Exynos 2200 vs A16 Bionic

We compared the 8-core Samsung Exynos 2200 (Samsung Xclipse 920) with the newer 6-core Apple A16 Bionic (Apple A16 GPU) SoC. Here you will find the pros and cons of each chip, technical specs, and comprehensive tests in benchmarks, like AnTuTu and Geekbench.

Review

General comparison of performance, power consumption, and other indicators
CPU Performance
Single and multi-core processor tests
Gaming Performance
GPU performance in games and OpenCL/Vulkan
Battery life
Efficiency of battery consumption
NanoReview Score
Overall chip score

Key Differences

Main differences and advantages of each chip
Pros of Samsung Exynos 2200
  • Has 2 more cores
  • Better instruction set architecture
Pros of Apple A16 Bionic
  • Performs 78% better in floating-point computations
  • 24% higher CPU clock speed (3460 vs 2800 MHz)
  • Higher GPU frequency (~7%)
  • Shows better (up to 13%) AnTuTu 11 score – 1626K vs 1434K

Benchmarks

Performance tests in popular benchmarks

AnTuTu 11

The AnTuTu Benchmark measures CPU, GPU, RAM, and I/O performance in different scenarios
1434169
A16 Bionic +13%
1626008
CPU 472427 432740
GPU 390230 490354
Memory 216173 216774
UX 355339 486140
Total score 1434169 1626008
Samples [52 tests] [36 tests]
AnTuTu results from iOS and Android are not directly comparable! They won't affect NanoReview scores.

GeekBench 6

The GeekBench test shows raw single-threaded and multithreaded CPU performance
Single-Core Score
A16 Bionic +66%
2631
Multi-Core Score
A16 Bionic +67%
6602
Asset compression 169.2 MB/sec 234.4 MB/sec
HTML 5 Browser 103 pages/sec 155.2 pages/sec
PDF Renderer 133.7 Mpixels/sec 157.5 Mpixels/sec
Image detection 101.3 images/sec 149.7 images/sec
HDR 130.8 Mpixels/sec 202.6 Mpixels/sec
Background blur 14.7 images/sec 25.9 images/sec
Photo processing 34.9 images/sec 76.8 images/sec
Ray tracing 4.65 Mpixels/sec 6.74 Mpixels/sec
Samples 25 tests 24 tests
Compute Score (GPU)
10088
A16 Bionic +127%
22851
Background blur 14.6 images/sec 39.5 images/sec
Face detection 9.75 images/sec 50.9 images/sec
Horizon detection 0.41 Gpixels/sec 0.73 Gpixels/sec
Edge detection 0.36 Gpixels/sec 1.05 Gpixels/sec
Gaussian blur 0.48 Gpixels/sec 1.22 Gpixels/sec
Feature matching 0.15 Gpixels/sec 0.29 Gpixels/sec
Stereo matching 38.1 Gpixels/sec 70.4 Gpixels/sec
Particle physics 1860.5 FPS 2162.5 FPS
API Vulkan Metal
Samples 14 tests 12 tests
Compute results use different APIs (Metal vs Vulkan/OpenCL) and are not directly comparable!

3DMark

A cross-platform benchmark that assesses graphics performance in Vulkan (Metal)
3DMark Steel Nomad Light
Score 900 -
Stability 66% -
Graphics test 7 FPS -
3DMark Solar Bay
4266
Score 3972 4266
Stability 66% 74%
Graphics test 15 FPS 16 FPS
Section 1 18 FPS 20 FPS
Section 2 15 FPS 16 FPS
Section 3 12 FPS 12 FPS
3DMark Wild Life Extreme
A16 Bionic +74%
3335
Score 1918 3335
Stability 64% 71%
Graphics test 11 FPS 19 FPS

PCMark 3.0

Benchmark for evaluating overall system performance in everyday workloads
PCMark 3.0
Web score 11932 -
Video editing score 7385 -
Data manipulation score 12323 -
Photo editing score 24230 -
Writing score 16664 -
Phones tested 4 models -

Recent User Tests

The latest benchmark tests that have been submitted by users
Samsung Exynos 2200
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-25 ((tiktok:frowners_tech_))AnTuTu 121674395
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-21 -> MOLANGAnTuTu 121628220
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-21 -> MOLANGGeekbench 6 GPU10630
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-12 (Ogurchik))AnTuTu 121628220
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-09 (Hangal)AnTuTu 111587642
Apple A16 Bionic
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-10-09 (Gurudev)AnTuTu 111226584
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-26 (Peltsi74)AnTuTu 111477304
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-21 (Атомная Π±ΠΎΠΌΠ±Π°)AnTuTu 111772840
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-19 (Bear lover)AnTuTu 111714105
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-14 (ZUSEPRO)AnTuTu 111603687

Specifications

Full list of technical specifications of Exynos 2200 and A16 Bionic

CPU

Architecture 1x 2.8 GHz – Cortex-X2
3x 2.52 GHz – Cortex-A710
4x 1.82 GHz – Cortex-A510
2x 3.46 GHz – Everest
4x 2.02 GHz – Sawtooth
Cores 8 6
Frequency 2800 MHz 3460 MHz
Instruction set ARMv9-A ARMv8.6-A
L1 cache - 256 KB
L2 cache - 16 MB
L3 cache 4 MB -
Process 4 nanometers 4 nanometers
Transistor count - 16 billion
TDP (Sustained Power Limit) 7 W 8 W
Manufacturing Samsung TSMC

Graphics

GPU name Samsung Xclipse 920 Apple A16 GPU
Architecture RDNA 2 Apple Bionic GPU
GPU frequency 1306 MHz 1398 MHz
Pipelines 3 5
Shading units 128 128
Total shaders 384 640
FLOPS 1003 Gigaflops 1789.4 Gigaflops
Vulkan version 1.3 -
OpenCL version 2.0 -
DirectX version 12.1 -

AI Accelerator

Neural processor (NPU) Yes Apple Neural Engine
NPU theoretical performance - 17 TOPS

Memory

Memory type LPDDR5 LPDDR5
Memory frequency 3200 MHz 3200 MHz
Bus 4x 16 Bit 4x 16 Bit
Max bandwidth 51.2 Gb/s 51.2 Gb/s
Max size 24 GB 6 GB

Multimedia (ISP)

Storage type UFS 3.1 NVMe
Max display resolution 3840 x 2160 2796 x 1290
Max camera resolution 1x 200MP 1x 48MP
Video capture 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS 4K at 60FPS
Video playback 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 -
4G support LTE Cat. 24 LTE Cat. 24
5G support Yes Yes
Download speed Up to 7350 Mbps Up to 7500 Mbps
Upload speed Up to 3670 Mbps Up to 3500 Mbps
Wi-Fi 6 6
Bluetooth 5.2 5.3
Navigation GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, NAVIC GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS

Info

Announced January 2022 September 2022
Class Flagship Flagship
Model number S5E9925 APL1W10
Official page Samsung Exynos 2200 official site -
Successor - Samsung Exynos 2500 - Apple A19 Pro

Cast your vote

So, which SoC would you choose?
145 (41%)
209 (59%)
Total votes: 354

Comments

Please give your opinion on the comparison of A16 Bionic and Exynos 2200, or ask any questions
🌐 Register your profile and become part of NanoReview community!