Exynos 2400 vs A15 Bionic

We compared the 10-core Samsung Exynos 2400 (Samsung Xclipse 940) with the older 6-core Apple A15 Bionic (Apple A15 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 2400
  • Performs 2x better in floating-point computations
  • Supports 100% higher memory bandwidth (68.2 against 34.1 GB/s)
  • Has 4 more cores
  • Shows significantly better (up to 45%) AnTuTu 11 score – 2046K vs 1413K
  • Has a smaller size transistor (4 versus 5 nm)
  • Better instruction set architecture
Pros of Apple A15 Bionic
  • Higher GPU frequency (~22%)

Benchmarks

Performance tests in popular benchmarks

AnTuTu 11

The AnTuTu Benchmark measures CPU, GPU, RAM, and I/O performance in different scenarios
2046435
1413275
CPU 698933 410975
GPU 637772 370837
Memory 301201 164151
UX 408529 467312
Total score 2046435 1413275
Samples [93 tests] [69 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
2315
Multi-Core Score
6826
5753
Asset compression 285.5 MB/sec 208.1 MB/sec
HTML 5 Browser 167.2 pages/sec 122.9 pages/sec
PDF Renderer 165.6 Mpixels/sec 139.1 Mpixels/sec
Image detection 168.2 images/sec 125.1 images/sec
HDR 207.3 Mpixels/sec 179.4 Mpixels/sec
Background blur 25.3 images/sec 22.3 images/sec
Photo processing 63.9 images/sec 53.2 images/sec
Ray tracing 7.73 Mpixels/sec 6.26 Mpixels/sec
Samples 38 tests 37 tests
Compute Score (GPU)
16273
A15 Bionic +25%
20400
Background blur 28.2 images/sec 35.4 images/sec
Face detection 15 images/sec 44.8 images/sec
Horizon detection 0.6 Gpixels/sec 0.62 Gpixels/sec
Edge detection 0.51 Gpixels/sec 0.82 Gpixels/sec
Gaussian blur 0.84 Gpixels/sec 0.84 Gpixels/sec
Feature matching 0.22 Gpixels/sec 0.3 Gpixels/sec
Stereo matching 77.8 Gpixels/sec 71.1 Gpixels/sec
Particle physics 2872.5 FPS 2198.2 FPS
API Vulkan Metal
Samples 29 tests 19 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 1769 -
Stability 67% -
Graphics test 13 FPS -
3DMark Solar Bay
Exynos 2400 +121%
8302
3765
Score 8302 3765
Stability - 71%
Graphics test 32 FPS 14 FPS
Section 1 37 FPS 19 FPS
Section 2 31 FPS 14 FPS
Section 3 25 FPS 9 FPS
3DMark Wild Life Extreme
3812
2854
Score 3812 2854
Stability 57% 76%
Graphics test 22 FPS 17 FPS

PCMark 3.0

Benchmark for evaluating overall system performance in everyday workloads
PCMark 3.0
Web score 16695 -
Video editing score 8032 -
Data manipulation score 14884 -
Photo editing score 35055 -
Writing score 21619 -
Phones tested 3 models -

Recent User Tests

The latest benchmark tests that have been submitted by users
Samsung Exynos 2400
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-30 (Rakson)AnTuTu 122303953
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-27 (Halil)AnTuTu 122426875
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-25 (Omar_syriangamerr)AnTuTu 122245977
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-12 -> Viljami22AnTuTu 122321618
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-11 -> S25fe6833AnTuTu 122388378
Apple A15 Bionic
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-25 -> op1Geekbench 6 CPU2168 / 4988
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-23 -> HotPowerAnTuTu 111184759
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-19 -> HotPowerGeekbench 6 GPU21284
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-19 (Vova)AnTuTu 111297615
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-19 -> HotPowerGeekbench 6 CPU2423 / 5985

Specifications

Full list of technical specifications of Exynos 2400 and A15 Bionic

CPU

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
2x 3.23 GHz – Avalanche
4x 2.02 GHz – Blizzard
Cores 10 6
Frequency 3210 MHz 3230 MHz
Instruction set ARMv9.2-A ARMv8.5-A
L1 cache - 256 KB
L2 cache - 12 MB
L3 cache 8 MB -
Process 4 nanometers 5 nanometers
Transistor count - 15 billion
TDP (Sustained Power Limit) 6 W 6 W
Manufacturing Samsung TSMC

Graphics

GPU name Samsung Xclipse 940 Apple A15 GPU
Architecture RDNA 3 Apple Bionic GPU
GPU frequency 1095 MHz 1338 MHz
Pipelines 6 5
Shading units 128 128
Total shaders 768 640
FLOPS 3406.8 Gigaflops 1712.6 Gigaflops
Vulkan version 1.3 -
OpenCL version 3.0 -
DirectX version 12.1 -

AI Accelerator

Neural processor (NPU) Yes Apple Neural Engine
NPU theoretical performance - 15.8 TOPS

Memory

Memory type LPDDR5X LPDDR4X
Memory frequency 4200 MHz 2133 MHz
Bus 4x 16 Bit 4x 16 Bit
Max bandwidth 68.2 Gb/s 34.1 Gb/s
Max size 24 GB 6 GB

Multimedia (ISP)

Storage type UFS 3.1, UFS 4.0 NVMe
Max display resolution 3840 x 2400 2732 x 2048
Max camera resolution 1x 320MP -
Video capture 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS 4K at 60FPS
Video playback 8K at 60FPS, 4K at 120FPS 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 5400 -
4G support LTE Cat. 24 LTE Cat. 24
5G support Yes Yes
Download speed Up to 12100 Mbps Up to 7500 Mbps
Upload speed Up to 3670 Mbps Up to 3000 Mbps
Wi-Fi 6 6
Bluetooth 5.3 5.0
Navigation GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, NAVIC GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS

Info

Announced January 2024 September 2021
Class Flagship Flagship
Model number S5E9945 APL1W07
Official page Samsung Exynos 2400 official site -
Successor - Samsung Exynos 2500 - Apple A19 Pro

Cast your vote

So, which SoC would you choose?
297 (74.3%)
103 (25.8%)
Total votes: 400

Comments

Please give your opinion on the comparison of A15 Bionic and Exynos 2400, or ask any questions
🌐 Register your profile and become part of NanoReview community!