Kirin 9030S VS Exynos 2600
We are comparing the Kirin 9030S ( HiSilicon ) head-to-head with the Exynos 2600 ( Samsung ) . You’ll get the key pros and cons of each chipset, in-depth specs, and benchmarking scores.
Note: This comparison of Kirin 9030S vs. Exynos 2600 is based on Comparigon's analysis and is for informational purposes only.
Last Updated: August 12, 2026
KEY DIFFERENCES OF Kirin 9030S AND Exynos 2600
Here’s how Kirin 9030S and Exynos 2600 stack up against each other in their most impactful areas. Use these bullets to see at a glance which chipset excels where.
Reasons to consider the Kirin 9030S
-
2.0× more shading units (256 vs 128)
Reasons to consider the Exynos 2600
-
95% higher AnTuTu V11 score (3161830 vs 1617928)
-
144% higher Single-Core Geekbench score (3455 vs 1417)
-
202% higher Multi-Core Geekbench score (11621 vs 3851)
-
1.3× more CPU cores (10 vs 8)
-
27% higher CPU frequency (3800 MHz vs 3000 MHz)
SPECIFICATION TABLE COMPARISON OF Kirin 9030S AND Exynos 2600
Below is the detailed specification table comparing Kirin 9030S and Exynos 2600.
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 | Kirin 9030S | Exynos 2600 |
|---|---|---|
|
General Information
|
||
| Name: | Kirin 9030S | Exynos 2600 |
| Brand: | HiSilicon | Samsung |
| Class: | Mid-range | High-End |
| Release Date: | April 20, 2026 | December 19, 2025 |
| Foundry: | SMIC | Samsung Foundry |
| Instruction Set: | ARMv8-A | ARMv9.3-A |
|
CPU
|
||
| CPU Cores: | 8 | 10 |
| CPU Architecture: | 1x 3 GHz Taishan v124 Big, 3x 2.27 GHz Taishan v124 Mid, 4x 1.72 GHz Taishan v124 Little | 1x 3.8 GHz C1-Ultra, 3x 3.25 GHz C1-Pro, 6x 2.75 GHz C1-Pro |
| CPU Frequency: | 3000 MHz | 3800 MHz |
|
Graphics (GPU)
|
||
| GPU Model: | Maleoon 935F | Samsung Xclipse 960 |
| Graphics Architecture: | Maleoon | RDNA 4 |
| GPU Frequency: | 933 MHz | 980 MHz |
| GPU Pipelines: | 3 | 8 |
| Shading Units: | 256 | 128 |
| GPU FLOPS: | 1433.1 Gigaflops | 4014.1 Gigaflops |
|
Memory Subsystem
|
||
| Memory Type: | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |
| Max Memory Size: | 16 GB | 24 GB |
| Memory Frequency: | 4266 MHz | — |
| Memory Bandwidth: | 34.1 Gb/s | 64 Gb/s |
| Memory Bus Width: | 2x 16 Bit | 4x 16 Bit |
|
Benchmark Scores
|
||
|
GEEKBENCH
|
||
| Single-Core (V6) | 1417 | 3455 |
| Multi-Core (V6) | 3851 | 11621 |
| GPU (V6) | 4269 | 27627 |
| Asset Compression | — | 459.4 MB/sec |
| HTML 5 Browser | — | 328.1 pages/sec |
| PDF Renderer | — | 345 Mpixels/sec |
| Image Detection | — | 259.1 images/sec |
| HDR | — | 344.2 Mpixels/sec |
| Background Blur | — | 41.7 images/sec |
| Photo Processing | — | 97.1 images/sec |
| Ray Tracing | — | 12.2 Mpixels/sec |
|
ANTUTU SCORE
|
||
| Overall (AnTuTu V11) | 1617928 | 3161830 |
| CPU | 599837 | 1060612 |
| GPU | 301831 | 1200578 |
| MEM | 370488 | 409429 |
| UX | 345772 | 491211 |
| Overall (AnTuTu V10) | 1267000 | 3115908 |
| CPU | 469733 | 991772 |
| GPU | 236364 | 1258872 |
| MEM | 290129 | 554880 |
| UX | 270774 | 310384 |
|
Connectivity & I/O
|
||
| Cellular Download Speed: | Up to 7500 Mbps | Up to 15000 Mbps |
| Wi-Fi Version: | Wi-Fi 7 | Wi-Fi 7 |
| Bluetooth Version: | 6.0 | 6.0 |
|
AI & Acceleration
|
||
| Neural Processor: | Da Vinci NPU | AI engine with 32K MAC NPU |
Tip: ▲ indicates a higher-is-better spec advantage, while ▼ indicates a lower-is-better advantage.
PERFORMANCE CHART COMPARISON OF Kirin 9030S AND Exynos 2600
The charts below visualize how Kirin 9030S and Exynos 2600 stack up in key performance metrics.
Radar Chart Comparison
Bullet Chart Comparison
Release Timeline of Kirin 9030S and Exynos 2600
Exynos 2600 was released 4 months, 1 day earlier than Kirin 9030S.
Domain Score Summary
Note: Scores (0 to 100) 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 dominates overall compared to the Kirin 9030S. It comes out ahead across every comparable key area.
Try to Compare Again One of These SoCs With Another SoC
Pick which SoC to keep, then search for the other SoC to compare.