MediaTek Dimensity 800U vs Unisoc Tiger T616
The Unisoc Tiger T616 and MediaTek Dimensity 800U are both powerful processors designed for smartphones and other mobile devices. Let's compare their specifications to see how they differ.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Unisoc Tiger T616 has a 2x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 configuration. On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 800U features a 2x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 and 6x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 setup. This means that the Dimensity 800U has a slightly higher clock speed and more powerful Cortex-A76 cores than the Tiger T616.
Both processors have 8 cores, allowing for efficient multitasking and better performance overall. They also use the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, which ensures compatibility with modern software and applications.
One notable difference between the two processors is their lithography. The Tiger T616 is built on a 12 nm process, while the Dimensity 800U utilizes a more advanced 7 nm process. This indicates that the Dimensity 800U is more power-efficient and potentially better at handling heavier workloads without draining the device's battery quickly.
Additionally, the Dimensity 800U boasts Neural Processing Unit (NPU) capabilities, providing advanced AI processing capabilities for improved camera performance, voice recognition, and other AI-related tasks. The Tiger T616, however, lacks this specific feature.
In terms of power consumption, the Tiger T616 has a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10 Watts. Unfortunately, the Dimensity 800U's TDP is not provided in the specifications.
Overall, the MediaTek Dimensity 800U seems to have a slight edge over the Unisoc Tiger T616. Its higher clock speed, more advanced lithography, and inclusion of an NPU make it a more powerful and efficient processor. However, the choice ultimately depends on the specific requirements and preferences of the user or device manufacturer.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Unisoc Tiger T616 has a 2x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 configuration. On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 800U features a 2x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 and 6x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 setup. This means that the Dimensity 800U has a slightly higher clock speed and more powerful Cortex-A76 cores than the Tiger T616.
Both processors have 8 cores, allowing for efficient multitasking and better performance overall. They also use the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, which ensures compatibility with modern software and applications.
One notable difference between the two processors is their lithography. The Tiger T616 is built on a 12 nm process, while the Dimensity 800U utilizes a more advanced 7 nm process. This indicates that the Dimensity 800U is more power-efficient and potentially better at handling heavier workloads without draining the device's battery quickly.
Additionally, the Dimensity 800U boasts Neural Processing Unit (NPU) capabilities, providing advanced AI processing capabilities for improved camera performance, voice recognition, and other AI-related tasks. The Tiger T616, however, lacks this specific feature.
In terms of power consumption, the Tiger T616 has a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10 Watts. Unfortunately, the Dimensity 800U's TDP is not provided in the specifications.
Overall, the MediaTek Dimensity 800U seems to have a slight edge over the Unisoc Tiger T616. Its higher clock speed, more advanced lithography, and inclusion of an NPU make it a more powerful and efficient processor. However, the choice ultimately depends on the specific requirements and preferences of the user or device manufacturer.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 2x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A76 6x 2.0 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 | 10 Watt | |
Neural Processing | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 12 GB | up to 6 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 2133 MHz | 1866 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.2 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G57 MP3 | Mali-G57 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Valhall | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 850 MHz | 750 MHz |
Execution units | 3 | 1 |
Shaders | 48 | 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 | 2520x1080@120Hz | 2400x1080 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 64MP, 1x 20MP + 1x 16MP | 1x 64MP, 2x 32MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30FPS | FullHD@60fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) |
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 QZSS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2020 Quarter 3 | 2021 |
Partnumber | MT6853V, MT6853V/TNZA, MT6853/TNZA, MT6853T | 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 Dimensity 7050 vs Unisoc Tiger T700
2
MediaTek Helio P35 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 712
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 vs HiSilicon Kirin 960
4
Samsung Exynos 9825 vs Samsung Exynos 8890
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 660
6
Apple A10 Fusion vs HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G
7
HiSilicon Kirin 950 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G
8
MediaTek Dimensity 800 vs MediaTek Helio P65
9
MediaTek Helio G85 vs Samsung Exynos 2100
10
MediaTek Helio G96 vs Apple A15 Bionic