Key differences between Kirin 9030 and 9030 Pro revealed
Briefly

Key differences between Kirin 9030 and 9030 Pro revealed
"Yesterday, Huawei announced its Mate 80 series devices alongside the Mate X7 foldable, and all five devices are equipped with its new Kirin 9030 series chipsets. We say chipsets because there are two versions of the SoC - a vanilla Kirin 9030 found on the Mate 80 and some trims of the Mate 80 Pro, while the Pro version is reserved for the Mate 80 Pro (16/512GB), Mate 80 Pro Max, Mate 80 RS Ultimate and the Mate X7."
"While Huawei did not share complete specs for its new chips, users on Weibo have already shared screenshots of the new Mate80 models, which detail some of the hardware differences between the two chips. Kirin 9030 Pro (left) vs Kirin 9030 (right) Kirin 9030 Pro reports a 9-core CPU architecture with 14 threads. Based on the screenshots, the prime cores are clocked at 2.75GHz, the performance cores at 2.27GHz, while the efficiency cores are working at 1.72GHz."
"Kirin 9030 also features a 9-core CPU but with 12 threads. It has the same clock speeds as the 9030 Pro, and both chips share the same ARMv8 CPU cores and the Maleoon 935 GPU. Based on rumors, the Kirin 9030 series is likely fabbed using SMIC's N+3 node (6nm), which is the same as the Kirin 9100 chip inside the Mate 70 series. Hopefully, we'll get more official details regarding the Kirin 9030 chips soon."
Huawei's Mate 80 series and Mate X7 foldable are powered by the new Kirin 9030 series chipsets, with five devices sharing the platform. Two SoC variants exist: a vanilla Kirin 9030 used on the Mate 80 and some Mate 80 Pro trims, and a Kirin 9030 Pro reserved for higher-end Mate 80 Pro (16/512GB), Mate 80 Pro Max, Mate 80 RS Ultimate and the Mate X7. The Pro reports a 9-core CPU with 14 threads while the standard 9030 has 9 cores with 12 threads; both share identical clock speeds, ARMv8 CPU cores and the Maleoon 935 GPU. Reports indicate fabrication on SMIC's N+3 (6nm) node and official specifications remain pending.
Read at GSMArena.com
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]