Samsung Exynos 1480 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 835
45
out 100
VS
29
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Samsung Exynos 1480, vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 835. 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 | 227818 | 97035 |
| GPU | 166248 | 116400 |
| Memory | 150386 | 87397 |
| UX | 178841 | 67775 |
| NanoReview Score | 723293 | 368607 |
| Stability | n/a | 95 % |
| Graphics Test | 23 fps | 6 fps |
| File Compression | 176.8 MB/s | 89.3 MB/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 89.8 pages/s | 51.5 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 149.2 MP/sec | 58.8 MP/sec |
| Background Blur | 13.5 frames/s | 2.83 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 32.7 frames/s | 12 frames/s |
| Image Detection | 67.2 frames/s | 14.1 frames/s |
| HDR | 113.8 MP/sec | 55.2 MP/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 4.92 MP/sec | 2.43 MP/sec |
Processor
| Architecture | - 4x 2.75 GHz – Cortex-A78 - 4x 2 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
- 4/2.45 (Kryo 280 Cortex-A73) - 4/1.9 (Kryo 280 Cortex-A53) |
| Process | Samsung | Samsung |
| Cores count | 8 | 8 |
| Frequency | 2750 | 2450 |
| Instruction set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8-A |
| L1 cache | n/a | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | n/a | 2 MB |
| L3 Cache | 4 MB | n/a |
| Process tech. | 4 nm | 10 nm |
| Transistor count | n/a | 3 billion |
| Power (TDP) | 5 W | 9 W |
Graphics
| GPU Model | Samsung Xclipse 530 | Adreno 540 |
| Architecture | Titan (RDNA 2) | Adreno 500 |
| GPU Frequency | 1300 MHz | 710 MHz |
| Execution Units | 1 | 4 |
| Shader Units | 128 | 64 |
| Total shader | 128 | 256 |
| FLOPS | 332.8 GFLOPS | 363.5 GFLOPS |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.0 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| DirectX | 12 | 11 |
AI Acceleration
| Artificial Intelligence | Yes | Hexagon 682 |
Memory
| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR4X |
| Memory Frequency | 3200 MHz | 1866 MHz |
| Bus | 2x16 bit | 2x32 bit |
| Bandwidth | 25.6 Gbit/s | 29.8 Gbit/s |
| Max RAM | 12 GB | 8 GB |
Multimedia
| Memory Type | - UFS 2.2 - UFS 3.1 |
UFS 2.1 |
| Max. resolution | 2960x1440 pixels | 3840x2160 pixels |
| Camera | 1x200 pixels | 1x32 pixels |
| Video recording | 4K at 60FPS | 4K at 30FPS |
| Video quality | 4K at 60FPS | 4K at 30FPS |
| Video codecs | - H.264 - H.265 - VP8 - VP9 |
- H.264 - H.265 - VP9 |
| Audio codecs | - AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
- AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
Connectivity
| Modem | n/a | X16 |
| 4G Support | LTE Cat. 18 | LTE Cat. 16 |
| 5G Support | Yes | No |
| Download speed | Up to 5100 MB/s | Up to 1000 MB/s |
| Upload speed | Up to 1280 MB/s | Up to 150 MB/s |
| Wi-Fi version | 6 | 5 |
| Bluetooth version | 5.3 | 5.0 |
| Navigation | - GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo |
- GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS - SBAS |
Other
| Announced | March, 2024 yr | November, 2016 yr |
| Class | Mid-range | Flagship |
| Codename | S5E8845 | MSM8998 |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Samsung Exynos 1480 the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0
