Unisoc SC9832E vs Unisoc Tiger T700
The Unisoc SC9832E and Unisoc Tiger T700 are both processors manufactured by Unisoc. While they both have their own advantages, their specifications set them apart from each other.
The Unisoc SC9832E features a quad-core architecture with four Cortex-A53 cores running at a clock speed of 1.4 GHz. The processor is built on a 28 nm lithography process and has a thermal design power (TDP) of 7 Watts. The SC9832E supports the ARMv8-A instruction set, which provides enhanced performance and security features.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T700 offers an octa-core architecture, consisting of two Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz and six Cortex-A5 cores also running at 1.8 GHz. With a 12 nm lithography process, the T700 has a TDP of 10 Watts. It supports the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, which provides improvements in performance and power efficiency compared to its predecessor.
In terms of performance, the Tiger T700's combination of high-performance Cortex-A75 cores and power-efficient Cortex-A5 cores allows it to handle demanding tasks while maintaining power efficiency. However, the SC9832E's quad-core Cortex-A53 setup offers a balance between performance and power consumption.
The lithography process is another differentiating factor. The SC9832E utilizes a 28 nm process, while the Tiger T700 employs a more advanced 12 nm process. A smaller lithography process generally translates to improved power efficiency and thermal performance, which can be advantageous in mobile devices.
Ultimately, the choice between the two processors depends on specific requirements. The SC9832E may be suitable for budget-friendly devices that prioritize a balance between performance and power consumption. On the other hand, the Tiger T700 may be better suited for devices that demand higher performance, such as gaming smartphones or multimedia-intensive applications.
In conclusion, while both the Unisoc SC9832E and Unisoc Tiger T700 have their own strengths, their varying specifications make them suitable for different types of devices and use cases. Understanding these specifications can help in making an informed decision when selecting the right processor for a particular application.
The Unisoc SC9832E features a quad-core architecture with four Cortex-A53 cores running at a clock speed of 1.4 GHz. The processor is built on a 28 nm lithography process and has a thermal design power (TDP) of 7 Watts. The SC9832E supports the ARMv8-A instruction set, which provides enhanced performance and security features.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T700 offers an octa-core architecture, consisting of two Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz and six Cortex-A5 cores also running at 1.8 GHz. With a 12 nm lithography process, the T700 has a TDP of 10 Watts. It supports the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, which provides improvements in performance and power efficiency compared to its predecessor.
In terms of performance, the Tiger T700's combination of high-performance Cortex-A75 cores and power-efficient Cortex-A5 cores allows it to handle demanding tasks while maintaining power efficiency. However, the SC9832E's quad-core Cortex-A53 setup offers a balance between performance and power consumption.
The lithography process is another differentiating factor. The SC9832E utilizes a 28 nm process, while the Tiger T700 employs a more advanced 12 nm process. A smaller lithography process generally translates to improved power efficiency and thermal performance, which can be advantageous in mobile devices.
Ultimately, the choice between the two processors depends on specific requirements. The SC9832E may be suitable for budget-friendly devices that prioritize a balance between performance and power consumption. On the other hand, the Tiger T700 may be better suited for devices that demand higher performance, such as gaming smartphones or multimedia-intensive applications.
In conclusion, while both the Unisoc SC9832E and Unisoc Tiger T700 have their own strengths, their varying specifications make them suitable for different types of devices and use cases. Understanding these specifications can help in making an informed decision when selecting the right processor for a particular application.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 1.4 GHz – Cortex-A53 | 2x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A5 |
Number of cores | 4 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 28 nm | 12 nm |
TDP | 7 Watt | 10 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 2 GB | up to 4 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR3 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 667 MHz | 1866 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | eMMC 5.1 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T820 MP1 | Mali-G52 MP2 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 680 MHz | 850 MHz |
Execution units | 1 | 2 |
Shaders | 4 | 32 |
DirectX | 11 | 11 |
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 | 2400x1080 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 13MP | 1x 48MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@30fps | FullHD@60fps |
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 | 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 | 2021 March |
Partnumber | T700 | |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Low-end | Low-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Helio P35 vs Apple A10X Fusion
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus
3
Samsung Exynos 850 vs Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G
4
Unisoc Tiger T606 vs HiSilicon Kirin 710
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000
6
Samsung Exynos 9825 vs MediaTek Helio G35
7
HiSilicon Kirin 710A vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000 Plus
8
Unisoc SC9863A vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 1
9
MediaTek Dimensity 820 vs MediaTek Dimensity 6020
10
MediaTek Dimensity 1000L vs Samsung Exynos 8890