HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G vs MediaTek Dimensity 800
The HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G and MediaTek Dimensity 800 are two processors that are often compared due to their similar specifications. However, there are some differences that set them apart.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G features a more robust configuration. It has 1x 2.58 GHz Cortex-A76 core, 3x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This diverse setup allows for efficient performance across different tasks. On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 800 has 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A76 cores and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores, which provides a decent balance between power and efficiency.
In terms of the number of cores, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G takes the lead with 8 cores, while the MediaTek Dimensity 800 has 4 cores. Having more cores allows the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G to handle multitasking and intensive tasks more efficiently.
Both processors use the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and have a lithography of 7 nm, which ensures power efficiency and improved performance. However, there is a slight difference in the TDP (Thermal Design Power) ratings. The HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G has a TDP of 6 Watts, while the MediaTek Dimensity 800 has a slightly higher TDP of 10 Watts. This means that the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G is designed to consume less power for similar tasks.
When it comes to neural processing, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G utilizes the Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny with HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture, while the MediaTek Dimensity 800 uses an NPU (Neural Processing Unit). Both processors offer AI capabilities, but the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G may have an advantage in terms of AI performance due to its dedicated neural processing units.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G and MediaTek Dimensity 800 are both powerful processors with similar specifications. However, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G stands out with its more diverse CPU core configuration, higher number of cores, lower TDP, and potentially superior AI capabilities. These differences may make the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G a more attractive choice for those looking for high-performance and power-efficient processing.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G features a more robust configuration. It has 1x 2.58 GHz Cortex-A76 core, 3x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This diverse setup allows for efficient performance across different tasks. On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 800 has 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A76 cores and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores, which provides a decent balance between power and efficiency.
In terms of the number of cores, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G takes the lead with 8 cores, while the MediaTek Dimensity 800 has 4 cores. Having more cores allows the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G to handle multitasking and intensive tasks more efficiently.
Both processors use the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and have a lithography of 7 nm, which ensures power efficiency and improved performance. However, there is a slight difference in the TDP (Thermal Design Power) ratings. The HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G has a TDP of 6 Watts, while the MediaTek Dimensity 800 has a slightly higher TDP of 10 Watts. This means that the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G is designed to consume less power for similar tasks.
When it comes to neural processing, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G utilizes the Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny with HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture, while the MediaTek Dimensity 800 uses an NPU (Neural Processing Unit). Both processors offer AI capabilities, but the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G may have an advantage in terms of AI performance due to its dedicated neural processing units.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G and MediaTek Dimensity 800 are both powerful processors with similar specifications. However, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G stands out with its more diverse CPU core configuration, higher number of cores, lower TDP, and potentially superior AI capabilities. These differences may make the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G a more attractive choice for those looking for high-performance and power-efficient processing.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 1x 2.58 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.84 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
4x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 7 nm | 7 nm |
TDP | 6 Watt | 10 Watt |
Neural Processing | Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny, HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 12 GB | up to 16 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 2133 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 3.0 | UFS 2.2 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G77 MP8 | Mali-G57 MP4 |
GPU Architecture | Valhall | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 700 MHz | 650 MHz |
Execution units | 8 | 4 |
Shaders | 128 | 64 |
DirectX | 12 | 12 |
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 | 2520x1080@120Hz |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 20MP | 1x 80MP, 1x 32MP + 1x 16MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fp | 4K@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 | 1.4 Gbps | 2.77 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.2 Gbps | 1.2 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 5.0 | 5.1 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS QZSS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2020 Quarter 2 | 2020 Quarter 2 |
Partnumber | Hi6290 | MT6873, MT6873V |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Mid-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Apple A13 Bionic vs Apple A10X Fusion
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 vs MediaTek Helio P70
3
MediaTek Dimensity 800 vs Samsung Exynos 7884B
4
HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G vs MediaTek Dimensity 8020
5
MediaTek Helio G88 vs MediaTek Helio G96
6
Samsung Exynos 2200 vs Samsung Exynos 9810
7
MediaTek Helio G35 vs Samsung Exynos 7880
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G Plus
9
MediaTek Dimensity 820 vs Unisoc Tiger T700
10
Google Tensor G3 vs Samsung Exynos 1380