Samsung Exynos 1480 vs Samsung Exynos 9611
45
out 100
VS
24
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Samsung Exynos 1480, vs Samsung Exynos 9611. 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 | 64779 |
| GPU | 166248 | 56523 |
| Memory | 150386 | 58421 |
| UX | 178841 | 80023 |
| NanoReview Score | 723293 | 259746 |
| Stability | n/a | 73 % |
| Graphics Test | 23 fps | 4 fps |
| File Compression | 176.8 MB/s | 70.5 MB/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 89.8 pages/s | 37.2 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 149.2 MP/sec | 43 MP/sec |
| Background Blur | 13.5 frames/s | 1.5 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 32.7 frames/s | 8.33 frames/s |
| Image Detection | 67.2 frames/s | 11.9 frames/s |
| HDR | 113.8 MP/sec | 43.6 MP/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 4.92 MP/sec | 1.95 MP/sec |
Games
 PUBG Mobile |
n/a | 31 FPS (High) |
 Call of Duty: Mobile |
n/a | 40 FPS (Medium) |
 World of Tanks Blitz |
n/a | 43 FPS (Ultra) |
 Genshin Impact |
n/a | 38 FPS (High) |
| Device | n/a | Samsung Galaxy A51 (1080x2400) |
Processor
| Architecture | - 4x 2.75 GHz – Cortex-A78 - 4x 2 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
- 4x 2.3 GHz – Cortex-A73 - 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
| Process | Samsung | Samsung |
| Cores count | 8 | 8 |
| Frequency | 2750 | 2300 |
| Instruction set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8-A |
| L3 Cache | 4 MB | n/a |
| Process tech. | 4 nm | 10 nm |
| Transistor count | n/a | 3 billion |
| Power (TDP) | 5 W | 8 W |
Graphics
| GPU Model | Samsung Xclipse 530 | Mali-G72 MP3 |
| Architecture | Titan (RDNA 2) | Bifrost 2nd gen |
| GPU Frequency | 1300 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Execution Units | 1 | 3 |
| Shader Units | 128 | 12 |
| Total shader | 128 | 24 |
| FLOPS | 332.8 GFLOPS | 61.2 GFLOPS |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| DirectX | 12 | n/a |
AI Acceleration
| Artificial Intelligence | Yes | Yes |
Memory
| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR4X |
| Memory Frequency | 3200 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| Bus | 2x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
| Bandwidth | 25.6 Gbit/s | 11.9 Gbit/s |
| Max RAM | 12 GB | 8 GB |
Multimedia
| Memory Type | - UFS 2.2 - UFS 3.1 |
- eMMC 5.1 - UFS 2.1 |
| Max. resolution | 2960x1440 pixels | 2560x1600 pixels |
| Camera | 1x200 pixels | 1x64 pixels |
| Video recording | 4K at 60FPS | 4K at 120FPS |
| Video quality | 4K at 60FPS | 4K at 120FPS |
| Video codecs | - H.264 - H.265 - VP8 - VP9 |
- H.264 - H.265 - VP8 - VP9 |
| Audio codecs | - AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
- AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
Connectivity
| Modem | n/a | Shannon 337 |
| 4G Support | LTE Cat. 18 | LTE Cat. 12 |
| 5G Support | Yes | No |
| Download speed | Up to 5100 MB/s | Up to 600 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 |
Other
| Announced | March, 2024 yr | September, 2019 yr |
| Class | Mid-range | Mid-range |
| Codename | S5E8845 | S5E9611 |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Samsung Exynos 1480 the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0
