Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 vs Samsung Exynos 990
31
out 100
VS
43
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Qualcomm Snapdragon 685, vs Samsung Exynos 990. 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 | 201538 |
| GPU | 43728 | 231438 |
| Memory | 109871 | 138841 |
| UX | 78916 | 155432 |
| NanoReview Score | 348982 | 727249 |
| Stability | 99 % | 60 % |
| Graphics Test | 3 fps | 22 fps |
| File Compression | 100 MB/s | 126.3 MB/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 39.7 pages/s | 68.4 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 59.8 MP/sec | 90.2 MP/sec |
| Background Blur | 3.44 frames/s | 9.95 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 11 frames/s | 21 frames/s |
| Image Detection | 17 frames/s | 60.6 frames/s |
| HDR | 52 MP/sec | 88.9 MP/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 2.76 MP/sec | 3.37 MP/sec |
Processor
| Architecture | - 4x 2.8 GHz – Cortex-A73 - 4x 1.9 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
- 2x 2.73 GHz – Exynos M5 - 2x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A76 - 4x 2 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
| Process | TSMC | Samsung |
| Cores count | 8 | 8 |
| Frequency | 2800 | 2730 |
| Instruction set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8.2-A |
| L1 cache | n/a | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | n/a | 1 MB |
| L3 Cache | n/a | 2 MB |
| Process tech. | 6 nm | 7 nm |
| Power (TDP) | n/a | 9 W |
Graphics
| GPU Model | Adreno 610 | Mali-G77 MP11 |
| Architecture | Adreno 600 | Valhall 1st gen |
| GPU Frequency | 1260 MHz | 832 MHz |
| Execution Units | 1 | 11 |
| Shader Units | 128 | 32 |
| Total shader | 128 | 352 |
| FLOPS | 322.6 GFLOPS | 585.7 GFLOPS |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| DirectX | 12.1 | n/a |
AI Acceleration
| Artificial Intelligence | Hexagon 686 | Yes |
| GPU Frequency | n/a | 15 TOPS |
Memory
| Memory Type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR5 |
| Memory Frequency | 2133 MHz | 2750 MHz |
| Bus | 2x16 bit | 4x16 bit |
| Bandwidth | 17 Gbit/s | 44 Gbit/s |
| Max RAM | 8 GB | 16 GB |
Multimedia
| Memory Type | UFS 2.2 | - UFS 2.1 - UFS 3.0 |
| Max. resolution | 2520x1080 pixels | 3840x2400 pixels |
| Camera | 1x108 pixels | 1x108 pixels |
| Video recording | 1K at 60FPS | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS |
| Video quality | 1080p at 60FPS | 8K at 30FPS |
| Video codecs | - H.264 - H.265 - VP8 - VP9 |
- H.264 - H.265 - VP8 - VP9 |
| Audio codecs | - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
- AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
Connectivity
| Modem | X11 | Exynos 5123 |
| 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 | 5.1 |
| Navigation | - GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS - NAVIC |
- GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo |
Other
| Announced | March, 2023 yr | October, 2019 yr |
| Class | Low end | Flagship |
| Codename | SM6225-AD | S5E9830 |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Samsung Exynos 990 the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0
