Samsung Exynos 5 Octa vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 600

Announced January, 2013

Reasons to buy the Samsung Exynos 5 Octa

	More cores 8		More threads 8
	Better SunSpider 0.9.1 score 679 ms		Better BrowserMark 2.0 score 2,710

older Released April, 2013

Reasons to buy the Qualcomm Snapdragon 600

	Much more l2 cache 2 MB		Much better GLBenchmark 2.5 egypt classic (Offscreen) score 87.6 fps
	Significantly more l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core		Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.02 GHz

The comparison between the Samsung Exynos 5 Octa and the Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 is a clear representation that sometimes more cores doesn’t necessarily equal better quality.
True, the Exynos 5 has twice as many cores as the Snapdragon 600- eight and four respctively- but to compensate for that, the Snapdragon has about 60% higher clock speed, which compensates for the lack of cores, considering these processors are used in mobile devices like smartphones, tablets, etc. Another thing that the Snapdragon has above the Exynos 5 is that it offers more than twice the amount of fps as shown by the GLBenchmark 2.5 egypt classic (offscreen)- approximately 88 fps to the 43 of the Exynos.
More cores doesn’t always equal better CPU performance, as this case clearly shows.

	GPU
	Benchmark graphics performance
Exynos 5 Octa 7.5 Snapdragon 600 10.0
GLBenchmark 2.5 Egypt Classic (Offscreen)

	Features
	How does CPUBoss rank the features of each product?
Exynos 5 Octa 5.4 Snapdragon 600 5.4
Features and specifications that differ between products

	Performance
	Benchmark performance
Exynos 5 Octa 10.0 Snapdragon 600 10.0
GeekBench

	Browser
	Benchmark performance focused on browser usage
Exynos 5 Octa 8.9 Snapdragon 600 8.3
BrowserMark 2.0

	CPUBoss Score
	GPU, Features, Performance and Browser
Exynos 5 Octa 8.5 Snapdragon 600 9.4

Winner
Qualcomm Snapdragon 600

CPUBoss recommends the Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 based on its gpu.

See full details

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!

Reasons to consider the
Samsung Exynos 5 Octa

Report a correction

More cores

Twice as many cores; run more applications at once

More threads

Twice as many threads

Better SunSpider 0.9.1 score

679 ms

822.6 ms

More than 15% better SunSpider 0.9.1 score

Better BrowserMark 2.0 score

2,710

2,262

Around 20% better BrowserMark 2.0 score

Much better overclocked clock speed (Water)

1.9 GHz

0 GHz

Compared to all cpus, 1.9 GHz overclocked clock speed (Water) is just OK

Reasons to consider the
Qualcomm Snapdragon 600

Report a correction

Much more l2 cache

2 MB

0.5 MB

4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later

Much better GLBenchmark 2.5 egypt classic (Offscreen) score

87.6 fps

43 fps

More than 2x better GLBenchmark 2.5 egypt classic (Offscreen) score

Significantly more l2 cache per core

0.5 MB/core

0.06 MB/core

8x more l2 cache per core

Better overclocked clock speed (Air)

2.02 GHz

1.9 GHz

More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Air)

SunSpider 0.9.1

Exynos 5 Octa

679 ms

Snapdragon 600

822.6 ms

Exynos 5 Octa @ fonearena.com

Snapdragon 600 @ mobilesyrup.com

BrowserMark 2.0

Exynos 5 Octa

2,710

Snapdragon 600

2,262

Exynos 5 Octa @ drippler.com

Snapdragon 600 @ blog.gsmarena.com

GeekBench

Exynos 5 Octa

3,510

Snapdragon 600

3,163

GLBenchmark 2.5 Egypt Classic (Offscreen)

Exynos 5 Octa

43 fps

Snapdragon 600

87.6 fps

blog.gsmarena.com

summary	Exynos 5 Octa	Snapdragon 600
Clock speed	1.6 GHz	1.7 GHz
Cores	Octa core	Quad core
overclocking
Overclocked clock speed	1.9 GHz	2.02 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water)	1.9 GHz	0 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air)	1.9 GHz	2.02 GHz
power consumption
Typical power consumption	N/A	N/A

details	Exynos 5 Octa	Snapdragon 600
Threads	8	4
L2 cache	0.5 MB	2 MB
L2 cache per core	0.06 MB/core	0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process	28 nms	28 nms
Architecture	ARM	ARM
gpu
GPU	GPU	GPU

Samsung Exynos 5 Octa

Report a correction

Qualcomm Snapdragon 600

Report a correction

Compare

Popular Comparisons

Comments

Showing 5 comments.

Roberto Sanchez (08:42 PM, February 19, 2015)

power consumption is clearly one big point beetween the 2 of these processors, since it uses the low power A7 processor most of the time. and its 4 threads not 8, not sure if the l2 cache per core is accurate. i had the samsung galaxy s4 with S600 and now the Exynos variant and im very happy with its performance and battery use.

Alex Woinder (08:49 AM, February 22, 2014)

So did you fix it up? It's very intriguing to see it listed as a 8 core instead of a 4+4

Rushan (04:19 AM, August 18, 2013)

The results are totally opposite here http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s4_i9500_vs_i9505-review-930p2.php

Jude Fiorillo (01:19 PM, July 26, 2013)

Good point, we'll see if we can get this fixed up

WindLord Gray (01:59 AM, July 26, 2013)

It's not really an 8 core processor, it's a big Quad core Cortex A15 chip clocked at 1.6GHz and a smaller Quad core Cortex A7 chip clocked at 1.2 GHz. Note that only 1 set is active at any given time, depending on the processing load being processed.

	VS

800 vs 5 Octa

	VS

Z2560 vs 600

	VS

Z2520 vs 600

	VS

Z3560 vs 600

	VS

S4 Pro (APQ8064) vs 600

	VS

800 vs 600

	VS
$17
Z3735F vs 600

	VS
		$281
6410 vs 4200U

	VS
$225		$330
9590 vs 4770K

	VS
$364		$330
5820K vs 4790K

	VS
$230		$330
4690K vs 4790K

	VS
$161		$275
N3540 vs 4005U

	VS
$161		$49
N3530 vs 3110M

	VS
$230		$149
4690K vs 8350

Samsung Exynos 5 Octa vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 600