The new wireless networking technology i.e. 5G is the next big thing in the tech industry. And to capture the 5G market, there are so many smartphone manufacturing companies like Xiaomi, Realme, Oppo, Vivo, Samsung, etc. But for a smartphone to be 5G capable, the SoC inside it is needed to be 5G supported with the integrated or external 5G modem. The Qualcomm X50 and X55 5G modems, Samsung Exynos 5123 5G Modem, and Huawei Balong 5000 5G Modem are some of the very first 5G modems for smartphones.
But these modems and the supported SoCs were of the flagship categories and were expensive. So, now the companies are making trying to provide 5G SoCs in as budget range as possible. And as a result, the Snapdragon 765G from Qualcomm is was the very first mid-range 5G SoC. But now, Huwaei has also jumped in the game of budget 5G SoC and has launched the new Kirin 820 5G SoC. It is the direct successor of the Kirin 810. The SoC is directly in competition with the Snapdragon 765G. And in this post, we are going to compare the Snapdragon 765G and will take the reference of the previous generation’s Kirin 810. So, let’s get started.
Kirin 820 5G vs 810 vs Snapdragon 765G
|Kirin 820 5G||Hisilicon Kirin 810||Snapdragon 765G|
|Model Number||Kirin 820||Kirin 810||SDM765G|
|CPU||Octa-core (1x A76 @2.36 GHz|
3x A76 @2.2 GHz
4x A55 @1.8GHz
|Octa-core (2x Cortex-A76 2.27 GHz|
6x Cortex-A55 @1.88 GHz)
|Octa-core (1x Cortex-A76 (Kryo 475) @2.4GHz
1x Cortex-A76 (Kryo 475) @2.2GHz
6x Cortex-A55 (Kryo 475) @1.8GHz)
|GPU||Mali-G57||Mali-G52 MP6 @850 MHz, Quad-Core||Adreno 620|
|API Support||OpenGL ES 3.2|
|OpenGL ES 3.2|
|OpenGL ES 3.2
|RAM||8GB, LPDDR4X (1866 MHz)|
|Storage||UFS 2.1 / eMMC 5.1||UFS 2.1 / eMMC 5.1||UFS 2.1 / eMMC 5.1|
|Display||3360x1440 pixels QHD+|
|3360x1440 pixels QHD+|
|3360x1440 pixels QHD+ @60Hz
2560 x 1080 pixels Full HD+ @120Hz
|Camera Support||-||Single 48MP|
Dual 40 MP+ 24 MP
|Single 36MP, MFNR, ZSL, 30fps, 48MP, MFNR, 192MP
Dual 22MP + 22MP MFNR, ZSL, 30fps,Spectra 355 2x ISP
|Modem||Balong 5000 5G modem|
D/L Speed: 6.5 Gbps
U/L Speed: 3.5 Gbps
|Integrated 4G LTE|
D/L Speed: 1.4 Mbps
U/L Speed: 200 Mbps
|Integrated 5G X52 Modem
D/L Speed: 3.7Gbps (5G), 1.2 Gbps (LTE)
U/L Speed: 1.6 Gbps (5G), 216Mbps (LTE)
|Video||Up to 4K Ultra HD|
H.265 (HEVC), H.264 (AVC), VP8, VP9)
|Up to 4K Ultra HD|
H.265 (HEVC), H.264 (AVC), VP8, VP9)
|Up to 4K Ultra HD
H.265 (HEVC), H.264 (AVC), VP8, VP9)
|Charging||Quick Charge 4+||Super Charge||Fast Charging|
|Others||Bluetooth 5.0, true wireless audio, USB 3.1 support, 802.11a/b/g, Dual 4G VoLT||Bluetooth 5.0, USB 3.1 support, 802.11a/b/g (dual-band 2.4GHz, 5.0 Ghz)||Bluetooth 5.0, USB 3.1 support, 802.11a/b/g (dual-band 2.4GHz, 5.0 Ghz)|
|GeekBench Scores||Single Core: 3490|
Multi Core: 11200
|Single Core: 2746|
|Single Core: 3072
Multi Core: 7661
|Antutu Scores||375,277 points||305,540 points||322,826 points|
The very first thing that comes in mind is the 5G connectivity. Both Kirin 820 and Snapdragon 765G comes with the integrated multi-mode 5G modem that supports all networking generations from 2G to 5G. The Kirin 820 has been equipped with the Balong 5000 5G modem which is the same modem that has been used in the Kirin 990 5G flagship SoC.
The Snapdragon 765G has the companies Qualcomm X52 5G modem which is definitely not the flagship one but is still very capable of a mid-range smartphone. The modems of both the SoCs have support for Sub-6 and mmWave type 5G networks.
The mmWave 5G speeds of the Balong 5000 5G modem is 6.5Gbps and 3.5Gbps in downloads and uploads. Whereas the X52 modem has 3.7Gbps and 1.6Gbps. So, definitely the Kirin 820 is leading the 5G connectivity. The Kirin 810 has no 5G support and comes with an integrated 4G/LTE modem with download and upload speeds of 600Mbps and 150Mbps respectively.
CPU & Fabrication Process
The Snapdragon 765G has the 7nm EUV fabrication fro Samsung whereas the Kirin 820 has the normal 7nm from TSMC. It is obvious that the EUV-based 7nm fabrication is more power-efficient and hence the Snapdragon 765G is expected to have better power management. The core distribution of both the SoC is of the tri-cluster type. The Kirin 820 has one top-performing Cortex-A76 core at 2.36GHz, three mid-tear Cortex-A76 cores at 2.22GHz and four Cortex-A55 efficiency cores at 1.84GHz.
Whereas the Snapdragon 765G is a bit low performing here. There is one Prime Cortex-A76 Kryo 475 core at 2.4GHz, one mid-tear Cortex-A76 Kryo 475 Silver core at 2.2GHz, and six efficiencies Cortex-A55 Kryo Silver cores at 1.8GHz. Clearly, the lack of cores in the mid-tear segment is making a difference here. The Kirin 820 5G has a better CPU performance. The Kirin 810 is on the bottom with two Cortex-A76 performance cores at 2.2GHz and four Cortex-A55 cores at 1.9GHz. The Kirin 820 5G has a 27% improved CPU performance.
GPU & Gaming Performance
Kirin 820 has used the new Mali-G57 series GPU which has been tuned with 6-cores. That means there is the Mali -G57 MP6 GPU here. This is the same GPU which has also been used in the Dimensity 800 buy with four cores. But still, that GPU was able to beat the Snapdragon 765G’s Adreno 620 GPU. So, there are no chances that the Snapdragon 765G would perform better in GPU intensive tasks than Kirin 820.
Both the SoCs have also been equipped with the software-based weapons. For instance, the Snapdragon 765G has support for Qualcomm Elite gaming software features but partially. Whereas the Kirin 820 5G has support for Kiri Gaming + 2.0. On the other hand, the Kirin 810 has the Mali-G52 MP GPU. This is also a 6-core GPU with a clock frequency of 850MHz. This GPU is also better than the Adreno 620 but is not as good as Kirin 820’s GPU. The Kirin 820 5G has 38% improved GPU performance over the Kirin 810.
AnTuTu-Geekbench Benchmark Scores
here are the AnTuTu and Geekbench Benchmark scores of Kirin 820 5G, Kirin 810 and Snapdragon 765G.
AnTuTu Benchmark Scores
The AnTuTu Benchmark scores of Kirin 820 5G are 3,75,270 which in comparison to the Snapdragon 765G’s score of 3,22,826, is pretty good. The Kirin 810, however, is at the bottom with a score of 3,05,540.
Geekbench Benchmark Scores
Coming to the Geekbench, the following are the scores:
- Kirin 820 5G: 3,490 (Single Core) and 11,200 (Multi-Core)
- Snapdragon 765G: 3,072 (Single Core) and 7,661(Multi-Core)
- Kirin 810: 2,746 (Single Core) and 7,700 (Multi-Core)
The Kirin 820 has no match in the AI performance. The Kirin 810 was the first SoC from the company with the Da-Vinci NPU design. The Kirin 810 was already better in AI performance than the Snapdragon 765G. But the new Kirin 820 5G is even better. There is incorporation if one big core in the NPU which makes the Kirin 820 to have up to 73%. It is a big jump.
The Snapdragon 765G with the Hexagon 698 DSP, combined with the 5th Gen AI Engine, is definitely at the bottom here. But the AI power of Snapdragon 765G is still more than enough for a mid-range smartphone. It can reach up to 5.5TOPS in AI speed.
Camer and ISP
The Kirin 820 5G has upgraded to the new ISP 5.0 which is the company’s new ISP. It has support for new SLR-level noise reduction algorithms. It has also support for 4k video shooting at 60fps. The previous Kirin 810 was, obviously, using the ISP 4.0 which as already more than enough.
As usual, there is no talk from the company on the camera sensor’s resolution support hence we can’t comment on that. On the other hand, the Snapdragon 765G has the Spectra 355 ISP with support for up to 192MP resolution snapshots. It also has 4k 60fps video recording.
Conclusion – Which One Is Better?
The Kirin 820 5G is the new mid-range 5G king. The Kirin 820 5G has no match with any of the counterparts in this comparison. The Kirin 810 is now an outdated one and the Snapdragon 765G is also on par but is not as good as Kirin 820. But one thing to keep in mind is that there are almost negligible chances of Kirin chips to be used in any other smartphone manufacturer’s phone other than Huawei and Honor. So, in order to have the Kirin 820 5G, you might have to go with the smartphone of either company. Whereas the Kirin 765G is openly available for every smartphone manufacturer.