Unisoc Tiger T610 vs Unisoc Tiger T612
The Unisoc Tiger T610 and T612 are two processors that share many similarities in their specifications. Both processors have the same architecture, with 2x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. They also both use the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and have a lithography of 12 nm. Additionally, both processors have a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 10 Watts.
The main difference between these two processors is not apparent from their specifications. More in-depth analysis may be required to identify any subtle differences in terms of performance, power consumption, or features. Marketing materials or user reviews might provide more insights into the practical differences between the two processors.
When comparing processors, it is essential to consider factors beyond just their specifications. While the specifications provide a good starting point, real-world performance, power efficiency, and user experiences are equally important. Benchmarks and real-world tests can provide a clearer picture of how these processors perform in different scenarios.
It is worth noting that Unisoc is a relatively new player in the processor industry, and its Tiger series processors are primarily targeted towards the mid-range segment. As such, it is important to consider Unisoc's reputation, track record, and overall market presence when evaluating their processors.
When selecting between the Unisoc Tiger T610 and T612 processors, potential buyers should consider their specific needs and requirements. Factors such as the intended use case, budget, performance expectations, and software compatibility should all play a role in determining which processor is the best fit.
In conclusion, while the Unisoc Tiger T610 and T612 processors share many similarities in their specifications, deeper analysis may be needed to understand their practical differences. Ultimately, potential buyers should consider their specific needs and conduct thorough research before making a decision.
The main difference between these two processors is not apparent from their specifications. More in-depth analysis may be required to identify any subtle differences in terms of performance, power consumption, or features. Marketing materials or user reviews might provide more insights into the practical differences between the two processors.
When comparing processors, it is essential to consider factors beyond just their specifications. While the specifications provide a good starting point, real-world performance, power efficiency, and user experiences are equally important. Benchmarks and real-world tests can provide a clearer picture of how these processors perform in different scenarios.
It is worth noting that Unisoc is a relatively new player in the processor industry, and its Tiger series processors are primarily targeted towards the mid-range segment. As such, it is important to consider Unisoc's reputation, track record, and overall market presence when evaluating their processors.
When selecting between the Unisoc Tiger T610 and T612 processors, potential buyers should consider their specific needs and requirements. Factors such as the intended use case, budget, performance expectations, and software compatibility should all play a role in determining which processor is the best fit.
In conclusion, while the Unisoc Tiger T610 and T612 processors share many similarities in their specifications, deeper analysis may be needed to understand their practical differences. Ultimately, potential buyers should consider their specific needs and conduct thorough research before making a decision.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 2x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
2x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 12 nm | 12 nm |
TDP | 10 Watt | 10 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 8 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1600 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | eMMC 5.1 | UFS 2.2 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G52 MP2 | Mali-G57 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 614.4 MHz | 650 MHz |
Execution units | 2 | 1 |
Shaders | 32 | 16 |
DirectX | 11 | 12 |
OpenCL API | 2.1 | 2.1 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | ES 3.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2400x1080 | 2400x1080 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 32MP | 1x 50MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@60fps | FullHD@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.3 Gbps | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.1 Gbps | 0.1 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 5.0 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2019 June | 2022 January |
Partnumber | T610 | T612 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-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 855
2
HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs Samsung Exynos 1330
3
Unisoc SC9863A vs MediaTek Helio P90
4
MediaTek Dimensity 8100 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G
5
Google Tensor G3 vs MediaTek Helio G36
6
HiSilicon Kirin 970 vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G
7
MediaTek Dimensity 6020 vs MediaTek Helio P95
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 782G vs Unisoc Tanggula T740 5G
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G vs Samsung Exynos 9825
10
MediaTek Helio G88 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2