Samsung Exynos 2500 vs Samsung Exynos 2100
n/a
out 100
VS
53
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Samsung Exynos 2500, vs Samsung Exynos 2100. 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 | 500921 | 264571 |
| GPU | 928912 | 297459 |
| Memory | 410202 | 144480 |
| UX | 373762 | 188158 |
| NanoReview Score | 2213797 | 894668 |
| Stability | n/a | 66 % |
| Graphics Test | n/a | 34 fps |
| File Compression | 386.4 MB/s | 157.4 MB/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 234.1 pages/s | 75.1 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 272.4 MP/sec | 105.8 MP/sec |
| Background Blur | 36.6 frames/s | 12.7 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 86.3 frames/s | 21.1 frames/s |
| Image Detection | 246.4 frames/s | 70.4 frames/s |
| HDR | 313.6 MP/sec | 112.2 MP/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 13 MP/sec | 4.42 MP/sec |
Processor
| Architecture | - 1x 3.3 GHz – Cortex-X925 - 2x 2.75 GHz – Cortex-A725 - 3x 2.36 GHz – Cortex-A725 - 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A520 |
- 1x 2.91 GHz – Cortex-X1 - 3x 2.81 GHz – Cortex-A78 - 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
| Process | Samsung | Samsung |
| Cores count | 10 | 8 |
| Frequency | 3300 | 2900 |
| Instruction set | ARMv9.2-A | ARMv8.4-A |
| Process tech. | 3 nm | 5 nm |
| Power (TDP) | n/a | 8 W |
Graphics
| GPU Model | Samsung Xclipse 950 | Mali-G78 MP14 |
| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | Valhall 2nd gen |
| GPU Frequency | 1300 MHz | 854 MHz |
| Execution Units | 8 | 14 |
| Shader Units | n/a | 32 |
| Total shader | n/a | 448 |
| FLOPS | n/a | 765.2 GFLOPS |
| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| DirectX | 12.1 | n/a |
AI Acceleration
| Artificial Intelligence | Yes | Yes |
| GPU Frequency | n/a | 26 TOPS |
Memory
| Memory Type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5 |
| Memory Frequency | 4800 MHz | 3200 MHz |
| Bus | 4x16 bit | 4x16 bit |
| Bandwidth | 77 Gbit/s | 51.2 Gbit/s |
| Max RAM | 24 GB | 24 GB |
Multimedia
| Memory Type | - UFS 4.0 - UFS 4.1 |
UFS 3.1 |
| Max. resolution | 3840x2160 pixels | 3840x2160 pixels |
| Camera | n/a | 1x200 pixels |
| Video recording | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS |
| Video quality | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS | 8K at 60FPS |
| Video codecs | - H.264 - H.265 - AV1 |
- H.264 - H.265 - AV1 - VP9 |
| Audio codecs | - AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
- AAC - AIFF - CAF - MP3 - MP4 - WAV |
Connectivity
| Modem | n/a | Exynos 5300 |
| 4G Support | LTE Cat. 24 | LTE Cat. 24 |
| 5G Support | Yes | Yes |
| Download speed | n/a | Up to 7350 MB/s |
| Upload speed | n/a | Up to 3670 MB/s |
| Wi-Fi version | 7 | 6 |
| Bluetooth version | 5.4 | 5.2 |
| Navigation | - GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS - SBAS - NAVIC |
- GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - NAVIC |
Other
| Announced | August, 2025 yr | December, 2020 yr |
| Class | Flagship | Flagship |
| Codename | S5E9955 | S5E9840 |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Samsung Exynos 2100 the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0
