HiSilicon Kirin 935
Intel Atom Z3530
Select graphics card
Select graphics card

Comparing Intel Atom Z3530 vs HiSilicon Kirin 935

Comparison of video cards Intel Atom Z3530 vs HiSilicon Kirin 935 in benchmarks and specifications.

Differences

HiSilicon Kirin 935

Top features of HiSilicon Kirin 935

Report a bug
  • Higher clock speed
    1.50 GHz left arrow 1.33 GHz
    Around -13% better clock speed
Intel Atom Z3530

Top features of Intel Atom Z3530

Report a bug

Specifications

Complete list of technical specifications

CPU generation and family

Let's find out which one of HiSilicon Kirin 935 and Intel Atom Z3530 is of a more recent generation, and what segment it belongs to.

Specification Value
Name HiSilicon Kirin 935 left arrow Intel Atom Z3530
Segment Mobile left arrow Mobile
Family HiSilicon Kirin left arrow Intel Atom
Generation 3 left arrow 5
CPU group HiSilicon Kirin 930 left arrow Intel Atom Z3500

CPU Cores and Base Frequency

In this block we are going to compare HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs Intel Atom Z3530 by main technical specifications: number of cores and threads, base and maximum frequencies, process technology and cache size. The higher these specifications are, the more powerful your CPU will be.

Specification Value
Frequency 1.50 GHz left arrow 1.33 GHz
Overclocking No left arrow No
Core architecture hybrid (big.LITTLE) left arrow normal

Internal Graphics

Common specifications for integrated graphics cards in HiSilicon Kirin 935 and Intel Atom Z3530 along with supported interfaces and connection options. This block has no effect on the final efficiency of the CPU.

Specification Value
GPU name ARM Mali-T628 MP4 left arrow PowerVR G6430
GPU frequency 0.68 GHz left arrow 0.46 GHz
GPU (Turbo) 0.68 GHz left arrow No turbo
Execution units 4 left arrow 16
Shader 64 left arrow 128
Max. displays 1 left arrow 2
Generation Midgard 2 left arrow
Technology 32nm left arrow 28 nm
Release date Q4/2012 left arrow Q3/2013

Hardware codec support

Let's compare the support of video codecs between HiSilicon Kirin 935 and Intel Atom Z3530. Hardware support of video decoding by embedded graphics cards directly affects the speed and quality of rendering videos.

Specification Value
h265 / HEVC (8 bit) No left arrow No
h265 / HEVC (10 bit) No left arrow No
h264 Decode / Encode left arrow No
VP9 No left arrow No
VP8 Decode / Encode left arrow No
AV1 No left arrow No
AVC No left arrow No
VC-1 No left arrow No
JPEG No left arrow No

Memory & PCIe

To choose the best model between HiSilicon Kirin 935 and Intel Atom Z3530 you need to pay special attention to memory type, clock frequency, multi-channel features, and PCIe version. The higher these numbers are, the better your CPU will be. Keep in mind that the maximum memory and frequency may also depend on the model of the motherboard.

Specification Value
Memory type LPDDR3-1600 left arrow LPDDR3-1600
Max. Memory left arrow 4 GB
ECC No left arrow No
Memory channels 2 left arrow 2 (Dual Channel)

Thermal Management

Let's find out what TDP value would be better for HiSilicon Kirin 935 or Intel Atom Z3530? The Thermal Design Power (TDP) indicates the maximum amount of heat that should be dissipated by the chip cooling system. However, the value of TDP gives only a rough indication of the real power consumption of the CPU.

Specification Value
Tjunction max. -- left arrow 90 \xc2\xb0C

Technical details

Here you can find a comparison of 2nd and 3rd level cache sizes for HiSilicon Kirin 935 and Intel Atom Z3530 CPUs along with a list of ISA extensions.

Specification Value
Instruction set (ISA) ARMv8-A64 (64 bit) left arrow x86-64 (64 bit)
Virtualization None left arrow Intel VT-x
ISA extensions left arrow MMX, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2,
L2-Cache -- left arrow 2.00 MB
Architecture Cortex-A53 / Cortex-A53 left arrow Moorefield
Technology 28 nm left arrow 22 nm
Socket N/A left arrow FC-MB5T1064
Release date Q1/2015 left arrow Q2/2014

Benchmarks

Real tests HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs Intel Atom Z3530

iGPU - FP32 Performance (Single-precision GFLOPS)

This test serves for determining the performance of integrated graphics in Intel and AMD processors.

Latest comparisons