Unisoc SC7731E vs Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G
The Unisoc SC7731E and Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G are two processors with distinct specifications. Let's compare them based on their core architecture, performance, instruction set, lithography, power consumption, and additional features.
In terms of core architecture, the Unisoc SC7731E features a 4x 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 architecture, whereas the Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G boasts a more powerful 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 architecture. With eight cores, the Tanggula T760 5G has an advantage over the SC7731E's four cores.
Moving on to performance, the Tanggula T760 5G excels due to its higher clock speeds and more advanced architecture. It has the potential to deliver smoother multitasking and faster processing times compared to the SC7731E.
As for the instruction set, the SC7731E operates on the ARMv7-A instruction set, while the Tanggula T760 5G adopts the more recent ARMv8.2-A instruction set. This means the latter processor can handle more advanced commands and applications efficiently.
When it comes to lithography, the Tanggula T760 5G outshines the SC7731E with its smaller and more advanced 6 nm lithography process. This generally results in improved power efficiency and reduced heat generation.
Power consumption is essential to consider, and here the Tanggula T760 5G once again takes precedence. With a TDP of 5 Watts compared to the SC7731E's 7 Watts, the Tanggula T760 5G consumes less power while providing superior performance.
Moreover, the Tanggula T760 5G offers an additional feature that the SC7731E lacks – a Neural Processing Unit (NPU). The NPU enhances the processor's capability to perform AI-related tasks, making it a more suitable choice for AI-powered applications.
In summary, the Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G outperforms the Unisoc SC7731E in several aspects. With a more advanced architecture, higher clock speeds, an updated instruction set, smaller lithography, lower power consumption, and the inclusion of an NPU, the Tanggula T760 5G is a more powerful and efficient processor overall.
In terms of core architecture, the Unisoc SC7731E features a 4x 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 architecture, whereas the Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G boasts a more powerful 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 architecture. With eight cores, the Tanggula T760 5G has an advantage over the SC7731E's four cores.
Moving on to performance, the Tanggula T760 5G excels due to its higher clock speeds and more advanced architecture. It has the potential to deliver smoother multitasking and faster processing times compared to the SC7731E.
As for the instruction set, the SC7731E operates on the ARMv7-A instruction set, while the Tanggula T760 5G adopts the more recent ARMv8.2-A instruction set. This means the latter processor can handle more advanced commands and applications efficiently.
When it comes to lithography, the Tanggula T760 5G outshines the SC7731E with its smaller and more advanced 6 nm lithography process. This generally results in improved power efficiency and reduced heat generation.
Power consumption is essential to consider, and here the Tanggula T760 5G once again takes precedence. With a TDP of 5 Watts compared to the SC7731E's 7 Watts, the Tanggula T760 5G consumes less power while providing superior performance.
Moreover, the Tanggula T760 5G offers an additional feature that the SC7731E lacks – a Neural Processing Unit (NPU). The NPU enhances the processor's capability to perform AI-related tasks, making it a more suitable choice for AI-powered applications.
In summary, the Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G outperforms the Unisoc SC7731E in several aspects. With a more advanced architecture, higher clock speeds, an updated instruction set, smaller lithography, lower power consumption, and the inclusion of an NPU, the Tanggula T760 5G is a more powerful and efficient processor overall.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 1.3 GHz – Cortex-A7 | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 4 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv7-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 28 nm | 6 nm |
TDP | 7 Watt | 5 Watt |
Neural Processing | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 1 GB | up to 16 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR3 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 533 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | eMMC 5.1 | UFS 3.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T820 MP1 | Mali-G57 MP6 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 600 MHz | 850 MHz |
Execution units | 1 | 6 |
Shaders | 4 | 96 |
DirectX | 11 | 12 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 2.1 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | ES 3.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 1440x720 | 2160x1080 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 8MP | 1x 64MP, 2x 24MP |
Max Video Capture | HD@30fps | FullHD@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 2.7 Gbps | |
Peak Upload Speed | 1.5 Gbps | |
Wi-Fi | 4 (802.11n) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2018 Quarter 2 | 2021 February |
Partnumber | T760 | |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Low-end | Mid-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Dimensity 1050 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 888
2
Samsung Exynos 9810 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G Plus vs MediaTek Helio G37
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 vs Samsung Exynos 7884B
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 vs HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G
6
MediaTek Dimensity 8200 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730
7
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G vs Samsung Exynos 980
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 vs MediaTek Dimensity 820
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1 vs Samsung Exynos 9820
10
MediaTek Dimensity 9200 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 765