HiSilicon Kirin 930 vs HiSilicon Kirin 659

HiSilicon Kirin 930

► remove

The HiSilicon Kirin 930 is an ARM-based octa-core SoC (system-on-a-chip) for smartphones and tablets. It was launched in the first half of 2015. It integrates two quad-core clusters of Cortex-A53 cores (big.LITTLE). The performance cluster clocks at up to 2 GHz, the power saving cluster at up to 1.5 GHz. Furthermore, the SoC integrates a ARM Mali-T628 MP4 graphics card and LTE Cat. 6 modem. The SoC is manufactured in 28nm and thanks to the small Cortex-A53 cores also suited for smaller smartphones.

HiSilicon Kirin 659

► remove 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 930HiSilicon Kirin 659
Cortex-A53Cortex-A53
: 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 650 compare2 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
» HiSilicon Kirin 9302 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
MediaTek MT8168 compare2 GHz4 / 4 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 650 compare2 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
HiSilicon Kirin 9302 GHz8 / 8 Cortex-A53
MediaTek MT8168 compare2 GHz4 / 4 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
28 16
ARM Mali-T628 MP4 GPU, 4x Cortex-A53e (2.0 GHz) + 4x Cortex-A53 (1.5 GHz, big.LITTLE), LTE Cat. 6, 2x 32 Bit LPDDR3-1600 Memory ControllerARMv8-ISA, Mali-T830 MP2, Dual SIM LTE (Cat. 6), LPDDR3 Memory Controller
iGPUARM Mali-T628 MP4 ( - 600 MHz)ARM Mali-T830 MP2
ArchitectureARMARM

3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Physics
9337 Points (6%)
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Extreme Physics
min: 9404     avg: 9487     median: 9499 (10%)     max: 9557 Points
12599 Points (13%)
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
min: 10447     avg: 10528     median: 10494 (11%)     max: 10643 Points
min: 11780     avg: 13618     median: 13379.5 (14%)     max: 14930 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
min: 1632     avg: 1675     median: 1685 (21%)     max: 1717 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot (ES 3.0) Unlimited Physics
min: 1354     avg: 1625     median: 1685 (29%)     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 32 Bit Multi-Core
min: 2955     avg: 3212     median: 3211.5 (6%)     max: 3468
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 32 Bit Single-Core
min: 698     avg: 761     median: 760.5 (16%)     max: 823
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 64 Bit Multi-Core
min: 3458     avg: 3498     median: 3497.5 (5%)     max: 3537
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 64 Bit Single-Core
min: 864     avg: 873     median: 872.5 (18%)     max: 881
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 (13%)     max: 946
Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 - Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 64 Bit Multi-Core
min: 3316     avg: 3608     median: 3680.5 (6%)     max: 3805
Linpack Android / IOS - Linpack Multi Thread
min: 272.043     avg: 272     median: 272.3 (9%)     max: 272.482 MFLOPS
Linpack Android / IOS - Linpack Single Thread
min: 120.972     avg: 122     median: 121.5 (12%)     max: 122.028 MFLOPS
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Kraken 1.1 Total Score *
min: 9903     avg: 11085     median: 11543.5 (19%)     max: 11807.9 ms
min: 8684.3     avg: 9440     median: 9271 (16%)     max: 10788.1 ms
Sunspider - Sunspider 1.0 Total Score *
min: 1021.4     avg: 1093     median: 1092.5 (12%)     max: 1163.6 ms
1173 ms (13%)
Octane V2 - Octane V2 Total Score
min: 3866     avg: 4211     median: 4084 (7%)     max: 4682 Points
min: 4191     avg: 4947     median: 4980 (8%)     max: 5471 Points
Vellamo 3.x - Vellamo 3.x Metal
1254 Points (34%)
Vellamo 3.x - Vellamo 3.x Multicore Beta
2044 Points (46%)
Vellamo 3.x - Vellamo 3.x Browser
2756 Points (36%)
Quadrant Standard Edition 2.0 - Quadrant Standard 2.0 Total Score
13277 points (31%)
AnTuTu v5 - AnTuTu v5 Total Score
min: 45927     avg: 47313     median: 47313 (48%)     max: 48699 Points
AnTuTu v6 - AnTuTu v6 Total Score
52322 Points (18%)
min: 62810     avg: 65730     median: 66608 (23%)     max: 68232 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
1338 Iter./s (41%)
1694 Iter./s (52%)
AndEBench - AndEBench Native
20284 Iter./s (67%)
20418 Iter./s (67%)
PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1 - PerformanceTest Mobile CPU Tests
125047 Points (16%)
min: 122441     avg: 127602     median: 127602 (17%)     max: 132762 Points
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Work Score
min: 4358     avg: 4432     median: 4458 (22%)     max: 4479 Points
min: 5704     avg: 5956     median: 5887 (29%)     max: 6252 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 (24%)     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 930 → 100% n=12

Average Benchmarks HiSilicon Kirin 659 → 115% n=12

-
-
* 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), 2020, 2019
v1.16
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)