|
Unisoc Tiger T616 vs Samsung Exynos 9611 |
|
Comparisons 03-12-2021 Comprehensive comparison data of Unisoc Tiger T616 vs Samsung Exynos 9611, examination of graphics processors (GPU). A thorough analysis of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to understand, is presented in the form of the table. From the video comparison, you can get the results of joint testing in software tests such as Geekbench, Vellamo, GFXBench, Quadrant, PassMark, AnTuTu, 3DMark, PCMark, Neocore, and how good the processors are in games Fortnite, Madout2, Call of Duty, Asphalt 9, GTA, Minecraft, PUBG etc. After looking at the data of joint tests and videos, you can already make an informed decision about which SoCs is better to buy Unisoc Tiger T616 or Exynos 9611.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors CPU Benchmark Based on Antutu and Geekbench scoreUnisoc Tiger T616 | 11% |
Exynos 9611 | 11% |
Battery life test Power Consumption efficiency (how quickly the processor reduces the battery charge)Unisoc Tiger T616 | 68% |
Exynos 9611 | 68% |
Gaming performance Which CPU is better for gamingUnisoc Tiger T616 | 8% |
Exynos 9611 | 9% |
Antutu v10, 9Antutu benchmark separately tests the performance of the CPU, GPU, and memory speed | Unisoc Tiger T616 |
Exynos 9611 | Total score | 154594 | 155435 | CPU | 43285 | 43530 | GPU | 58754 | 59071 | MEM | 24739 | 24864 | UX | 27829 | 27987 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Unisoc Tiger T616 |
Exynos 9611 | Single-Core | 264 | 318 | Multi-Core | 1508 | 1338 |
Comparison of specifications
CPU and Memory | Unisoc Tiger T616 |
Exynos 9611 | Frequency | 2000 MHz | 2300 MHz | Cores | 8 | 8 | Bit | 64 | 64 | Lithography | 12 nm | 10 nm | Transistors count | | | Core configuration | 2x2.0 GHz ARM Cortex-A75 6x1.8 GHz ARM Cortex-A55 | 4x2.3 GHz ARM Cortex-A73 4x1.7 GHz ARM Cortex-A53 | Power consumption (TDP) | 9 W | 8 W | Memory type | LPDDR4x | LPDDR4 | Max. Memory | 8 Gb | 8 Gb | Memory Frequency | 1866 | 1866 | Memory bandwidth | 32 | | Neural Processor (NPU) | No | No | L1 cache | 128 KB | | L2 cache | 2 MB | | L3 cache | 1 MB | | Instruction set architecture (ISA) | ARMv8.1-A | ARMv8-A | In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here Exynos 9611 is 13% better than Unisoc Tiger T616 in terms of CPU frequency. Also keep in mind that high CPU frequency affects battery life through power consumption.
GPU and MediaGPU | Mali-G57 MP1 | Mali-G72 MP3 | GPU Frequency | 750 MHz | 700 MHz | GFloPS | 383.69 | 161 | # of Cores | 1 | 3 | # of Shader Units | | | Display | 2160 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1600 pixels | The frequency of the GPU does not always directly indicate its performance. To fully evaluate all the capabilities of a graphics chip, you should take into account the number of Shader Units and Cores, as well as how many GFlops it has.
Gaming benchmarkFortnite Mobile | | | PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG Mobile) | 29.5 | 29.4 | Garena Free Fire - The Cobra | 45.4 | 45.8 | Call of Duty: Mobile | 39.3 | 39.6 | Grand Theft Auto V (GTA 5 Mobile) | 28.2 | 28.4 | Minecraft: Pocket Edition | 39.9 | 39.5 | Real Racing 3 | 56.7 | 57.3 | Sniper 3D | 72.2 | 73.3 | Need for Speed No Limits | 72.2 | 73.3 | Mortal Kombat X | 72.6 | 73.3 | CSR Racing 2 | 59.7 | 59.5 | The numbers in this table indicate the maximum FPS that was received on the device with the corresponding processor. Depending on the configuration of the gadget and graphics quality settings (Ultra, Medium, Normal), the results may differ quite significantly. We recommend that you better study the results of the Antutu v10, 9 and GeekBench 6, 5.2 becnmarks.
CamerasCamera resolution | 64 MP | 64 MP | Dual Camera resolution | 16 MP | 16 MP | Image Signal Processor (ISP) | | | Video Encoding FPS | 30 | 120 | Video Encoding resolution | FullHD | 4K (Ultra HD), 2K, FullHD | Codec support | H.264/AVC, H.265/HEVC | H.264, H.265/HEVC, VP9 |
Networks and NavigationModem | LTE-7 | LTE Cat.12/13 2/3CA | Download speed | 300 MBit/s. | 600 MBit/s. | Upload speed | 150 MBit/s. | 150 MBit/s. | Navigation | GPS, Galileo, Glonass, Beidou | GPS, Glonass, BeiDou, Galileo | NFC support | Yes | No | 5G support | Yes | No |
Result:
The number of parameters for which Unisoc Tiger T616 is better: 14
The number of parameters for which Samsung Exynos 9611 is better: 21 You need to understand that you should not blindly trust the automatic comparison of the table. You can watch video from beginning to end of parallel comparison and hear what those who really appreciated the capabilities of both SoCs think, and also read the test results on the links under the article.
Unisoc Tiger T616 SoC Comparisons • Vs Samsung Exynos 9610 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 970 • Vs MediaTek Helio P60 • Vs MediaTek Helio P90 • Vs MediaTek Helio P65 (MT6768) • Vs MediaTek Helio P95 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T610 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 MSM8998 • Vs Samsung Exynos 9 Octa 8895 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 • Vs MediaTek Helio G70 • Vs Samsung Exynos 880 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 712 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G • Vs Unisoc Tiger T618 • Vs MediaTek Helio G80 • Vs Samsung Exynos 9810 • Vs MediaTek Dimensity 600 5G • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 678 • Vs MediaTek Helio G85 • Vs Samsung Exynos 980 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T7520 • Vs Unisoc T740 Tanggula • Vs Unisoc Tiger T7510 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 810 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 • Vs MediaTek Helio P70 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro • Vs Samsung Exynos 9609 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 • Vs MediaTek Helio X30 (MT6799) • Vs Unisoc Tiger T606 • Vs Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7885 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 710A • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 710F • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 710 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 • Vs Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890 • Vs MediaTek Helio P40 • Vs Samsung Exynos 850 • Vs Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7884 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 MSM8976 Plus • Vs MediaTek Helio G35 • Vs Samsung Exynos 7 7904 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T310 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 955 • Vs MediaTek Helio G25 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 950 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 • Vs MediaTek Helio X27 (MT6797X) • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 960 • Vs MediaTek Helio A25 • Vs MediaTek Helio X25 (MT6797T) • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 632 • Vs MediaTek Helio G37 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T612 • Vs MediaTek Kompanio 500 • Vs Qualcomm QCS4290 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7c • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7c Gen 2 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 850 • Vs MediaTek Helio G36 • Vs Allwinner A523 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T820 • Vs Unisoc T750 Tanggula • Vs MediaTek MT6762VCB • Vs Rockchip RK3562 • Vs Unisoc UIS8141E • Vs Unisoc Tiger T603
Exynos 9611 SoC Comparisons • Vs Helio P65 (MT6768) • Vs Exynos 7 Octa 7884 • Vs Tiger T310 • Vs Exynos 7 7904 • Vs Kirin 955 • Vs Helio G25 • Vs Kirin 950 • Vs Snapdragon 660 MSM8976 Plus • Vs Exynos 850 • Vs Helio P40 • Vs Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 • Vs Kirin 710F • Vs Snapdragon 636 • Vs Helio X27 (MT6797X) • Vs Unisoc Tiger T710 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 960 • Vs MediaTek Helio A25 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 632 • Vs MediaTek Helio X25 (MT6797T) • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 710A • Vs Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890 • Vs MediaTek Dimensity 600 5G • Vs MediaTek Helio G35 • Vs Samsung Exynos 5 Hexa 7872 • Vs MediaTek MT8768T • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 5G • Vs Unisoc Tiger T610 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 678 • Vs Unisoc T740 Tanggula • Vs Unisoc Tiger T606 • Vs MediaTek Helio G37 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T612 • Vs MediaTek Kompanio 500 • Vs Qualcomm QCS4290 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7c • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7c Gen 2 • Vs MediaTek Helio G36 • Vs Allwinner A523 • Vs Rockchip RK3562 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T603
| |
|