Unisoc SC9832E vs Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G
The Unisoc SC9832E and Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G are two processors with varying specifications.
Starting with the Unisoc SC9832E, it features a quad-core architecture with 4x 1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. The processor operates on the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a lithography of 28 nm. The thermal design power (TDP) of the SC9832E is 7 Watts.
In contrast, the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G takes a more powerful approach. It employs an octa-core architecture with a combination of cores: 1x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A76, 3x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55. This provides a range of performance capabilities for different tasks. The instruction set supported by the processor is ARMv8.2-A. The Tanggula T770 5G utilizes a more advanced lithography process of 6 nm, which typically translates to improved power efficiency. It operates with a TDP of 5 Watts. Additionally, it includes Neural Processing capabilities in the form of an NPU, which can enhance the device's performance in artificial intelligence and machine learning tasks.
Comparing these two processors, it is clear that the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G offers higher performance potential with its octa-core architecture, particularly with its Cortex-A76 cores. Additionally, the use of a more advanced lithography process and the inclusion of an NPU make the Tanggula T770 5G a more advanced and efficient processor. However, it is worth noting that the SC9832E may still prove suitable for less demanding tasks or budget-oriented devices due to its lower power consumption.
Overall, the choice between these two processors would depend on the specific requirements of the device and the intended usage. If high performance and advanced AI capabilities are essential, the Tanggula T770 5G would be the recommended choice. On the other hand, if power efficiency and budget constraints are priorities, the SC9832E could still be a viable option.
Starting with the Unisoc SC9832E, it features a quad-core architecture with 4x 1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. The processor operates on the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a lithography of 28 nm. The thermal design power (TDP) of the SC9832E is 7 Watts.
In contrast, the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G takes a more powerful approach. It employs an octa-core architecture with a combination of cores: 1x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A76, 3x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55. This provides a range of performance capabilities for different tasks. The instruction set supported by the processor is ARMv8.2-A. The Tanggula T770 5G utilizes a more advanced lithography process of 6 nm, which typically translates to improved power efficiency. It operates with a TDP of 5 Watts. Additionally, it includes Neural Processing capabilities in the form of an NPU, which can enhance the device's performance in artificial intelligence and machine learning tasks.
Comparing these two processors, it is clear that the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G offers higher performance potential with its octa-core architecture, particularly with its Cortex-A76 cores. Additionally, the use of a more advanced lithography process and the inclusion of an NPU make the Tanggula T770 5G a more advanced and efficient processor. However, it is worth noting that the SC9832E may still prove suitable for less demanding tasks or budget-oriented devices due to its lower power consumption.
Overall, the choice between these two processors would depend on the specific requirements of the device and the intended usage. If high performance and advanced AI capabilities are essential, the Tanggula T770 5G would be the recommended choice. On the other hand, if power efficiency and budget constraints are priorities, the SC9832E could still be a viable option.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 1.4 GHz – Cortex-A53 | 1x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 4 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 28 nm | 6 nm |
TDP | 7 Watt | 5 Watt |
Neural Processing | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 2 GB | up to 32 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR3 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 667 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 | 680 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@120Hz |
Max camera resolution | 1x 13MP | 1x 108MP, 2x 24MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@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 | 0.15 Gbps | 2.7 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 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 | 2021 February |
Partnumber | T770, Tiger T7520 | |
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 Helio G37 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
2
MediaTek Dimensity 900 vs MediaTek Dimensity 820
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 1 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 660
4
MediaTek Helio G90T vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 695
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 732G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1
6
MediaTek Helio G96 vs Apple A12 Bionic
7
MediaTek Dimensity 7200 vs Samsung Exynos 850
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs MediaTek Dimensity 920
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 480
10
MediaTek Helio P95 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1