HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G vs Unisoc Tiger T616
The HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G and Unisoc Tiger T616 are both processors used in mobile devices. Let's compare their specifications to see how they stack up against each other.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G, it boasts an impressive architecture that includes 1x 2.58 GHz Cortex-A76 core, 3x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This configuration makes it capable of handling various tasks efficiently. Additionally, it is built on a 7 nm lithography, which ensures lower power consumption and improved performance. With a TDP of 6 Watt, it maintains excellent power efficiency. It also incorporates the Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny for neural processing, utilizing HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture.
Moving on to the Unisoc Tiger T616, it features an architecture that includes 2x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Though not as impressive as the Kirin 985 5G's configuration, it still offers decent performance. The Tiger T616's 12 nm lithography is not as advanced as the Kirin 985 5G's, which may result in slightly higher power consumption. It has a TDP of 10 Watt, indicating a slightly lower power efficiency compared to the Kirin 985 5G.
Both processors have 8 cores and utilize the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, the Kirin 985 5G has an advantage with its more powerful Cortex-A76 cores compared to the Tiger T616's Cortex-A75 cores. This means the Kirin processor may handle intensive tasks more effectively.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G surpasses the Unisoc Tiger T616 in terms of architecture, lithography, and overall performance. The Kirin 985 5G's combination of Cortex-A76 and Cortex-A55 cores, as well as its 7 nm lithography, allow for better power efficiency and higher performance capabilities. However, it is important to note that other factors, such as optimizations and system-level integration, also contribute to the overall performance of a device.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G, it boasts an impressive architecture that includes 1x 2.58 GHz Cortex-A76 core, 3x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This configuration makes it capable of handling various tasks efficiently. Additionally, it is built on a 7 nm lithography, which ensures lower power consumption and improved performance. With a TDP of 6 Watt, it maintains excellent power efficiency. It also incorporates the Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny for neural processing, utilizing HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture.
Moving on to the Unisoc Tiger T616, it features an architecture that includes 2x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Though not as impressive as the Kirin 985 5G's configuration, it still offers decent performance. The Tiger T616's 12 nm lithography is not as advanced as the Kirin 985 5G's, which may result in slightly higher power consumption. It has a TDP of 10 Watt, indicating a slightly lower power efficiency compared to the Kirin 985 5G.
Both processors have 8 cores and utilize the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, the Kirin 985 5G has an advantage with its more powerful Cortex-A76 cores compared to the Tiger T616's Cortex-A75 cores. This means the Kirin processor may handle intensive tasks more effectively.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G surpasses the Unisoc Tiger T616 in terms of architecture, lithography, and overall performance. The Kirin 985 5G's combination of Cortex-A76 and Cortex-A55 cores, as well as its 7 nm lithography, allow for better power efficiency and higher performance capabilities. However, it is important to note that other factors, such as optimizations and system-level integration, also contribute to the overall performance of a device.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 1x 2.58 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.84 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
2x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.8 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 6 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 2133 MHz | 1866 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 | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 700 MHz | 750 MHz |
Execution units | 8 | 1 |
Shaders | 128 | 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 20MP | 1x 64MP, 2x 32MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fp | FullHD@60fps |
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 | 1.4 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 |
Partnumber | Hi6290 | T616 |
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
MediaTek Helio G25 vs Apple A13 Bionic
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 732G
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000L
4
MediaTek Helio A25 vs MediaTek Helio P90
5
MediaTek Helio P35 vs Samsung Exynos 9610
6
MediaTek Helio G37 vs Unisoc SC7731E
7
Apple A12 Bionic vs MediaTek Dimensity 1200
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus vs MediaTek Helio G90
9
MediaTek Dimensity 1080 vs MediaTek Dimensity 930
10
HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G vs HiSilicon Kirin 810