Samsung Exynos 2200 vs Apple A16 Bionic
63
out 100
VS
89
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Samsung Exynos 2200, vs Apple A16 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 | 316037 | 381160 |
| GPU | 424486 | 472052 |
| Memory | 170650 | 258668 |
| UX | 226015 | 329468 |
| NanoReview Score | 1137188 | 1441348 |
| Stability | 61 % | 79 % |
| Graphics Test | 49 fps | 59 fps |
| File Compression | 151.9 MB/s | 236.7 MB/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 93.6 pages/s | 156.7 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 106.3 MP/sec | 162.1 MP/sec |
| Background Blur | 13.3 frames/s | 26.5 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 27 frames/s | 77.6 frames/s |
| Image Detection | 92.5 frames/s | 155.8 frames/s |
| HDR | 123.8 MP/sec | 207.5 MP/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 4.48 MP/sec | 6.85 MP/sec |
Processor
| Architecture | - 1x 2.8 GHz – Cortex-X2 - 3x 2.52 GHz – Cortex-A710 - 4x 1.82 GHz – Cortex-A510 |
- 2/3.46 (Everest) - 4/2.02 (Sawtooth) |
| Process | Samsung | TSMC |
| Cores count | 8 | 6 |
| Frequency | 2800 | 3460 |
| Instruction set | ARMv9-A | ARMv8.6-A |
| L1 cache | n/a | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | n/a | 16 MB |
| L3 Cache | 4 MB | n/a |
| Process tech. | 4 nm | 4 nm |
| Transistor count | n/a | 16 billion |
| Power (TDP) | 7 W | 8 W |
Graphics
| GPU Model | Samsung Xclipse 920 | Apple A16 GPU |
| Architecture | Voyager (RDNA 2) | Apple Bionic GPU |
| GPU Frequency | 1306 MHz | 1398 MHz |
| Execution Units | 3 | 5 |
| Shader Units | 128 | 128 |
| Total shader | 384 | 640 |
| FLOPS | 1003 GFLOPS | 1789.4 GFLOPS |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | n/a |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | n/a |
| DirectX | 12.1 | n/a |
AI Acceleration
| Artificial Intelligence | Yes | Apple Neural Engine |
| GPU Frequency | n/a | 17 TOPS |
Memory
| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR5 |
| Memory Frequency | 3200 MHz | 3200 MHz |
| Bus | 4x16 bit | 4x16 bit |
| Bandwidth | 51.2 Gbit/s | 51.2 Gbit/s |
| Max RAM | 24 GB | 6 GB |
Multimedia
| Memory Type | UFS 3.1 | NVMe |
| Max. resolution | 3840x2160 pixels | 2796x1290 pixels |
| Camera | 1x200 pixels | 1x48 pixels |
| Video recording | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS | 4K at 60FPS |
| Video quality | 8K at 60FPS, 4K at 240FPS | 4K at 60FPS |
| Video codecs | - H.264 - H.265 - AV1 - VP9 |
- H.264 - H.265 - VP8 - VP9 - Motion JPEG |
| Audio codecs | - AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
- AAC - AAX - AAX+ - AC-3 - AIFF - CAF - E-AC-3 - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
Connectivity
| Modem | Exynos 5300 | n/a |
| 4G Support | LTE Cat. 24 | LTE Cat. 24 |
| 5G Support | Yes | Yes |
| Download speed | Up to 7350 MB/s | Up to 7500 MB/s |
| Upload speed | Up to 3670 MB/s | Up to 3500 MB/s |
| Wi-Fi version | 6 | 6 |
| Bluetooth version | 5.2 | 5.3 |
| Navigation | - GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - NAVIC |
- GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS |
Other
| Announced | January, 2022 yr | September, 2022 yr |
| Class | Flagship | Flagship |
| Codename | S5E9925 | APL1W10 |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Apple A16 Bionic the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0
