Murr19 February 2024 10:47
Samsung is on the right track to creating superior chipsets. Now, they should concentrate on thermal stability and efficiency; everything else is already satisfactory. Healthy competition always benefits consumers. However, Samsung needs to maintain fairness. If the standard 24 and 24+ are receiving Exynos, then they should provide Exynos worldwide without bias towards Japan, the US, Canada, and China. If this is the case, I would be more than happy to use an Exynos-powered smartphone.
+35Reply
Xavier13 March 2024 06:32
Agreed. I've been using an S21+ (Exynos) up until now and it hasn't let me down. In terms of benchmarking, thermal control, and efficiency, it may not be the best, but my experience with the S21+ has been satisfying. I hope Samsung will build a better chipset in the future, because it would not be beneficial to only have Snapdragon and MediaTek as the main competitors in the Android market.
+3Reply
Gat07 February 2024 17:13
It's all well and good that the overheating and performance issues have somewhat caught up to Snapdragon, but can Samsung deliver with proper software optimization?
+39Reply
Radik05 February 2024 10:31
To those who deffend the 2400 this year, raw performance means nothing, if its not sustainable. So let's just wait how 2400 does in those tests. Let's not fall for Samsungs promise of the best performance again.
+20Reply
Miller08 February 2024 15:33
240p has held stable Temps and stable fps. You haters are wrong. Samsung is learning
+32Reply
4fgaming20 February 2024 13:42
Miller, Clearly, everyone knows Gen 3 of the 8 series is superior. Obviously, Samsung is improving, but I don't think it's on par with the 8 Gen 3 yet.
+5Reply
Kenny28 January 2024 13:31
For those wondering why the Exynos 2400 performs better in gaming tests, despite theoretically having a much weaker GPU (see Antutu score), it's because the Xclipse 940 is based on the RDNA 3 architecture. This isn't entirely compatible with some of the APIs used in those benchmarks. Furthermore, the GPU itself does not support native OpenGL and relies on ANGLE for its translation.
+103Reply
Ronald26 February 2024 09:22
FINALLY!!!! Somone who understands compatibility translates to better performanceFML
+9Reply
Mehran26 March 2024 13:41
Ronald, And that's why Exynos in Galaxy phones = A bionics or A pros in iPhones
0Reply
LOL28 January 2024 13:12
Get rid of the Exynos; it's embarrassing. If Samsung wants to avoid paying Qualcomm's fee, they should incorporate a high-end MediaTek Dimensity into their phones and sell them at a slightly lower price. It would still be a better price-performance than anything Exynos has to offer.Exynos continues to exist through its equivalent, Tensor, in Pixel phones. There's no need to flog a dead horse. Samsung isn't proficient at manufacturing chips. Leave it to TSMC.
+34Reply
4fgaming20 February 2024 13:44
They won't include a MediaTek Dimensity because it has a higher TDP and tends to overheat, as seen in the case of the Vivo X100 Pro (Dimensity 9300). Samsung doesn't have advanced cooling technology, compared to companies such as Asus and OnePlus.
+8Reply
MWR0121 February 2024 01:35
It's an Exynos/Snapdragon dilemma in the market... Dependence on Chinese technology can be risky. This time, with better optimization in major updates, we could see a superior 10-core Exynos. I hoped Samsung would retire Exynos for 2 years, studying and developing more sophisticated technology before its relaunch in 2026. After the S4's horrific fail, they put a hold on the whole new Exynos project and developed it further into Exynos 7420, which was a powerhouse compared to the 2-core A series and 4-core Snapdragon. After one major OS update, it was considered the best. The S7 also saw great success with the 8890 chip, but a mistake was made when the S8 used the same unit, just modified. The S9 was let down by poor optimization, whereas the Note9 demonstrated the potential of the Exynos 9810. However, then came the downfall...
0Reply
Ronald26 February 2024 09:23
4fgaming, Exactly, the architecture just isn't as efficient
0Reply
Guest03 March 2024 04:46
4fgaming, They could feasibly use the Dimensity 8100 on the S24 FE, which may not be the fastest chipset, but it is one of the most efficient, never exceeding 5 watts in any performance-demanding scenes.
0Reply
I know11 March 2024 08:37
Honestly, this year, it's not at all embarrassing. The device uses Xclipse940 and that's why on paper, the GPU seems weaker (due to the incompatibility of RDNA3 with many benchmarks), but during testing, it occasionally outperformed the Sd 8g3! The GPU is strong, and I'm not sure why you should be overly troubled by a smartphone CPU that is indeed very capable.It may not be superior to the 8g3 but it's definitely not embarrassing at all. In fact, the term "embarrassing" might be more applicable to the Google Tensor. For non-gamers, it's reliable, but it fails in terms of battery life. However, this Exynos is certainly commendable, especially with its innovative feature of hosting 10 cores!
+1Reply
Exynos 240027 January 2024 02:07
I'm surprised by the amount of criticism the Exynos 2400 faced before the launch of the S24 series. However, results from recent gaming and battery tests suggest that the Exynos 2400 performs perfectly fine, much to the critics' dismay.
+55Reply
Nerd09 February 2024 04:54
Hey buddy, the same things were said back when MediaTek released an SoC. Give them time and patience; at least they are making it increasingly powerful - this time, it's just close to Snap 8 Gen 3. My take would be to promote what Samsung is doing. They are manufacturing the best hardware for mobile phones, and the SoC is more stable and power-efficient than before. It's even less vulnerable to thermal throttling, but the GPU still needs a lot of optimization.
+7Reply
Ooo17 February 2024 22:50
It performs *fine* but there’s still a difference and Snapdragon 8 gen 3 still does better
0Reply
I know11 March 2024 08:39
Ooo, Yes, I understand, but it's not so bad that it's a dealbreaker! It registers the same frames per second, roughly. 95% of SD8G3 performance falls somewhere between 8G2 and 8G3, which isn't bad at all!
+1Reply
Iam20 January 2024 06:08
The Exynos chip is nearer to Qualcomm's than ever before. While I agree that Samsung is aiming to cut costs, the single core score is almost identical. With further research, Exynos could become a formidable competitor to Snapdragon.
+94Reply
Zax22 January 2024 23:38
Posts similar to this were made when the Exynos 2200 launched on the S22 Ultra, and I must say, I almost regretted not getting another iPhone. However, after six months, the S23 Ultra was launched and I could definitely tell the difference, it was like night and day. Even now, my SD8G2 is on a performance profile (70% CPU) and it still performs outstandingly, whereas the other architecture could not even load the gallery.
+12Reply
Qwerty20 January 2024 01:28
The score is about of 1.78M score in Antutu
+14Reply
genius18 January 2024 09:10
Samsung is creating subpar SoCs again. Why can't they just use Snapdragon for all versions? We are paying the same price and getting weaker SoCs? 😂😂😂
+97Reply
ballsack18 January 2024 19:37
Samsung aims to cut costs...
+26Reply
ballsack's dad18 January 2024 23:25
ballsack, Except they didn't cut costs... In Australia the base and plus version got a $50 AUD price hike and the Ultra got $250 AUD. Many other countries did as well especially for the ultra. Even last year with the s23, countries got a price hike due to the use of SD 8 gen 2 so the use of Exynos this year despite it's performance seems unnecessary.
+10Reply
Myself19 January 2024 06:52
Bro, it's not a laughing matter. Soon, Samsung will produce superior SoCs for their phones at a lower price. Just let them carry out their research and development work.
+33Reply
Bob28 January 2024 07:46
Myself, But why should those outside of the us have to be the guinea pigs and still have to pay the same as the SD. Inferior product show have an accordingly lower equivalent price
+6Reply
Ooo17 February 2024 22:53
UK buyers actually pay far more for an inferior chip and half the storage vs e.g. HK
+2Reply
Devil boy18 January 2024 08:29
Samsung has really dropped the ball by incorporating the Exynos 2400 processor. They could have opted for a more reliable 8th gen option instead. The processor is absolutely garbage, and their pricing needs to be much lower simply due to the subpar quality of this processor. It's not worth anywhere between 90kRs to 100kRs. The s24 was reasonably priced, ranging from 75kRs to 89kRs.This is a poor decision on Samsung's part, and I will not be investing in this particular model. The Exynos processor is substandard, and there are superior options available. Why should I pay for such a flawed processor? It would be more economical to stick with the older S22 at this price point, which proved to be more reliable.In conclusion, it's highly unwise to spend money on this model due to the inferior Exynos processor. It's not trustworthy, and a safer bet would be to invest in the Ultra model or retain an older model.
+31Reply
Moses19 January 2024 07:06
This is exactly what they want - they want us to invest in Ultra models instead.
+11Reply
Have a life21 January 2024 05:01
Can you at least acknowledge that Samsung made a significant effort to do its best? Their scores are not even that far apart.
+6Reply
Sachu23 January 2024 15:37
I must disagree, the Exynos 2400 is not as bad as it seems. In fact, it is standing neck and neck with the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3. There are numerous videos proving this claim. Therefore, it seems like Samsung has done their homework this time.
+11Reply
Leo18 January 2024 05:42
They can't match on 4nm? Then they might fail badly on 3nm.
+17Reply
Patuljak14 January 2024 18:55
In the end, Samsung is once again selling two different phones under the same product name. This is considered fraud in most parts of the world.
+118Reply
JL197716 January 2024 14:52
Why commit fraud? It's no secret that a different chipset is used in the European models.
+53Reply
Bigelangston17 January 2024 19:49
That's not how fraud works. They have openly stated this, so it's par for the course.
+14Reply
JL197712 January 2024 11:06
If the power efficiency of the new Exynos is better than previous chips I don't mind having an Exynos is a new phone.I also don't think the benchmarks are all that "fair". I think the main performance advantage for the SDgen3 is coming from the faster (+600Mhz) RAM.In most modern CPU benchmarks we see big speed improvements if faster RAM is used with the same clock speeds. If Samsung couples the Exynos with the same 4800MHz RAM we will probably see equal or better performance for Exynos.For now, I think the slower RAM will keep power usage lower. As I look at the CPU design of the Exynos, it seems it is designed to provide a large amount of low-power CPU power. I think this design provided options to schedule more task to use the the low-power CPU cores, causing less frequent scheduling of medium, high of very high performance and power hungry CPU cores.This might be the game changer for the power efficiency people are looking for these days.
+91Reply
CPU fanboi24 January 2024 05:01
Bro, please recheck the benchmark comparison again. The GPU of the 8Gen3 is almost 50% better than that of the 2400. It's a significant score-lifter, not just due to faster memory.
+10Reply
Zhinazhu26 December 2023 04:23
The Exynos 2400 represents a significant advancement for Samsung and should ideally be deployed in the S24FE rather than the S24. Curiously, the S23FE utilizes 8 Gen 1 and is priced higher than the S23 which features 8 Gen 2. This discrepancy provokes questions about the efficacy of Samsung's marketing department.
+43Reply
bop28 December 2023 15:31
It's obvious to me that the Exynos is built in a purposeful way - they have contracts with Qualcomm and making the Exynos the same level as the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 is not smart at all. Exynos will be kept a step below on purpose for the near future.
+20Reply
Pisin17 January 2024 23:26
bop, The goal is to push the sales of the S24 Ultra to their maximum. Even if previous models aren't taken into consideration, they will continue to sell the basic S23 model, which operates on Snapdragon 8 Gen. 2. They will also highlight the Galaxy AI feature in the S24 Ultra, which some may dismiss as unnecessary.Later, they will provide an update for the S23 Series, which will include the same Galaxy AI. They will levy a "small fee" for use of this feature, but they won't incorporate it into models released after 2025."The Galaxy AI will be provided without additional charges on supported Galaxy devices at least until the end of 2025."In the meantime, the S25 Series might be introduced with the Exynos 2500 on all models.That's my prediction.
+18Reply
Radik05 February 2024 10:28
The 23FE used 2200, check your facts.Back in the day, I have pre ordered the S22 with 2200, thinking I am getting an amazing phone. The S22 at the time was by my opinion the best looking Galaxy phone to date. But dear lord, the 2200 was the absolutely utterly the most shocking junk I have ever had the pleasure to experience.Never ever will again pre order any Samsung phone, because they will lie, year after year, all over again. Promising the best Galaxy ever, forgetting to mention that it's a pocket toaster. The 2200 even before it starts overheating, which is pretty fast..it performs terribly.
+1Reply
Thatguysays23 December 2023 12:34
Objectively Damsunf has utilised lower clock speed across the board which I’m guessing off sets the 10-core configuration.Samsung has the performance figures fine for most people but as said by others efficiency needs a boost, if Samsung trades outright peak performance for significant efficiency the 2400 would be my choice.
+23Reply
Ngetich Ezra15 December 2023 13:15
The amazing thing about the Exynos 2400 is its 10-core CPU architecture. Even though it's not as good as the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 in the multi-core Geekbench scores, it's great to have Samsung as a viable competitor to TSMC.
+20Reply
power efficiency18 December 2023 09:50
I am currently using the Exynos SOC-based S20. The feature I dislike the most about this SOC is its power efficiency - it's the worst. I don't need an extra 10% speed difference, but having more efficient battery consumption is crucial to me.I've had to sacrifice using the 120Hz feature to ensure that the phone's battery consumption isn't disastrously bad. I won't purchase any other devices with this Exynos SOC until numerous reviews indicate improvements in battery efficiency. I don't need a better GPU or more CPU, as long as the battery issues are addressed.
+54Reply
Vijey22 December 2023 11:40
power efficiency, You failed to mention the poor modem combination for Exynos. Further issues such as terrible standby time and excessive heat generation are other reasons never to purchase an Exynos product again. I actually own an S20 and have been compelled to disable high resolution and 120Hz features to conserve battery life. Despite these measures, I still end up having to charge my phone twice a day. It's really disappointing. I'll have to consider lowering my expectations to an S23 if they release an S24 with Exynos in my region.
+32Reply
Pisin17 January 2024 23:38
Let's clarify. Having two extra cores is beneficial because processes can be distributed across a higher number of cores, reducing the overall temperature and power consumption. However, this can lessen immersion. On the other hand, the additional cores might actually increase power consumption, leading to higher heat loss and resulting in what's called "throttling", which lowers efficiency. Can someone explain why Qualcomm's eight cores are still superior to TSMC's ten cores?
+10Reply
Techgeek18 January 2024 22:27
Vijey, Is your phone four years old and you're complaining about the battery life, blaming it on the Exynos chip? That's priceless.
+10Reply
Pidli19 January 2024 11:24
Pisin, Not all processes can operate on multicore systems, and even if they can, they can't be indefinitely fragmented as desired. Having too many lower-clocked cores can be less efficient than having a few higher-clocked cores.
0Reply
Peter19 January 2024 22:36
Techgeek, It's a fact that both the S20 and S22 have terrible battery life where the SD variant doesn't, so age doesn't matter.
+5Reply
Josh bowen15 March 2024 22:33
Peter, yep, SD version of s20, still no complaints at all.
0Reply
Bigelangston18 November 2023 05:16
The effort put forth here is commendable compared to previous Exynos entries from Samsung. However, with the sheer amount of gains that the 8 Gen 3 has achieved, I predict that its launch will mirror those of the S21 and S22.
+15Reply
JoshM07 November 2023 08:44
The Exynos is closer than ever to its superior counterpart. I anticipate that Samsung has been fine-tuning its chip impressively over the past two years. Hopefully, efficiency has also seen a significant improvement.
+40Reply
Blaze29 October 2023 18:39
Samsung is certainly catching up in the CPU race! If the benchmark results are accurate, they definitely have the potential to compete against the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3, Dimensity 9300, and A17 Pro in both CPU and GPU.Hopefully, Samsung has addressed the main issue that the Exynos 2200 faced, which was power efficiency. This was a significant problem as it drained the battery in the Galaxy S22 series.Another intriguing aspect is that it has a total of 10 cores.
+20Reply
Daine Ramos Quitco18 January 2024 11:15
Hopefully, the Samsung Exynos 2400, which utilizes thinner dies, may result in enhanced thermal performance.
+2Reply
Nate26 October 2023 12:56
Samsung has improved its processor. I expect the Exynos 2500 to probably outperform the Snapdragon 8 Gen 4, unless Qualcomm employs their new cores.
+38Reply
4fgaming20 February 2024 13:48
I'm not certain about the Exynos 2500, but there are rumors suggesting that the 8th generation i4 surpasses the M3 chip in Geekbench scores. This is incredibly impressive, given that Geekbench often favors Apple. I don't believe that Samsung will be able to match the performance of the i4 either, especially considering its usage of a 3nm architecture.
0Reply
Тимур29 February 2024 05:43
4fgaming, Test results already show that the Dimensity 9400 scored higher than the 8th Gen 4, suggesting that Samsung could perform equally or even better than the Snapdragon.
0Reply
Person 125 October 2023 14:02
People are obsessing over 8K this, 8K that, yet they fail to understand the immense stability of Snapdragon. In comparison, Exynos and MediaTek 8K are extremely underwhelming. No one buys a smartphone-based solely on its capacity to capture 8k video. In terms of performance, the 8th Generation 3 far outperforms both Exynos and MediaTek. It maintains impressive stability even under harsh conditions, while still being more efficient than its counterparts. As demonstrated by the 8th Generation 2 itself, it's already ahead in efficiency and stability compared to the A17 Pro. Therefore, it's absolutely absurd to suggest MediaTek and Exynos could possibly rival Snapdragon. At present, Snapdragon is unarguably leading the pack globally in terms of performance and efficiency.
+23Reply
Cake08 November 2023 20:09
Please stop making naive comments about topics you may not fully understand. Consider checking out Geekerwan on YouTube to see how the SD 8th generation 3 compared against the D9300 and others during early testing. You've already started forming conclusions on chips that have barely been released.
+26Reply
Harsh*t Raj24 October 2023 13:12
Yes, you're right, Abd. From Snapdragon 870 to 8 Gen 3, chips from 5 generations still only support 8K video recording at 30 fps.
+3Reply
Him07 November 2023 22:13
8K video is mostly next to useless for the vast consumer base of any mobile phone device, Qualcomm knows this.
+9Reply
Bigelangston18 November 2023 05:19
Most people don't even have monitors to view 8K in its natural state. These phones have been stuck on 2K displays for eight years now. If you're concerned over 8K 60fps - bro, the market isn't there yet.
+15Reply
Abd24 October 2023 07:35
Snapdragons aren't the same as before; MediaTek is beginning to take its place. Still, the 8 Gen 3 lacks the ability to capture 8k at 60 fps. This is only a minor change from the 8 Gen 2.
+13Reply
...09 November 2023 02:33
I mean, it is already much better than some snapdragon 695 which can only record at some laughable 1080p. Like, you would consider recording with your laptop's webcam than recording with this. And manufacturers still ship phones with this chip in 2023. The flagships records videos at 16 times the number of pixels than the budget phones. Can they at least make the budget phone video recording experience usable?
+13Reply
4fgaming20 February 2024 13:51
Who really needs 8K recording? In my opinion, it's definitely an overkill. The Dimensity processor heats up considerably, which is a more crucial issue than 8K video recording capability. I don't think anyone is even excited about 8K video recording right now.
+1Reply
