Exynos 2600 VS Tensor G5
We are comparing the Exynos 2600 (Samsung) with the Tensor G5 (Google). Scroll down to the pros and cons of each chipset, in-depth specs, and benchmarking scores.
Last Updated: April 6, 2026
Overall Comparison
KEY DIFFERENCES OF Exynos 2600 AND Tensor G5
Here’s how Exynos 2600 and Tensor G5 stack up against each other in their most impactful areas.
Reasons to consider the Exynos 2600
-
134% higher AnTuTu V11 score (3161830 vs 1351330)
-
52% higher Single-Core Geekbench score (3455 vs 2276)
-
87% higher Multi-Core Geekbench score (11621 vs 6213)
-
1.3× more CPU cores (10 vs 8)
-
1% higher CPU frequency (3800 MHz vs 3780 MHz)
Reasons to consider the Tensor G5
-
7% higher memory bandwidth (68.2 GB/s vs 64 GB/s)
SPECIFICATION TABLE COMPARISON OF Exynos 2600 AND Tensor G5
Below is the detailed specification table comparing Exynos 2600 and Tensor G5.
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 | Exynos 2600 | Tensor G5 |
|---|---|---|
|
General Information
|
||
| Name: | Exynos 2600 | Tensor G5 |
| Brand: | Samsung | |
| Class: | High-End | High-End |
| Release Date: | December 19, 2025 | August 20, 2025 |
| Foundry: | Samsung Foundry | TSMC |
| Instruction Set: | ARMv9.3-A | ARMv9.2-A |
|
CPU
|
||
| CPU Cores: | 10 | 8 |
| CPU Architecture: | 1x 3.8 GHz C1-Ultra, 3x 3.25 GHz C1-Pro, 6x 2.75 GHz C1-Pro | 1x 3.78 GHz Cortex-X4, 5x 3.05 GHz Cortex-A725, 2x 2.25 GHz Cortex-A520 |
| CPU Frequency: | 3800 MHz | 3780 MHz |
|
Graphics (GPU)
|
||
| GPU Model: | Samsung Xclipse 960 | PowerVR GPU |
| Graphics Architecture: | RDNA 4 | — |
| GPU Frequency: | 980 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| GPU Pipelines: | 8 | 6 |
| Shading Units: | 128 | 128 |
| GPU FLOPS: | 4014.1 Gigaflops | 1536 Gigaflops |
|
Memory Subsystem
|
||
| Memory Type: | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |
| Max Memory Size: | 24 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory Frequency: | — | 4266 MHz |
| Memory Bandwidth: | 64 Gb/s | 68.2 Gb/s |
| Memory Bus Width: | 4x 16 Bit | 4x 16 Bit |
|
Benchmark Scores
|
||
|
GEEKBENCH
|
||
| Single-Core (V6) | 3455 | 2276 |
| Multi-Core (V6) | 11621 | 6213 |
| GPU (V6) | 27627 | 3696 |
| Asset Compression | 459.4 MB/sec | 284.2 MB/sec |
| HTML 5 Browser | 328.1 pages/sec | 188.4 pages/sec |
| PDF Renderer | 345 Mpixels/sec | 219.7 Mpixels/sec |
| Image Detection | 259.1 images/sec | 147.9 images/sec |
| HDR | 344.2 Mpixels/sec | 181.5 Mpixels/sec |
| Background Blur | 41.7 images/sec | 24.2 images/sec |
| Photo Processing | 97.1 images/sec | 61.1 images/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 12.2 Mpixels/sec | 7.51 Mpixels/sec |
|
ANTUTU SCORE
|
||
| Overall (AnTuTu V11) | 3161830 | 1351330 |
| CPU | 1060612 | 610905 |
| GPU | 1200578 | 180044 |
| MEM | 409429 | 219947 |
| UX | 491211 | 340434 |
| Overall (AnTuTu V10) | 3115908 | 1030472 |
| CPU | 991772 | 266714 |
| GPU | 1258872 | 359552 |
| MEM | 554880 | 236256 |
| UX | 310384 | 167950 |
|
Connectivity & I/O
|
||
| Cellular Download Speed: | Up to 15000 Mbps | Up to 10000 Mbps |
| Wi-Fi Version: | Wi-Fi 7 | Wi-Fi 7 |
| Bluetooth Version: | 6.0 | 6.0 |
|
AI & Acceleration
|
||
| Neural Processor: | AI engine with 32K MAC NPU | Tensor |
Tip: ▲ indicates a higher-is-better spec advantage, while ▼ indicates a lower-is-better advantage.
PERFORMANCE CHART COMPARISON OF Exynos 2600 AND Tensor G5
The charts below visualize how Exynos 2600 and Tensor G5 stack up in key performance metrics.
Radar Chart Comparison
Bullet Chart Comparison
Release Timeline of Exynos 2600 and Tensor G5
Tensor G5 was released 3 months, 29 days earlier than Exynos 2600.
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 Exynos 2600 is clearly better overall compared to the Tensor G5. Its strongest advantages are in Benchmark, CPU, Graphics and Connectivity. They are still fairly close in 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.