MediaTek Dimensity 920 vs Unisoc Tiger T618
The Unisoc Tiger T618 and MediaTek Dimensity 920 are both powerful processors that have their own unique specifications. Let's compare them.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, both processors have 8 cores and use the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, there are some differences in their CPU architecture. The Unisoc Tiger T618 consists of 2 Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz and 6 Cortex-A55 cores also clocked at 2.0 GHz. On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 920 features 2 Cortex-A78 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz and 6 Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz. This suggests that the Dimensity 920 may have a slight edge in terms of CPU performance due to its higher clock speed and the use of Cortex-A78 cores.
Moving on to the lithography, the Unisoc Tiger T618 has a 12 nm lithography, while the MediaTek Dimensity 920 boasts a more advanced 6 nm lithography. A smaller lithography generally leads to better power efficiency and performance. Therefore, the Dimensity 920 might have an advantage in terms of efficiency and power consumption.
Another key aspect to consider is the neural processing capability. Both the Tiger T618 and Dimensity 920 feature Neural Processing Units (NPU), which helps enhance AI and machine learning tasks. However, without detailed information about their respective NPUs, it is difficult to make a definitive comparison in this aspect.
In terms of TDP (Thermal Design Power), both processors have a similar power consumption of 10 Watts. This indicates that they have a similar thermal output and overall power efficiency.
To summarize, the MediaTek Dimensity 920 seems to have an advantage in terms of CPU performance due to its higher clock speed and Cortex-A78 cores. Additionally, its smaller lithography promises better power efficiency. However, without further information on the specifics of their NPUs, it is challenging to determine the superiority in terms of AI and machine learning tasks. Overall, both processors offer competitive specifications and are capable of delivering strong performance.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, both processors have 8 cores and use the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, there are some differences in their CPU architecture. The Unisoc Tiger T618 consists of 2 Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz and 6 Cortex-A55 cores also clocked at 2.0 GHz. On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 920 features 2 Cortex-A78 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz and 6 Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz. This suggests that the Dimensity 920 may have a slight edge in terms of CPU performance due to its higher clock speed and the use of Cortex-A78 cores.
Moving on to the lithography, the Unisoc Tiger T618 has a 12 nm lithography, while the MediaTek Dimensity 920 boasts a more advanced 6 nm lithography. A smaller lithography generally leads to better power efficiency and performance. Therefore, the Dimensity 920 might have an advantage in terms of efficiency and power consumption.
Another key aspect to consider is the neural processing capability. Both the Tiger T618 and Dimensity 920 feature Neural Processing Units (NPU), which helps enhance AI and machine learning tasks. However, without detailed information about their respective NPUs, it is difficult to make a definitive comparison in this aspect.
In terms of TDP (Thermal Design Power), both processors have a similar power consumption of 10 Watts. This indicates that they have a similar thermal output and overall power efficiency.
To summarize, the MediaTek Dimensity 920 seems to have an advantage in terms of CPU performance due to its higher clock speed and Cortex-A78 cores. Additionally, its smaller lithography promises better power efficiency. However, without further information on the specifics of their NPUs, it is challenging to determine the superiority in terms of AI and machine learning tasks. Overall, both processors offer competitive specifications and are capable of delivering strong performance.
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
CPU cores and architecture
| Architecture | 2x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A78 6x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
2x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
| Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
| Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8.2-A |
| Lithography | 6 nm | 12 nm |
| TDP | 10 Watt | 10 Watt |
| Neural Processing | NPU | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
| Max amount | up to 16 GB | up to 6 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR4X |
| Memory frequency | 3200 MHz | 1866 MHz |
| Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
| Storage specification | UFS 3.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
| GPU name | Mali-G68 MP4 | Mali-G52 MP2 |
| GPU Architecture | Mali Valhall | Mali Bifrost |
| GPU frequency | 950 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Execution units | 4 | 2 |
| Shaders | 96 | 32 |
| DirectX | 12 | 11 |
| OpenCL API | 2.0 | 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 108MP, 2x 20MP | 1x 64M |
| 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 | 6 (802.11ax) | 5 (802.11ac) |
| Bluetooth | 5.2 | 5.0 |
| Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS NavIC QZSS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
| Launch Date | 2021 Quarter 3 | 2019 August |
| Partnumber | MT6877T | T618 |
| Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
| Positioning | Mid-end | Mid-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Dimensity 800 vs HiSilicon Kirin 810
2
HiSilicon Kirin 710F vs MediaTek Helio P90
3
Apple M1 (iPad) vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 695
4
Samsung Exynos 2200 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 4
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3 vs Unisoc Tiger T615
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 6s Gen 3 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
7
Samsung Exynos 7885 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 435
8
Apple A13 Bionic vs Samsung Exynos 9611
9
MediaTek Helio G35 vs MediaTek Helio G81
10
Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G vs HiSilicon Kirin 970