanced and modern processor, potentially offering better software compatibility and optimizations.
Regarding lithography, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 is manufactured using a 7 nm process, which is considered more advanced and efficient. In contrast, the Unisoc Tiger T616 employs a 12 nm process, making it slightly less efficient but still capable of delivering satisfactory performance.
Looking at power consumption, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 boasts a relatively low TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 6 Watts. This indicates that it is designed to be power-efficient while still delivering high performance. The Unisoc Tiger T616, on the other hand, has a higher TDP of 10 Watts, suggesting that it may consume more power in comparison.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 offers a more advanced and powerful configuration in terms of CPU cores, architecture, and lithography. It also benefits from a lower TDP, indicating better power efficiency. The Unisoc Tiger T616, while not as advanced, still provides a decent level of performance and could be a suitable choice for budget-friendly devices. Ultimately, the choice between the two processors will depend on the specific needs and requirements of the device they will be used in.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 features a more powerful configuration with 2x Cortex-A76 cores clocked at 2.6 GHz, another 2x Cortex-A76 cores clocked at 1.92 GHz, and 4x Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. This offers a total of 8 cores, providing a strong performance capability. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T616 has a configuration of 2x Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz, combined with 6x Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz, also totaling 8 cores. While the Tiger T616's configuration is somewhat lower in performance compared to the Kirin 980, it still offers a decent level of processing power.
Moving on to the instruction set, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set, while the Unisoc Tiger T616 uses the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. The Kirin 980's use of the ARMv8-A instruction set positions it as a more advanced and modern processor, potentially offering better software compatibility and optimizations.
Regarding lithography, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 is manufactured using a 7 nm process, which is considered more advanced and efficient. In contrast, the Unisoc Tiger T616 employs a 12 nm process, making it slightly less efficient but still capable of delivering satisfactory performance.
Looking at power consumption, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 boasts a relatively low TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 6 Watts. This indicates that it is designed to be power-efficient while still delivering high performance. The Unisoc Tiger T616, on the other hand, has a higher TDP of 10 Watts, suggesting that it may consume more power in comparison.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 offers a more advanced and powerful configuration in terms of CPU cores, architecture, and lithography. It also benefits from a lower TDP, indicating better power efficiency. The Unisoc Tiger T616, while not as advanced, still provides a decent level of performance and could be a suitable choice for budget-friendly devices. Ultimately, the choice between the two processors will depend on the specific needs and requirements of the device they will be used in.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 2x 2.6 GHz – Cortex-A76 2x 1.92 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
2x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 7 nm | 12 nm |
Number of transistors | 6900 million | |
TDP | 6 Watt | 10 Watt |
Neural Processing | HiSilicon Dual NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 8 GB | up to 6 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 2133 MHz | 1866 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G76 MP10 | Mali-G57 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 720 MHz | 750 MHz |
Execution units | 10 | 1 |
Shaders | 160 | 16 |
DirectX | 12 | 11 |
OpenCL API | 2.1 | 2.1 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | ES 3.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 3120x1440 | 2400x1080 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 32MP | 1x 64MP, 2x 32MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@60fps |
Video codec support | AV1 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 | 1.4 Gbps | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.2 Gbps | 0.1 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 6 (802.11ax) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 5.0 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2018 Quarter 4 | 2021 |
Partnumber | T616 | |
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 835 vs Unisoc Tanggula T740 5G
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8200
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 vs Apple A14 Bionic
5
Samsung Exynos 990 vs MediaTek Helio G35
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730 vs MediaTek Dimensity 6020
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 vs Samsung Exynos 9609
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 690 vs HiSilicon Kirin 950
9
HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G