Exynos 2400 beats the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 and Apple A17 Pro in GravityMark GPU tests

[Redaktion]

Samsung's Exynos 2400 powers the Galaxy S24 and S24+ in most regions. Unlike with the disappointing Exynos 2200, however, the flagship chipset looks to deliver performance on par with its peers this time out, with GravityMark benchmark results indicating superiority over the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 and Apple A17 Pro.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Exynos-2400-beats-the-Snapdragon-8-Gen-3-and-Apple-A17-Pro-in-GravityMark-GPU-tests.811460.0.html

[dsadasdsa]

Wow, what a discovery!
rDNA 3 IP is better than some less established ones.
Too bad the rest of the exynos 2400 IPs are not that great.
Anyways...

[Mr Majestyk]

So let me get this right. Samsung that would have tested the 2400 vs SD 8 Gen 3 decided to put the inferior chipset in the Ultra and give the pleb grade S24 the premium SoC. Yeah sure, pull the other one it yodels.

[Maccaberry]

So an artificial test shows the Exynos chip is fast. But what about real life tests where it is shown to be a power hog and needs to throttle significantly to stop overheating. And real life tests that show it uses 17% more battery than the Qualcomm chip.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good IA generated advertising piece.
If I get an S24, I'll get the US Qualcomm version via grey import. Otherwise, I will wait until Samsung treat the international customers with the same respect they give to USA and China.

[Umitru_cu_d]

I saw this one coming. It makes sense given how well amd gpus do when it comes to vulkan. OpenGL would probably skew in favor of the snapdragon. For reference,  my exynos 2200 s22 ultra outperforms the 8 gen 1 in anything vulkan, but falls a tad short in other tests.

[Cooe]

... This really shouldn't be surprising to anyone... AMD's RDNA GPU architecture has NEVER been the problem with Samsung's modern Exynos chips. It's always been the Samsung Foundries fabrication processes they were made on that's continually let them down. 🤷

This can be seen with Steam Deck's Van Gogh/Aerith APU, which makes it BLATANTLY CLEAR that AMD's RDNA GPU architecture can absolutely freaking SCREAM in super restricted <10W power envelopes when made on a good fab process!

In fact, considering JUST HOW BAD Samsung's pre-3nm processes were vs TSMC's equivalents (see 4nm Samsung Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 vs 4nm TSMC 8+ Gen 1), having AMD's GPU architecture helped them punch notably HIGHER than they otherwise would have, even if they still couldn't keep up w/ Qualcomm & Apple!

(Just see Google's Tensor chips all the for proof you need of that, seeing that for the CPU & GPU blocks they're just Exynos chips but w/ slower & worse ARM Mali GPU's swapped in for Samsung's licensed AMD RDNA ones.)

[Yielar]

Not a chance would I trade my Snapdragon Gen 3 for the 2400. You left out every other metric which leaves the 2400 in the dust including efficiency and battery life.

[Randy chan]

I really find it hard to believe that Samsung's exynos 2400 outperforms Qualcomm 8 Gen 3 and Apple A17 bionic. Looking back, the flaw filled lackluster Google custom tensor chip is basically a rebadged exynos chip. That said, I would be sceptical about chips made by Samsung and just stick with qualcomm if you prefer android over iOS or Apple A17 bionic if you prefer iOS over android. Both of chips are better established and reputable than Samsung exynos.

[Gkr]

Lols,
One metric ahead does not mean its good

They should improve on thermals and battery life efficiency