Unisoc SC9832E vs Unisoc Tiger T310
VS
The Unisoc SC9832E and Unisoc Tiger T310 are two processors that have different specifications and features.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the SC9832E has 4x 1.4 GHz cores based on the Cortex-A53 architecture. On the other hand, the Tiger T310 features a 1x 2 GHz core based on the Cortex-A75 architecture, as well as 3x 1.8 GHz cores based on the Cortex-A55 architecture. This means that the Tiger T310 has a more advanced architecture with a higher clock speed, potentially offering better performance and efficiency compared to the SC9832E.
The number of cores for both processors is 4, which indicates that they both have quad-core configurations. However, the Tiger T310 utilizes a combination of different core types to optimize performance and power efficiency.
Regarding the instruction set, the SC9832E uses the ARMv8-A instruction set, while the Tiger T310 utilizes the more recent ARMv8.2-A instruction set. This suggests that the Tiger T310 may have additional capabilities and improved efficiency compared to the SC9832E.
An important factor in processor performance is the lithography, which refers to the process technology used to manufacture the chips. The SC9832E has a lithography of 28 nm, while the Tiger T310 features a more advanced 12 nm lithography. A smaller lithography generally indicates better power efficiency and potentially higher performance.
Lastly, the TDP (Thermal Design Power) of the SC9832E is 7 Watts, while the TDP for the Tiger T310 is not specified. However, it can be inferred that the Tiger T310 may have a lower TDP due to its more advanced architecture and smaller lithography.
In conclusion, the Unisoc Tiger T310 offers a more advanced architecture, higher clock speeds, a more recent instruction set, and a smaller lithography compared to the Unisoc SC9832E. These specifications suggest that the Tiger T310 could potentially provide superior performance, power efficiency, and additional capabilities compared to the SC9832E.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the SC9832E has 4x 1.4 GHz cores based on the Cortex-A53 architecture. On the other hand, the Tiger T310 features a 1x 2 GHz core based on the Cortex-A75 architecture, as well as 3x 1.8 GHz cores based on the Cortex-A55 architecture. This means that the Tiger T310 has a more advanced architecture with a higher clock speed, potentially offering better performance and efficiency compared to the SC9832E.
The number of cores for both processors is 4, which indicates that they both have quad-core configurations. However, the Tiger T310 utilizes a combination of different core types to optimize performance and power efficiency.
Regarding the instruction set, the SC9832E uses the ARMv8-A instruction set, while the Tiger T310 utilizes the more recent ARMv8.2-A instruction set. This suggests that the Tiger T310 may have additional capabilities and improved efficiency compared to the SC9832E.
An important factor in processor performance is the lithography, which refers to the process technology used to manufacture the chips. The SC9832E has a lithography of 28 nm, while the Tiger T310 features a more advanced 12 nm lithography. A smaller lithography generally indicates better power efficiency and potentially higher performance.
Lastly, the TDP (Thermal Design Power) of the SC9832E is 7 Watts, while the TDP for the Tiger T310 is not specified. However, it can be inferred that the Tiger T310 may have a lower TDP due to its more advanced architecture and smaller lithography.
In conclusion, the Unisoc Tiger T310 offers a more advanced architecture, higher clock speeds, a more recent instruction set, and a smaller lithography compared to the Unisoc SC9832E. These specifications suggest that the Tiger T310 could potentially provide superior performance, power efficiency, and additional capabilities compared to the SC9832E.
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
CPU cores and architecture
| Architecture | 4x 1.4 GHz – Cortex-A53 | 1x 2 GHz – Cortex-A75 3x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
| Number of cores | 4 | 4 |
| Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
| Lithography | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| TDP | 7 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
| Max amount | up to 2 GB | up to 4 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR3 | LPDDR4X |
| Memory frequency | 667 MHz | 1333 MHz |
| Memory-bus | 2x16 bit |
Storage
| Storage specification | eMMC 5.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
| GPU name | Mali-T820 MP1 | Imagination PowerVR GE8300 |
| GPU Architecture | Mali Midgard | PowerVR Rogue |
| GPU frequency | 680 MHz | 660 MHz |
| Execution units | 1 | 2 |
| Shaders | 4 | 32 |
| DirectX | 11 | 10 |
| OpenCL API | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | ES 3.2 |
| Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
| Max screen resolution | 1440x720 | 1600x720 |
| Max camera resolution | 1x 13MP | 1x 16MP + 1x 8MP |
| Max Video Capture | FullHD@30fps | FullHD@30fps |
| Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
Wireless
| 4G network | Yes | Yes |
| 5G network | Yes | Yes |
| Peak Download Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 0.3 Gbps |
| Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 0.1 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 | 2019 April |
| Partnumber | T310 | |
| Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
| Positioning | Low-end | Low-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Dimensity 7200 Ultra vs HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G
2
MediaTek Dimensity 900 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite (Gen 4)
3
MediaTek Dimensity 1000L vs MediaTek Dimensity 6080
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8s Gen 4 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Plus Gen 2
5
MediaTek Dimensity 1200 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 625 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 888
7
MediaTek Dimensity 6100 Plus vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730
8
Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G vs Apple A16 Bionic
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G vs MediaTek Dimensity 8100
10
Unisoc SC9863A vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 695