HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G vs Unisoc Tiger T606
When comparing the specifications of the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G and the Unisoc Tiger T606 processors, several key differences can be observed.
In terms of CPU architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G utilizes a combination of cores including 1x 2.58 GHz Cortex-A76, 3x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T606 features 2x 1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 and 6x 1.6 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Both processors have a total of 8 cores, but the arrangement and speeds differ.
The instruction set for both processors is ARMv8.2-A, ensuring compatibility with modern software and applications. However, it is important to note that the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G boasts a slightly more advanced lithography process at 7 nm, compared to the Unisoc Tiger T606's 12 nm lithography. This suggests that the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G may offer better power efficiency and potentially improved performance.
Another aspect to consider is the thermal design power (TDP), which measures the maximum amount of heat generated and dissipated by a processor. The HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G has a TDP of 6 watts, indicating a low power consumption. In contrast, the Unisoc Tiger T606 has a TDP of 10 watts, suggesting a higher power consumption.
Furthermore, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G incorporates Huawei's Ascend D110 Lite and Ascend D100 Tiny neural processing units, utilizing the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture. These neural processing units enhance the performance of artificial intelligence tasks and contribute to improved overall processing capabilities.
Although both processors are suitable for various applications, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G's advanced lithography process, lower TDP, and neural processing units make it an attractive choice for those seeking high-performance and energy-efficient processing power. Conversely, the Unisoc Tiger T606 may be suitable for less power-demanding tasks where efficient power management is not a primary concern.
Ultimately, choosing between these processors will depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user or application.
In terms of CPU architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G utilizes a combination of cores including 1x 2.58 GHz Cortex-A76, 3x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T606 features 2x 1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 and 6x 1.6 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Both processors have a total of 8 cores, but the arrangement and speeds differ.
The instruction set for both processors is ARMv8.2-A, ensuring compatibility with modern software and applications. However, it is important to note that the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G boasts a slightly more advanced lithography process at 7 nm, compared to the Unisoc Tiger T606's 12 nm lithography. This suggests that the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G may offer better power efficiency and potentially improved performance.
Another aspect to consider is the thermal design power (TDP), which measures the maximum amount of heat generated and dissipated by a processor. The HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G has a TDP of 6 watts, indicating a low power consumption. In contrast, the Unisoc Tiger T606 has a TDP of 10 watts, suggesting a higher power consumption.
Furthermore, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G incorporates Huawei's Ascend D110 Lite and Ascend D100 Tiny neural processing units, utilizing the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture. These neural processing units enhance the performance of artificial intelligence tasks and contribute to improved overall processing capabilities.
Although both processors are suitable for various applications, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G's advanced lithography process, lower TDP, and neural processing units make it an attractive choice for those seeking high-performance and energy-efficient processing power. Conversely, the Unisoc Tiger T606 may be suitable for less power-demanding tasks where efficient power management is not a primary concern.
Ultimately, choosing between these processors will depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user or application.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 1x 2.58 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.84 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
2x 1.6 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.6 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 7 nm | 12 nm |
TDP | 6 Watt | 10 Watt |
Neural Processing | Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny, HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 12 GB | up to 8 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 2133 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 3.0 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G77 MP8 | Mali-G57 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Valhall | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 700 MHz | 650 MHz |
Execution units | 8 | 1 |
Shaders | 128 | 16 |
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 | 1600x900@90Hz |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 20MP | 1x 24MP, 16MP + 8MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fp | FullHD@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
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 | 5 (802.11ac) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 5.0 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2020 Quarter 2 | 2021 October |
Partnumber | Hi6290 | T606 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Low-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Unisoc Tiger T616 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1
2
MediaTek Dimensity 7050 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 480
3
MediaTek Helio G88 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
4
MediaTek Helio G35 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 685
5
MediaTek Dimensity 1000 vs MediaTek Helio G35
6
MediaTek Helio G37 vs Samsung Exynos 9820
7
Unisoc Tiger T606 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 vs HiSilicon Kirin 935
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 vs HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G
10
Samsung Exynos 2100 vs Apple A13 Bionic