Samsung Exynos 1580 vs MediaTek Helio G99
56
out 100
VS
33
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Samsung Exynos 1580, vs MediaTek Helio G99. 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 | 289519 | 131367 |
| GPU | 265302 | 71737 |
| Memory | 156294 | 100728 |
| UX | 195882 | 118629 |
| NanoReview Score | 906997 | 422461 |
| Graphics Test | n/a | 7 fps |
| File Compression | 184.3 MB/s | 99.7 MB/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 112.2 pages/s | 50.6 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 138.4 MP/sec | 70.6 MP/sec |
| Background Blur | 15 frames/s | 6.15 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 35 frames/s | 18.8 frames/s |
| Image Detection | 68 frames/s | 40.1 frames/s |
| HDR | 104.8 MP/sec | 54.6 MP/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 4.96 MP/sec | 2.79 MP/sec |
Games
 PUBG Mobile |
n/a | 86 FPS (Low) |
 Call of Duty: Mobile |
n/a | 37 FPS (Ultra) |
 Shadowgun Legends |
n/a | 91 FPS (Low) |
 World of Tanks Blitz |
n/a | 66 FPS (Ultra) |
 Genshin Impact |
n/a | 55 FPS (Ultra) |
 Mobile Legends: Bang Bang |
n/a | 48 FPS (Ultra) |
| Device | n/a | Cubot X70 (1080x2408) |
Processor
| Architecture | - 1x 2.9 GHz – Cortex-A720 - 3x 2.6 GHz – Cortex-A720 - 4x 1.95 GHz – Cortex-A520 |
- 2/2.2 (Cortex-A76) - 6/2 (Cortex-A55) |
| Process | Samsung | TSMC |
| Cores count | 8 | 8 |
| Frequency | 2900 | 2200 |
| Instruction set | ARMv9.2-A | ARMv8.2-A |
| Process tech. | 4 nm | 6 nm |
| Power (TDP) | n/a | 5 W |
Graphics
| GPU Model | Samsung Xclipse 540 | Mali-G57 MP2 |
| Architecture | Magellan (RDNA 3) | Valhall 1st gen |
| GPU Frequency | 1300 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Execution Units | 2 | 2 |
| Shader Units | 128 | 32 |
| Total shader | 256 | 64 |
| FLOPS | 1331.2 GFLOPS | 128 GFLOPS |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
AI Acceleration
| Artificial Intelligence | Yes | Yes |
| GPU Frequency | 14.7 TOPS | n/a |
Memory
| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR4X |
| Memory Frequency | 3200 MHz | 2133 MHz |
| Bus | 4x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
| Bandwidth | 51.2 Gbit/s | 17.1 Gbit/s |
| Max RAM | 12 GB | 12 GB |
Multimedia
| Memory Type | UFS 3.1 | UFS 2.2 |
| Max. resolution | 2960x1440 pixels | 2520x1080 pixels |
| Camera | 1x200 pixels | 1x108 pixels |
| Video recording | 4K at 60FPS | 2K at 30FPS |
| Video quality | 4K at 60FPS | 2K 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
| 4G Support | LTE Cat. 18 | LTE Cat. 13 |
| 5G Support | Yes | No |
| Download speed | Up to 5100 MB/s | Up to 650 MB/s |
| Upload speed | Up to 1280 MB/s | Up to 150 MB/s |
| Wi-Fi version | 6 | 5 |
| Bluetooth version | 5.4 | 5.2 |
| Navigation | - GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS |
- GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS - NAVIC |
Other
| Announced | October, 2024 yr | May, 2022 yr |
| Class | Mid-range | Mid-range |
| Codename | S5E8855 | MT6789 |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Samsung Exynos 1580 the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 1
