Talk:HiSilicon

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Amosbatto in topic Kirin 620

This article has been deleted how can I get a look at it's previous content. I want to write it. Bostwickenator (talk) 23:22, 24 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Kirin 620

edit

This page originally said that the Kirin 620 contains "802.11 b/g/n (Wifi Direct & Hotspot) Not Supporting DLNA / Miracast" and "Bluetooth v4.0, A2DP, EDR, LE", but the Hi6220's logic block diagram (section 1.2.2) shows that the chip does not have either WiFi or Bluetooth modules, and these functions are implemented by external chips, so I deleted that part. Amosbatto (talk) 01:47, 15 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Kirin 960

edit

According to AnandTech it is produced on TSMC 16FFC process, which is their new production process, it offers advantages in power, performance, and area (density) compared to the existing TSMC 16Finfet+ process
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10766/huawei-announces-hisilicon-kirin-960-a73-g71
VictordeHollander (talk) 18:17, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply


yea but those links say 16finfet :

* http://www.phonearena.com/news/Huaweis-Kirin-960-chipset-expected-to-power-the-Mate-9-has-been-unveiled_id86737
* http://wccftech.com/kirin-960-is-official/
* http://www.gsmarena.com/kirin_960_chipset_announced_much_faster_gpu_better_power_use-news-21168.php
* https://www.google.com/search?q=Kirin+960+finfet
* https://www.google.com/search?q=Kirin+960+FFC

Unknowcontributor (talk) 18:26, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply


You didn't fully read/understood my original statement. The FF in FFC and FF+ is short for FinFET.
TSMC 16nm FF+ = 16nm FinFET Plus
TSMC 16nm FFC = 16nm FinFET Compact
FFC is a newer iteration of the 16nm process node. You could call it 3rd Gen 16nm if you'd like.
"the Kirin 960 uses TSMC’s 16FFC FinFET proces"
http://reviewhardware.info/the-huawei-mate-9-review/
VictordeHollander (talk) 22:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on HiSilicon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:09, 2 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Similar platforms

edit

This section seems a random list - in what way is Intel Atom similar to Kirin 970 for example? I think we need to define "similar" in the section lead, then scan the list of potential devices for ones that fit the definition. But before we do that, we need to elaborate what function this section is to serve in the article: are we interested in marketing, i.e. platforms that compete directly with Kirin SoC like Snapdragon and Exynos? Or are we more interested in the technology, i.e. 10nm/7nm so "similar" means sharing the same die size or some other technical specification? Sbalfour (talk) 17:06, 6 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

New page proposal

edit

See Talk:Qualcomm Gobi#Cellular_modem_chipset_page_proposal. — MaxEnt 00:36, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Date of founding

edit

Bloomberg (used for citation) no longer has date of founding, better source required? Archived copy still shows the year. Ipr1 (talk) 22:56, 21 September 2020 (UTC)Reply