Samsung Exynos 2400 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 860
87
out 100
VS
43
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Samsung Exynos 2400, vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 860. 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 | 451893 | 189310 |
| GPU | 722765 | 155621 |
| Memory | 300546 | 121534 |
| UX | 290016 | 177225 |
| NanoReview Score | 1765220 | 643690 |
| Stability | n/a | 97 % |
| Graphics Test | 83 fps | 20 fps |
| File Compression | 271 MB/s | 115.2 MB/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 207.8 pages/s | 67.6 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 220.5 MP/sec | 89.4 MP/sec |
| Background Blur | 21.8 frames/s | 7.65 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 65.3 frames/s | 26.4 frames/s |
| Image Detection | 159.2 frames/s | 53.8 frames/s |
| HDR | 211.5 MP/sec | 79.4 MP/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 7.4 MP/sec | 3.58 MP/sec |
Games
 PUBG Mobile |
n/a | 58 FPS (Ultra) |
 Call of Duty: Mobile |
n/a | 54 FPS (Ultra) |
 Fortnite |
n/a | 26 FPS (Low) |
 Shadowgun Legends |
n/a | 56 FPS (Ultra) |
 World of Tanks Blitz |
n/a | 98 FPS (Ultra) |
 Genshin Impact |
n/a | 56 FPS (Ultra) |
| Device | n/a | Xiaomi Poco X3 Pro (1080x2400) |
Processor
| Architecture | - 1x 3.21 GHz – Cortex-X4 - 2x 2.9 GHz – Cortex-A720 - 3x 2.6 GHz – Cortex-A720 - 4x 1.95 GHz – Cortex-A520 |
- 1x 2.96 GHz – Cortex-A76 (Kryo 485 Prime) - 3x 2.42 GHz – Cortex-A76 (Kryo 485 Gold) - 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 (Kryo 485 Silver) |
| Process | Samsung | TSMC |
| Cores count | 10 | 8 |
| Frequency | 3210 | 2960 |
| Instruction set | ARMv9.2-A | ARMv8.2-A |
| L1 cache | n/a | 512 KB |
| L2 cache | n/a | 1 MB |
| L3 Cache | 8 MB | 2 MB |
| Process tech. | 4 nm | 7 nm |
| Transistor count | n/a | 6.7 billion |
| Power (TDP) | 6 W | 6 W |
Graphics
| GPU Model | Samsung Xclipse 940 | Adreno 640 |
| Architecture | Magellan (RDNA 3) | Adreno 600 |
| GPU Frequency | 1095 MHz | 675 MHz |
| Execution Units | 6 | 3 |
| Shader Units | 128 | 256 |
| Total shader | 768 | 768 |
| FLOPS | 3406.8 GFLOPS | 1036.8 GFLOPS |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
AI Acceleration
| Artificial Intelligence | Yes | Hexagon 690 |
Memory
| Memory Type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR4X |
| Memory Frequency | 4200 MHz | 2133 MHz |
| Bus | 4x16 bit | 4x16 bit |
| Bandwidth | 68.2 Gbit/s | 34.13 Gbit/s |
| Max RAM | 24 GB | 16 GB |
Multimedia
| Memory Type | - UFS 3.1 - UFS 4.0 |
- UFS 3.0 - UFS 3.1 |
| Max. resolution | 3840x2400 pixels | 3840x2160 pixels |
| Camera | 1x320 pixels | 1x192 pixels |
| Video recording | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS | 4K at 120FPS |
| Video quality | 8K at 60FPS, 4K at 120FPS | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS |
| Video codecs | - H.264 - H.265 - AV1 - VP9 |
- H.264 - H.265 - VP8 - VP9 |
| Audio codecs | - AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
- AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
Connectivity
| Modem | Exynos 5300 | X24 LTE, X50 5G |
| 4G Support | LTE Cat. 24 | LTE Cat. 20 |
| 5G Support | Yes | Yes |
| Download speed | Up to 9640 MB/s | Up to 5000 MB/s |
| Upload speed | Up to 2550 MB/s | Up to 1240 MB/s |
| Wi-Fi version | 7 | 6 |
| Bluetooth version | 5.4 | 5.1 |
| Navigation | - GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS - NAVIC |
- GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS - SBAS |
Other
| Announced | January, 2024 yr | April, 2019 yr |
| Class | Flagship | Flagship |
| Codename | S5E9945 | SM8150-AC |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Samsung Exynos 2400 the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0
