MediaTek Dimensity 720 vs Unisoc Tiger T310
VS
The Unisoc Tiger T310 and MediaTek Dimensity 720 are both processors with their own unique specifications and features.
Starting with the Unisoc Tiger T310, it has a CPU architecture comprising of 1x 2 GHz Cortex-A75 core and 3x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This gives it a total of 4 cores to function efficiently. With an instruction set of ARMv8.2-A, it ensures compatibility and optimization with various software and applications. Additionally, it has a lithography of 12 nm, providing decent power efficiency.
On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 720 has a slightly different CPU architecture. It consists of 2x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 cores and 6x 2 GHz Cortex-A55 cores, totaling 8 cores. With this enhanced architecture, it can handle more demanding tasks and multitasking seamlessly. Similar to the Unisoc Tiger T310, it also operates on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, the Dimensity 720 utilizes a more advanced 7 nm lithography, resulting in improved power efficiency compared to the Tiger T310.
In terms of power consumption, the Unisoc Tiger T310 does not provide specific data regarding its TDP (Thermal Design Power). Conversely, the MediaTek Dimensity 720 has a TDP of 10 Watts. This indicates that the Dimensity 720 is designed to efficiently manage power consumption, enhancing battery life and overall efficiency.
Furthermore, the MediaTek Dimensity 720 boasts an Neural Processing Unit (NPU), which adds an additional layer of functionality. The NPU allows for tasks such as AI-based processing and machine learning, providing an enhanced user experience and enabling advanced features.
In conclusion, while both the Unisoc Tiger T310 and MediaTek Dimensity 720 have their own merits, the Dimensity 720 edges ahead in terms of CPU cores, lithography, power efficiency, and the inclusion of an NPU. These specifications make it an attractive choice for users seeking a powerful and energy-efficient processor. However, the Tiger T310 may still suffice for less demanding tasks and applications, considering its lower power core configurations.
Starting with the Unisoc Tiger T310, it has a CPU architecture comprising of 1x 2 GHz Cortex-A75 core and 3x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This gives it a total of 4 cores to function efficiently. With an instruction set of ARMv8.2-A, it ensures compatibility and optimization with various software and applications. Additionally, it has a lithography of 12 nm, providing decent power efficiency.
On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 720 has a slightly different CPU architecture. It consists of 2x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 cores and 6x 2 GHz Cortex-A55 cores, totaling 8 cores. With this enhanced architecture, it can handle more demanding tasks and multitasking seamlessly. Similar to the Unisoc Tiger T310, it also operates on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, the Dimensity 720 utilizes a more advanced 7 nm lithography, resulting in improved power efficiency compared to the Tiger T310.
In terms of power consumption, the Unisoc Tiger T310 does not provide specific data regarding its TDP (Thermal Design Power). Conversely, the MediaTek Dimensity 720 has a TDP of 10 Watts. This indicates that the Dimensity 720 is designed to efficiently manage power consumption, enhancing battery life and overall efficiency.
Furthermore, the MediaTek Dimensity 720 boasts an Neural Processing Unit (NPU), which adds an additional layer of functionality. The NPU allows for tasks such as AI-based processing and machine learning, providing an enhanced user experience and enabling advanced features.
In conclusion, while both the Unisoc Tiger T310 and MediaTek Dimensity 720 have their own merits, the Dimensity 720 edges ahead in terms of CPU cores, lithography, power efficiency, and the inclusion of an NPU. These specifications make it an attractive choice for users seeking a powerful and energy-efficient processor. However, the Tiger T310 may still suffice for less demanding tasks and applications, considering its lower power core configurations.
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
CPU cores and architecture
| Architecture | 2x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A76 6x 2 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
1x 2 GHz – Cortex-A75 3x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
| Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
| Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8.2-A |
| Lithography | 7 nm | 12 nm |
| TDP | 10 Watt | |
| Neural Processing | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
| Max amount | up to 12 GB | up to 4 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR4X |
| Memory frequency | 2133 MHz | 1333 MHz |
| Memory-bus | 2x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
| Storage specification | UFS 2.2 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
| GPU name | Mali-G57 MP3 | Imagination PowerVR GE8300 |
| GPU Architecture | Valhall | Rogue |
| GPU frequency | 850 MHz | 660 MHz |
| Execution units | 3 | 2 |
| Shaders | 32 | |
| DirectX | 12 | 10 |
| OpenCL API | 2.1 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | ES 3.2 |
| Vulkan API | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
| Max screen resolution | 2520x1080@90Hz | 1600x720 |
| Max camera resolution | 1x 64MP, 1x 20MP + 1x 16MP | 1x 16MP + 1x 8MP |
| Max Video Capture | 4K@30FPS | FullHD@30fps |
| Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
Wireless
| 4G network | Yes | Yes |
| 5G network | Yes | Yes |
| Peak Download Speed | 2.77 Gbps | 0.3 Gbps |
| Peak Upload Speed | 1.2 Gbps | 0.1 Gbps |
| Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 5 (802.11ac) |
| Bluetooth | 5.1 | 5.0 |
| Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS NavIC QZSS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
| Launch Date | 2020 Quarter 3 | 2019 April |
| Partnumber | MT6853V/ZA, MT6853V/NZA | T310 |
| Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
| Positioning | Mid-end | Low-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Dimensity 8000 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 820
2
MediaTek Dimensity 6100 Plus vs Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 Plus vs MediaTek Helio G37
4
Unisoc Tiger T710 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 685
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 768G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 870
6
Samsung Exynos 1380 vs Samsung Exynos 9611
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 vs Samsung Exynos 2100
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 1
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 vs Samsung Exynos 9610