Samsung Exynos 2100 vs Apple A11 Bionic
53
out 100
VS
40
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Samsung Exynos 2100, vs Apple A11 Bionic. 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 | 264571 | 169816 |
| GPU | 297459 | 123983 |
| Memory | 144480 | 100789 |
| UX | 188158 | 91913 |
| NanoReview Score | 894668 | 486501 |
| Stability | 66 % | 71 % |
| Graphics Test | 34 fps | 20 fps |
| File Compression | 157.4 MB/s | 104 MB/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 75.1 pages/s | 53.7 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 105.8 MP/sec | 50.2 MP/sec |
| Background Blur | 12.7 frames/s | 9.18 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 21.1 frames/s | 30.7 frames/s |
| Image Detection | 70.4 frames/s | 15.5 frames/s |
| HDR | 112.2 MP/sec | 83.7 MP/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 4.42 MP/sec | 3.19 MP/sec |
Processor
| Architecture | - 1x 2.91 GHz – Cortex-X1 - 3x 2.81 GHz – Cortex-A78 - 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
- 2/2.39 (Monsoon) - 4/1.42 (Mistral) |
| Process | Samsung | TSMC |
| Cores count | 8 | 6 |
| Frequency | 2900 | 2390 |
| Instruction set | ARMv8.4-A | ARMv8-A |
| L1 cache | n/a | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | n/a | 8 MB |
| Process tech. | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Transistor count | n/a | 4.3 billion |
| Power (TDP) | 8 W | 8 W |
Graphics
| GPU Model | Mali-G78 MP14 | Apple A11 GPU |
| Architecture | Valhall 2nd gen | Apple Bionic GPU |
| GPU Frequency | 854 MHz | 1066 MHz |
| Execution Units | 14 | 3 |
| Shader Units | 32 | 64 |
| Total shader | 448 | 192 |
| FLOPS | 765.2 GFLOPS | 409.3 GFLOPS |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | n/a |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | n/a |
AI Acceleration
| Artificial Intelligence | Yes | Apple Neural Engine |
| GPU Frequency | 26 TOPS | n/a |
Memory
| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR4X |
| Memory Frequency | 3200 MHz | 2133 MHz |
| Bus | 4x16 bit | 4x16 bit |
| Bandwidth | 51.2 Gbit/s | 34.1 Gbit/s |
| Max RAM | 24 GB | 4 GB |
Multimedia
| Memory Type | UFS 3.1 | NVMe |
| Max. resolution | 3840x2160 pixels | 2436x1125 pixels |
| Camera | 1x200 pixels | 1x32 pixels |
| Video recording | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS | 4K at 60FPS |
| Video quality | 8K at 60FPS | 4K at 60FPS |
| Video codecs | - H.264 - H.265 - AV1 - VP9 |
- H.264 - H.265 - Motion JPEG |
| Audio codecs | - AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
- AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
Connectivity
| Modem | Exynos 5300 | n/a |
| 4G Support | LTE Cat. 24 | LTE Cat. 12 |
| 5G Support | Yes | No |
| Download speed | Up to 7350 MB/s | Up to 600 MB/s |
| Upload speed | Up to 3670 MB/s | Up to 150 MB/s |
| Wi-Fi version | 6 | 5 |
| Bluetooth version | 5.2 | 5.0 |
| Navigation | - GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - NAVIC |
- GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo |
Other
| Announced | December, 2020 yr | September, 2017 yr |
| Class | Flagship | Flagship |
| Codename | S5E9840 | APL1W72 |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Samsung Exynos 2100 the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0
