Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 vs Samsung Exynos 2200
31
out 100
VS
63
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Qualcomm Snapdragon 685, vs Samsung Exynos 2200. Below are specs, tests, pros and cons for each device
Review
Processor Performance
Single-Core Benchmark Score
Gaming Performance
Graphics and OpenCL/Vulkan tests
Energy Efficiency
Chip Power Efficiency
Tests & specs
Specs & test comparisonBenchmarks
| CPU | 116467 | 316037 |
| GPU | 43728 | 424486 |
| Memory | 109871 | 170650 |
| UX | 78916 | 226015 |
| NanoReview Score | 348982 | 1137188 |
| Stability | 99 % | 61 % |
| Graphics Test | 3 fps | 49 fps |
| File Compression | 100 MB/s | 151.9 MB/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 39.7 pages/s | 93.6 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 59.8 MP/sec | 106.3 MP/sec |
| Background Blur | 3.44 frames/s | 13.3 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 11 frames/s | 27 frames/s |
| Image Detection | 17 frames/s | 92.5 frames/s |
| HDR | 52 MP/sec | 123.8 MP/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 2.76 MP/sec | 4.48 MP/sec |
Processor
| Architecture | - 4x 2.8 GHz – Cortex-A73 - 4x 1.9 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
- 1x 2.8 GHz – Cortex-X2 - 3x 2.52 GHz – Cortex-A710 - 4x 1.82 GHz – Cortex-A510 |
| Process | TSMC | Samsung |
| Cores count | 8 | 8 |
| Frequency | 2800 | 2800 |
| Instruction set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv9-A |
| L3 Cache | n/a | 4 MB |
| Process tech. | 6 nm | 4 nm |
| Power (TDP) | n/a | 7 W |
Graphics
| GPU Model | Adreno 610 | Samsung Xclipse 920 |
| Architecture | Adreno 600 | Voyager (RDNA 2) |
| GPU Frequency | 1260 MHz | 1306 MHz |
| Execution Units | 1 | 3 |
| Shader Units | 128 | 128 |
| Total shader | 128 | 384 |
| FLOPS | 322.6 GFLOPS | 1003 GFLOPS |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
AI Acceleration
| Artificial Intelligence | Hexagon 686 | Yes |
Memory
| Memory Type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR5 |
| Memory Frequency | 2133 MHz | 3200 MHz |
| Bus | 2x16 bit | 4x16 bit |
| Bandwidth | 17 Gbit/s | 51.2 Gbit/s |
| Max RAM | 8 GB | 24 GB |
Multimedia
| Memory Type | UFS 2.2 | UFS 3.1 |
| Max. resolution | 2520x1080 pixels | 3840x2160 pixels |
| Camera | 1x108 pixels | 1x200 pixels |
| Video recording | 1K at 60FPS | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS |
| Video quality | 1080p at 60FPS | 8K at 60FPS, 4K at 240FPS |
| Video codecs | - H.264 - H.265 - VP8 - VP9 |
- H.264 - H.265 - AV1 - VP9 |
| Audio codecs | - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
- AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
Connectivity
| Modem | X11 | Exynos 5300 |
| 4G Support | LTE Cat. 13 | LTE Cat. 24 |
| 5G Support | No | Yes |
| Download speed | Up to 390 MB/s | Up to 7350 MB/s |
| Upload speed | Up to 150 MB/s | Up to 3670 MB/s |
| Wi-Fi version | 5 | 6 |
| Bluetooth version | 5.2 | 5.2 |
| Navigation | - GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS - NAVIC |
- GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - NAVIC |
Other
| Announced | March, 2023 yr | January, 2022 yr |
| Class | Low end | Flagship |
| Codename | SM6225-AD | S5E9925 |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Samsung Exynos 2200 the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0
