Skip to content
InnoReviews

MediaTek Dimensity 7025 vs Unisoc T8200

MediaTek Dimensity 7025
39.3Inno Score
VS
Unisoc T8200
—Inno Score
28CPU28
—GPU55
44.6Benchmarks—
54.9Efficiencyspec-based36
1 spec wins — MediaTek Dimensity 70251 spec wins — Unisoc T8200

InnoReviews verdict

No overall winner yet: Unisoc T8200 lacks the published benchmark results an Inno Score requires, so there is no Inno Score to compare — we don't rank chips on their spec sheet alone. The spec table below still shows every difference we track.

Which would you pick?

General

General comparison: MediaTek Dimensity 7025 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecMediaTek Dimensity 7025Unisoc T8200
Announced20242025
Process6 nm6 nm
TDP (typical)5 W—
ArchitectureArmv8.2Armv8.2

CPU

CPU comparison: MediaTek Dimensity 7025 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecMediaTek Dimensity 7025Unisoc T8200
Cores88
Core configuration2x2.5 GHz Cortex-A78 + 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A552x2.3 GHz Cortex-A76 + 6x2.1 GHz Cortex-A55
Max clock2.5 GHz+9%2.3 GHz

GPU

GPU comparison: MediaTek Dimensity 7025 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecMediaTek Dimensity 7025Unisoc T8200
GPUIMG BXM-8-256Arm Mali-G57 MC2
GPU clock—850 MHz

Memory

Memory comparison: MediaTek Dimensity 7025 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecMediaTek Dimensity 7025Unisoc T8200
Memory typeLPDDR5-3200LPDDR4X-2133
Max bandwidth25.6 GB/s—

Connectivity

Connectivity comparison: MediaTek Dimensity 7025 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecMediaTek Dimensity 7025Unisoc T8200
ModemIntegrated 5G (sub-6)Integrated 5G (SA/NSA)
Wi-FiWi-Fi 5Wi-Fi 6 (1x1, optional)
Bluetooth5.45.4

Media

Media comparison: MediaTek Dimensity 7025 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecMediaTek Dimensity 7025Unisoc T8200
Max displayFHD+ @ 120HzFHD+ @ 120Hz
Video capture2K@30fps4K@30fps

Benchmarks

Benchmarks comparison: MediaTek Dimensity 7025 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecMediaTek Dimensity 7025Unisoc T8200
AnTuTu664,087Bottom 16%—
AnTuTu 11 (CPU)255,422Bottom 18%—
AnTuTu 11 (GPU)57,772Bottom 16%—
AnTuTu 11 (Memory)150,942Bottom 21%—
AnTuTu 11 (UX)199,951Bottom 16%—
Geekbench 6 (single)950Bottom 41%—
Geekbench 6 (multi)2,250Bottom 38%—

Related comparisons

Try another matchup