Exynos 2500 vs Snapdragon 8 Gen 3

We compared the 10-core Samsung Exynos 2500 (Samsung Xclipse 950) with the older 8-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 (Adreno 750) 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 2500
  • Performs 48% better in floating-point computations
  • Has 2 more cores
  • Has 4 MB larger L3 cache size than the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3
  • Has a smaller size transistor (3 versus 4 nm)

Benchmarks

Performance tests in popular benchmarks

AnTuTu 11

The AnTuTu Benchmark measures CPU, GPU, RAM, and I/O performance in different scenarios
2289696
2345563
CPU 771016 700525
GPU 723824 805478
Memory 356421 296043
UX 438435 543517
Total score 2289696 2345563
Samples [8 tests] [443 tests]

GeekBench 6

The GeekBench test shows raw single-threaded and multithreaded CPU performance
Single-Core Score
Multi-Core Score
Asset compression 390.2 MB/sec 256.8 MB/sec
HTML 5 Browser 179.4 pages/sec 190.9 pages/sec
PDF Renderer 218.9 Mpixels/sec 209.1 Mpixels/sec
Image detection 247.5 images/sec 168.6 images/sec
HDR 309 Mpixels/sec 208.6 Mpixels/sec
Background blur 36.4 images/sec 24 images/sec
Photo processing 89.9 images/sec 63.6 images/sec
Ray tracing 12.7 Mpixels/sec 7.27 Mpixels/sec
Samples Less than 3 139 tests
Compute Score (GPU)
18873
Background blur 35.4 images/sec 26.9 images/sec
Face detection 15.1 images/sec 13.2 images/sec
Horizon detection 0.45 Gpixels/sec 0.7 Gpixels/sec
Edge detection 0.7 Gpixels/sec 0.61 Gpixels/sec
Gaussian blur 1.6 Gpixels/sec 0.98 Gpixels/sec
Feature matching 0.23 Gpixels/sec 0.18 Gpixels/sec
Stereo matching 82.2 Gpixels/sec 43.4 Gpixels/sec
Particle physics 3446.8 FPS 3083.6 FPS
API Vulkan OpenCL
Samples 2 tests 90 tests

3DMark

A cross-platform benchmark that assesses graphics performance in Vulkan (Metal)
3DMark Steel Nomad Light
Score 2231 1652
Stability 54% 79%
Graphics test 17 FPS 12 FPS
3DMark Solar Bay
Score 9397 8190
Stability - 72%
Graphics test 36 FPS 31 FPS
Section 1 43 FPS 36 FPS
Section 2 35 FPS 31 FPS
Section 3 29 FPS 26 FPS
3DMark Wild Life Extreme
Score - 4676
Graphics test - 27 FPS

PCMark 3.0

Benchmark for evaluating overall system performance in everyday workloads
PCMark 3.0
Web score 15720 16536
Video editing score 8133 7905
Data manipulation score 11954 14260
Photo editing score 32035 31248
Writing score 22532 19168
Phones tested Less than 3 41 models

Recent User Tests

The latest benchmark tests that have been submitted by users
Samsung Exynos 2500
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-05-16 -> INFCAnTuTu 112220403
πŸ“˜ 2026-01-01 (Koss)AnTuTu 112437711
πŸ“˜ 2025-12-19 (Yell)AnTuTu 112112394
πŸ“˜ 2025-11-26 -> everviolet12Geekbench 6 GPU18873
πŸ“˜ 2025-11-26 -> everviolet12AnTuTu 112496663
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-30 (EA Fran)AnTuTu 122452758
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-30 (Nyvronis)AnTuTu 122649328
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-29 -> Alejandro SorinAnTuTu 122597186
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-29 (Gadji TΓ¦mΓ¦v)AnTuTu 122438906
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-29 (Ratiii)Geekbench 7 CPU1995 / 6875

Specifications

Full list of technical specifications of Exynos 2500 and Snapdragon 8 Gen 3

CPU

Architecture 1x 3.3 GHz – Cortex-X925
2x 2.74 GHz – Cortex-A725
5x 2.36 GHz – Cortex-A725
2x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A520
1x 3.3 GHz – Cortex-X4
3x 3.15 GHz – Cortex-A720
2x 2.96 GHz – Cortex-A720
2x 2.27 GHz – Cortex-A520
Cores 10 8
Frequency 3300 MHz 3300 MHz
Instruction set ARMv9.2-A ARMv9.2-A
L1 cache 128 KB -
L2 cache 3 MB 1 MB
L3 cache 16 MB 12 MB
Process 3 nanometers 4 nanometers
TDP (Sustained Power Limit) - 8 W
Manufacturing Samsung TSMC

Graphics

GPU name Samsung Xclipse 950 Adreno 750
Architecture RDNA 3 Adreno 700
GPU frequency 999 MHz 903-1000 MHz
Pipelines 8 6
Shading units 128 256
Total shaders 1024 1536
FLOPS 4091.9 Gigaflops 2774 Gigaflops
Vulkan version 1.4 1.3
OpenCL version 3.0 2.0
DirectX version 12.1 12.1

AI Accelerator

Neural processor (NPU) Yes Hexagon
NPU theoretical performance 59 TOPS -

Memory

Memory type LPDDR5X LPDDR5X
Memory frequency 4800 MHz 4800 MHz
Bus 4x 16 Bit 4x 16 Bit
Max bandwidth 76.8 Gb/s 76.8 Gb/s
Max size 24 GB 24 GB

Multimedia (ISP)

Storage type UFS 4.0 UFS 4.0, UFS 4.1
Max display resolution 3840 x 2160 3840 x 2160
Max camera resolution 1x 320MP 1x 200MP
Video capture 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS
Video playback 8K at 60FPS, 4K at 120FPS 8K at 60FPS, 4K at 120FPS
Video codecs - H.264
- H.265
- AV1
- VP9
- H.264
- H.265
- AV1
- VP8
- VP9
Audio codecs - AAC
- AIFF
- CAF
- MP3
- MP4
- WAV
- AAC
- AIFF
- CAF
- MP3
- MP4
- WAV

Connectivity

Modem Exynos 5400 Snapdragon X75
4G support LTE Cat. 24 LTE Cat. 24
5G support Yes Yes
Download speed Up to 12100 Mbps Up to 10000 Mbps
Upload speed Up to 3670 Mbps Up to 3500 Mbps
Wi-Fi 7 7
Bluetooth 5.4 5.4
Navigation GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, SBAS, NAVIC GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, NAVIC

Info

Announced June 2025 October 2023
Class Flagship Flagship
Model number S5E9955 SM8650-AB, SM8650-AC
Official page Samsung Exynos 2500 official site Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 official site
Successor - - Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5
Further details
Notes on Snapdragon 8 Gen 3:
    - Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 for Galaxy has a 100 MHz higher CPU and GPU clock speed. It has a higher GPU performance rate of up to 3072 Gigaflops.

Cast your vote

So, which SoC would you choose?
545 (71%)
223 (29%)
Total votes: 768

Comments

Please give your opinion on the comparison of Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 and Exynos 2500, or ask any questions
🌐 Register your profile and become part of NanoReview community!
Avatar
Gota July 9, 2025 at 05:19 AM
When will you guys update this?
+8 Reply
Serhii July 11, 2025 at 09:03 AM
What we should update, Gota?
+9 Reply
Avatar
hhh July 31, 2025 at 02:07 PM
Serhii, battery life because 88 is not justifying it
0 Reply
Zae1l July 1, 2025 at 10:35 AM
I want to know from the moderators. How dare you make the SAM 3nm node inferior to the TSMC 4nm node? This is unfair, my friend. Also, if you do a little more reading and research, you'll find that Samsung's new architecture is very promising, with no problems with overheating, performance, or power efficiency so far. So, how can you determine the efficiency criteria or number that indicates a lower lifespan and power efficiency for a 3nm architecture than the older 4nm architecture?
+14 Reply
ajbumpben July 21, 2025 at 02:19 PM
They are not the one doing it, they just compare devices that house each processor
+5 Reply
a7med July 23, 2025 at 05:49 PM
samsung 3nm still trash
+8 Reply
Avatar
Anonymous October 26, 2024 at 03:13 PM
I'd go with the sd , due to the better manufacturing (tsmc)
+36 Reply