, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

HiSilicon Kirin 650 vs HiSilicon Kirin 659

HiSilicon Kirin 650

► remove from comparison Kirin 650

The HiSilicon Kirin 650 is an ARM-based octa-core SoC for mid-range smartphones and tablets. It was announced early 2016 and features eight ARM Cortex-A53 cores. Four cores can be clocked with up to 1.7 GHz (power saving cores) and four with up to 2 GHz (performance cores). Furthermore, a ARM Mali-T830 MP2 graphics card (at 600 MHz with 40.8 GFLOPS), a 64-Bit LPDDR3 memory controller and a dual-sim capable LTE Cat. 6 (max. 300 MBit/s and GSM, WCDMA, UMTS, HSPA+) radio are integrated in the SoC.

The processor performance can be compared with the older Kirin 930 and therefore sufficient for daily usage as browsing and non demanding apps. High-end SoCs with Cortex-A57 or A72 cores however should be noticeably faster.

The SoC is produced in a modern 16nm FinFET process and is therefore very power efficient.

 

HiSilicon Kirin 659

► remove from comparison Kirin 659

The HiSilicon Kirin 659 is an ARM-based octa-core SoC for mid-range smartphones and tablets. It was announced mid 2017 and features eight ARM Cortex-A53 cores. Four cores can be clocked with up to 1.7 GHz (power saving cores) and four with up to 2.36 GHz (performance cores). The difference to the older Kirin 650 and Kirin 655 SoCs is the higher clock speed of the performance cores (2.35 versus 2.1 and 2.0 GHz). The slightly older Kirin 658 is very similar. The 659 is in our benchmarks around 4% faster than the 658 and offers a better LTE radio (Cat. 13).

Furthermore, a ARM Mali-T830 MP2 graphics card (at >=900 MHz), a 64-Bit LPDDR3 memory controller and a dual-sim capable LTE Cat. 6 (max. 300 MBit/s and GSM, WCDMA, UMTS, HSPA+) radio are integrated in the SoC. The processor performance can be compared with the older Kirin 930 and therefore sufficient for daily usage as browsing and non demanding apps. High-end SoCs with Cortex-A57 or A72 cores however should be noticeably faster. The SoC is produced in a modern 16nm FinFET process and is therefore very power efficient.

HiSilicon Kirin 650HiSilicon Kirin 659
Cortex-A53Cortex-A53
Series: Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 935 compare2.2 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 6592.36 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 658 compare2.35 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 655 compare2.1 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
» HiSilicon Kirin 6502 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 930 compare2 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 620 compare1.2 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
MediaTek MT8163 V/A 1.5 GHz compare1.5 GHz4 / 4 Cortex-A53
MediaTek MT8163 V/B 1.3 GHz compare1.3 GHz4 / 4 Cortex-A53
MediaTek MT8161 compare1.3 GHz4 / 4 Cortex-A53
Marvell Armada PXA1908 compare1.2 GHz4 / 4 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 935 compare2.2 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
» HiSilicon Kirin 6592.36 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 658 compare2.35 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 655 compare2.1 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 6502 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 930 compare2 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 620 compare1.2 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
MediaTek MT8163 V/A 1.5 GHz compare1.5 GHz4 / 4 Cortex-A53
MediaTek MT8163 V/B 1.3 GHz compare1.3 GHz4 / 4 Cortex-A53
MediaTek MT8161 compare1.3 GHz4 / 4 Cortex-A53
Marvell Armada PXA1908 compare1.2 GHz4 / 4 Cortex-A53
2000 MHz2360 MHz
8 / 88 / 8
16 16
ARMv8-ISA, Mali-T830 MP2, Dual SIM LTE (Cat. 6), LPDDR3 Memory ControllerARMv8-ISA, Mali-T830 MP2, Dual SIM LTE (Cat. 6), LPDDR3 Memory Controller
iGPUARM Mali-T830 MP2 (900 MHz)ARM Mali-T830 MP2
ArchitectureARMARM

Benchmarks

3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Extreme Physics
11640 Points (12%)
12599 Points (13%)
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
min: 13588     avg: 13632     median: 13632 (14%)     max: 13676 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
1440 Points (18%)
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot (ES 3.0) Unlimited Physics
min: 1354     avg: 1625     median: 1685 (24%)     max: 1741 Points
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Stream
968 Points (8%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Memory
2829 Points (26%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Floating Point
5944 Points (12%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Integer
3298 Points (7%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Total Score
3897 Points (10%)
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 64 Bit Multi-Core
min: 3768     avg: 3841     median: 3841 (6%)     max: 3914
3508 (5%)
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 64 Bit Single-Core
min: 883     avg: 895     median: 894.5 (18%)     max: 906
876 (18%)
Geekbench 4.0 - Geekbench 4.0 64 Bit Single-Core
min: 887     avg: 888     median: 888 (14%)     max: 889
Geekbench 4.0 - Geekbench 4.0 64 Bit Multi-Core
min: 3438     avg: 3473     median: 3473 (8%)     max: 3508
Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 - Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 64 Bit Single-Core
min: 869     avg: 919     median: 926.5 (12%)     max: 946
Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 - Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 64 Bit Multi-Core
min: 3316     avg: 3608     median: 3680.5 (5%)     max: 3805
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Kraken 1.1 Total Score *
min: 9111.2     avg: 9254     median: 9253.9 (16%)     max: 9396.5 ms
min: 8684.3     avg: 9440     median: 9271 (16%)     max: 10788.1 ms
Sunspider - Sunspider 1.0 Total Score *
1173 ms (13%)
Octane V2 - Octane V2 Total Score
min: 4188     avg: 4472     median: 4472 (6%)     max: 4756 Points
min: 4191     avg: 4947     median: 4980 (7%)     max: 5471 Points
WebXPRT 3 - WebXPRT 3 Score
min: 34     avg: 38.7     median: 40 (14%)     max: 42 Points
Vellamo 3.x - Vellamo 3.x Metal
1434 Points (38%)
Vellamo 3.x - Vellamo 3.x Multicore Beta
1965 Points (44%)
Vellamo 3.x - Vellamo 3.x Browser
3356 Points (44%)
AnTuTu v6 - AnTuTu v6 Total Score
min: 50366     avg: 51755     median: 51754.5 (18%)     max: 53143 Points
AnTuTu v7 - AnTuTu v7 MEM
min: 7947     avg: 8633     median: 8430.5 (26%)     max: 9656 Points
AnTuTu v7 - AnTuTu v7 UX
min: 21484     avg: 23751     median: 24193.5 (30%)     max: 24268 Points
AnTuTu v7 - AnTuTu v7 GPU
min: 12982     avg: 13331     median: 13167.5 (4%)     max: 14340 Points
AnTuTu v7 - AnTuTu v7 CPU
min: 39451     avg: 41305     median: 41643.5 (25%)     max: 41874 Points
AnTuTu v7 - AnTuTu v7 Total Score
min: 81992     avg: 87019     median: 87511.5 (15%)     max: 89639 Points
AndEBench - AndEBench Java
1694 Iter./s (52%)
AndEBench - AndEBench Native
20418 Iter./s (67%)
PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1 - PerformanceTest Mobile CPU Tests
142543 Points (19%)
min: 122441     avg: 127602     median: 127602 (17%)     max: 132762 Points
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Work Score
min: 5120     avg: 5230     median: 5229.5 (26%)     max: 5339 Points
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Computer Vision
min: 2413     avg: 2626     median: 2635 (14%)     max: 2819 Points
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Storage
min: 5970     avg: 7032     median: 6957 (19%)     max: 8244 Points
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Work Score 2.0
min: 4615     avg: 4805     median: 4834.5 (32%)     max: 4911 Points

Average Benchmarks HiSilicon Kirin 650 → 100% n=10

Average Benchmarks HiSilicon Kirin 659 → 105% n=10

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2021, 2020
v1.16
log 02. 15:53:45

#0 checking url part for id 8075 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 9252 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Sun, 01 Aug 2021 13:08:38 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 composed specs +0.051s ... 0.051s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.051s

#6 getting avg benchmarks for device 8075 +0s ... 0.051s

#7 got single benchmarks 8075 +0.007s ... 0.059s

#8 getting avg benchmarks for device 9252 +0s ... 0.059s

#9 got single benchmarks 9252 +0.015s ... 0.074s

#10 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.074s

#11 min, max, avg, median took s +0.016s ... 0.091s

#12 return log +0.004s ... 0.094s

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)