A18 VS Exynos 1680
We are comparing the A18 (Apple) with the Exynos 1680 (Samsung). Scroll down to the pros and cons of each chipset, in-depth specs, and benchmarking scores.
Last Updated: September 1, 2026
Overall Comparison
KEY DIFFERENCES OF A18 AND Exynos 1680
Here’s how A18 and Exynos 1680 stack up against each other in their most impactful areas.
Reasons to consider the A18
-
38% higher AnTuTu V11 score (1918031 vs 1390055)
-
147% higher Single-Core Geekbench score (3433 vs 1389)
-
95% higher Multi-Core Geekbench score (8692 vs 4453)
-
40% higher CPU frequency (4050 MHz vs 2900 MHz)
-
96% faster download speed (10000 Mbps vs 5100 Mbps)
Reasons to consider the Exynos 1680
-
1.3× more CPU cores (8 vs 6)
SPECIFICATION TABLE COMPARISON OF A18 AND Exynos 1680
Below is the detailed specification table comparing A18 and Exynos 1680.
Note: Highlighted specs mean that SoC wins that spec row.
If neither side is highlighted, it is a tie or there is not enough data for both specs.
| Specification | A18 | Exynos 1680 |
|---|---|---|
|
General Information
|
||
| Name: | A18 | Exynos 1680 |
| Brand: | Apple | Samsung |
| Class: | High-End | Mid-range |
| Release Date: | September 9, 2024 | March 25, 2026 |
| Foundry: | TSMC | Samsung |
| Instruction Set: | ARMv9.2-A | ARMv9.2-A |
|
CPU
|
||
| CPU Cores: | 6 | 8 |
| CPU Architecture: | 2x 4.04 GHz, 4x 2.42 GHz | 1x 2.9 GHz Cortex-A720, 4x 2.6 GHz Cortex-A720, 3x 1.95 GHz Cortex-A520 |
| CPU Frequency: | 4050 MHz | 2900 MHz |
|
Graphics (GPU)
|
||
| GPU Model: | Apple A18 GPU | Samsung Xclipse 550 |
| Graphics Architecture: | Apple Bionic | RDNA 3 |
| GPU Frequency: | 1490 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| GPU Pipelines: | 5 | 2 |
| Shading Units: | 128 | 128 |
| GPU FLOPS: | 1907 Gigaflops | 1228.8 Gigaflops |
|
Memory Subsystem
|
||
| Memory Type: | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |
| Max Memory Size: | 8 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory Frequency: | 3750 MHz | — |
| Memory Bandwidth: | 60 Gb/s | — |
| Memory Bus Width: | 4x 16 Bit | 2x 16 Bit |
|
Benchmark Scores
|
||
|
GEEKBENCH
|
||
| Single-Core (V6) | 3433 | 1389 |
| Multi-Core (V6) | 8692 | 4453 |
| GPU (V6) | — | 7924 |
| Asset Compression | 286.8 MB/sec | 212.5 MB/sec |
| HTML 5 Browser | 184.2 pages/sec | 125.8 pages/sec |
| PDF Renderer | 201.2 Mpixels/sec | 144.7 Mpixels/sec |
| Image Detection | 297.2 images/sec | 86.1 images/sec |
| HDR | 279.1 Mpixels/sec | 141.1 Mpixels/sec |
| Background Blur | 36.2 images/sec | 18 images/sec |
| Photo Processing | 90 images/sec | 39.6 images/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 8.68 Mpixels/sec | 5.87 Mpixels/sec |
|
ANTUTU SCORE
|
||
| Overall (AnTuTu V11) | 1918031 | 1390055 |
| CPU | 601640 | 510705 |
| GPU | 587216 | 374535 |
| MEM | 164895 | 204469 |
| UX | 564280 | 300346 |
| Overall (AnTuTu V10) | 1683923 | — |
| CPU | 452290 | — |
| GPU | 690909 | — |
| MEM | 179383 | — |
| UX | 361341 | — |
|
Connectivity & I/O
|
||
| Cellular Download Speed: | Up to 10000 Mbps | Up to 5100 Mbps |
| Wi-Fi Version: | Wi-Fi 7 | Wi-Fi 6E |
| Bluetooth Version: | 5.3 | 6.1 |
|
AI & Acceleration
|
||
| Neural Processor: | Neural Engine | NPU |
| NPU Theoretical Performance: | 35 TOPS | 19.6 TOPS |
Tip: ▲ indicates a higher-is-better spec advantage, while ▼ indicates a lower-is-better advantage.
PERFORMANCE CHART COMPARISON OF A18 AND Exynos 1680
The charts below visualize how A18 and Exynos 1680 stack up in key performance metrics.
Radar Chart Comparison
Bullet Chart Comparison
Release Timeline of A18 and Exynos 1680
A18 was released 1 year, 6 months, 16 days earlier than Exynos 1680.
Domain Score Summary
Scores are generated by Comparigon's scoring algorithm and are intended as a high-level guide. They may not map 1-to-1 with the individual spec-by-spec comparisons shown in the table.
Our Verdict
In conclusion, the A18 is slightly better overall compared to the Exynos 1680. Its strongest advantages are in Benchmark, CPU, Graphics and Connectivity. The Exynos 1680 is the better fit if your top priority is Memory.
Try to Compare Again One of These SoCs With Another SoC
Pick which SoC to keep, then search for the other SoC to compare.
Disclaimer: Specs, pricing, and benchmarks are sourced from official manufacturer data and verified test results. While we strive for precision, product details and pricing may change. Comparigon may earn an affiliate commission on qualifying purchases.