MediaTek Dimensity 900 vs Unisoc SC9832E
The Unisoc SC9832E and MediaTek Dimensity 900 are two processors with different specifications.
Starting with the Unisoc SC9832E, it is built on a 28 nm lithography and consists of four Cortex-A53 cores with a clock speed of 1.4 GHz. It follows the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a thermal design power (TDP) of 7 Watts. Although it is a relatively older processor, it still offers adequate performance for basic tasks and low-power devices.
On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 900 is a more advanced processor. It utilizes a 6 nm lithography and incorporates a mix of cores for better performance. It consists of two high-performance Cortex-A78 cores clocked at 2.4 GHz and six energy-efficient Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz. This configuration not only provides a higher clock speed but also enables better power efficiency. The Dimensity 900 follows the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and has a TDP of 10 Watts. It also boasts a neural processing unit (NPU), which enhances its AI processing capabilities.
Additionally, the MediaTek Dimensity 900 has a higher transistor count compared to the Unisoc SC9832E, with 10,000 million transistors. This allows for more advanced features and better overall performance.
While both processors have their strengths, the Dimensity 900 clearly outperforms the SC9832E in terms of power, performance, and advanced features. The Dimensity 900's smaller lithography, higher clock speed, mixed core architecture, and inclusion of an NPU make it a more capable choice for modern high-performance devices, enabling smoother multitasking, faster app loading, and better AI capabilities.
In conclusion, if you are looking for a processor with better performance and advanced features, the MediaTek Dimensity 900 is the superior choice. However, if you require a more budget-friendly option or have specific power consumption requirements, the Unisoc SC9832E can still be a viable choice for less demanding tasks.
Starting with the Unisoc SC9832E, it is built on a 28 nm lithography and consists of four Cortex-A53 cores with a clock speed of 1.4 GHz. It follows the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a thermal design power (TDP) of 7 Watts. Although it is a relatively older processor, it still offers adequate performance for basic tasks and low-power devices.
On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 900 is a more advanced processor. It utilizes a 6 nm lithography and incorporates a mix of cores for better performance. It consists of two high-performance Cortex-A78 cores clocked at 2.4 GHz and six energy-efficient Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz. This configuration not only provides a higher clock speed but also enables better power efficiency. The Dimensity 900 follows the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and has a TDP of 10 Watts. It also boasts a neural processing unit (NPU), which enhances its AI processing capabilities.
Additionally, the MediaTek Dimensity 900 has a higher transistor count compared to the Unisoc SC9832E, with 10,000 million transistors. This allows for more advanced features and better overall performance.
While both processors have their strengths, the Dimensity 900 clearly outperforms the SC9832E in terms of power, performance, and advanced features. The Dimensity 900's smaller lithography, higher clock speed, mixed core architecture, and inclusion of an NPU make it a more capable choice for modern high-performance devices, enabling smoother multitasking, faster app loading, and better AI capabilities.
In conclusion, if you are looking for a processor with better performance and advanced features, the MediaTek Dimensity 900 is the superior choice. However, if you require a more budget-friendly option or have specific power consumption requirements, the Unisoc SC9832E can still be a viable choice for less demanding tasks.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 2x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A78 6x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
4x 1.4 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 6 nm | 28 nm |
Number of transistors | 10000 million | |
TDP | 10 Watt | 7 Watt |
Neural Processing | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 16 GB | up to 2 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR3 |
Memory frequency | 3200 MHz | 667 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 3.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G68 MP4 | Mali-T820 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Valhall | Midgard |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 680 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 1 |
Shaders | 64 | 4 |
DirectX | 12 | 11 |
OpenCL API | 2.0 | 1.2 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | ES 3.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.2 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2520x1080@120Hz | 1440x720 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 108MP, 2x 20MP | 1x 13MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 2.77 Gbps | 0.15 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 1.2 Gbps | 0.05 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 6 (802.11ax) | 4 (802.11n) |
Bluetooth | 5.2 | 4.2 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS NavIC QZSS |
BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2021 Quarter 1 | 2018 |
Partnumber | MT6877 | |
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
HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs MediaTek Helio P35
2
Samsung Exynos 7904 vs Samsung Exynos 8895
3
Samsung Exynos 2100 vs Unisoc Tiger T610
4
Samsung Exynos 8890 vs MediaTek Helio P90
5
Unisoc Tiger T310 vs MediaTek Dimensity 820
6
Samsung Exynos 9810 vs MediaTek Helio G96
7
HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
8
HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G vs Apple A11 Bionic
9
Google Tensor G1 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
10
Samsung Exynos 1330 vs Samsung Exynos 990