HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G vs Unisoc Tiger T700
When comparing two processors based on their specifications, several factors should be taken into consideration. Two such processors are the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G and the Unisoc Tiger T700.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G, it boasts an 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 combination of cores provides a balance between performance and efficiency. Additionally, it operates on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and has a lithography of 7 nm, allowing for better power efficiency and thermal management. With a TDP of 6 Watts, it ensures minimal power consumption. Notably, it also incorporates the Ascend D110 Lite and Ascend D100 Tiny neural processing units, along with the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture, enhancing its AI capabilities.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T700 offers an architecture that includes 2x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A5 cores. While it may not have as high-performance cores as the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G, it still provides a balanced combination of cores for everyday tasks. Like the Kirin processor, it operates on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, it has a slightly larger lithography of 12 nm, meaning it may not be as power-efficient as the Kirin processor. Additionally, it has a TDP of 10 Watts, indicating slightly higher power consumption.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G appears to have a slight advantage over the Unisoc Tiger T700 in terms of its specifications. With a more advanced architecture, lower lithography, lower TDP, and the inclusion of dedicated neural processing units, it offers better performance and power efficiency. However, the Unisoc Tiger T700 still presents a viable option for users looking for a well-rounded processor with a balanced combination of cores. Ultimately, the choice between the two processors will depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G, it boasts an 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 combination of cores provides a balance between performance and efficiency. Additionally, it operates on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and has a lithography of 7 nm, allowing for better power efficiency and thermal management. With a TDP of 6 Watts, it ensures minimal power consumption. Notably, it also incorporates the Ascend D110 Lite and Ascend D100 Tiny neural processing units, along with the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture, enhancing its AI capabilities.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T700 offers an architecture that includes 2x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A5 cores. While it may not have as high-performance cores as the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G, it still provides a balanced combination of cores for everyday tasks. Like the Kirin processor, it operates on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, it has a slightly larger lithography of 12 nm, meaning it may not be as power-efficient as the Kirin processor. Additionally, it has a TDP of 10 Watts, indicating slightly higher power consumption.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G appears to have a slight advantage over the Unisoc Tiger T700 in terms of its specifications. With a more advanced architecture, lower lithography, lower TDP, and the inclusion of dedicated neural processing units, it offers better performance and power efficiency. However, the Unisoc Tiger T700 still presents a viable option for users looking for a well-rounded processor with a balanced combination of cores. Ultimately, the choice between the two processors will depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 1x 2.58 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.84 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
2x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A5 |
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 4 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-G52 MP2 |
GPU Architecture | Valhall | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 700 MHz | 850 MHz |
Execution units | 8 | 2 |
Shaders | 128 | 32 |
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 48MP |
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 March |
Partnumber | Hi6290 | T700 |
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
MediaTek Dimensity 7050 vs MediaTek Helio G95
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 vs MediaTek Dimensity 700
3
Apple A11 Bionic vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 870
4
Samsung Exynos 9611 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 835
5
MediaTek Dimensity 8100 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
7
MediaTek Helio P60 vs MediaTek Helio G70
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 vs HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G
9
Samsung Exynos 980 vs HiSilicon Kirin 930
10
Samsung Exynos 9820 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G