Tensor G4 VS Exynos 2600
We are comparing the Tensor G4 (Google) with the Exynos 2600 (Samsung). 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 Tensor G4 AND Exynos 2600
Here’s how Tensor G4 and Exynos 2600 stack up against each other in their most impactful areas.
Reasons to consider the Tensor G4
-
7% higher memory bandwidth (68.2 GB/s vs 64 GB/s)
Reasons to consider the Exynos 2600
-
113% higher AnTuTu V11 score (3161830 vs 1487240)
-
74% higher Single-Core Geekbench score (3455 vs 1984)
-
141% higher Multi-Core Geekbench score (11621 vs 4825)
-
1.3× more CPU cores (10 vs 8)
-
23% higher CPU frequency (3800 MHz vs 3100 MHz)
SPECIFICATION TABLE COMPARISON OF Tensor G4 AND Exynos 2600
Below is the detailed specification table comparing Tensor G4 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 | Tensor G4 | Exynos 2600 |
|---|---|---|
|
General Information
|
||
| Name: | Tensor G4 | Exynos 2600 |
| Brand: | Samsung | |
| Class: | High-End | High-End |
| Release Date: | August 13, 2024 | December 19, 2025 |
| Foundry: | Samsung Foundry | Samsung Foundry |
| Instruction Set: | ARMv9.2-A | ARMv9.3-A |
|
CPU
|
||
| CPU Cores: | 8 | 10 |
| CPU Architecture: | 1x 3.1 GHz Cortex-X4, 3x 2.6 GHz Cortex-A720, 4x 1.92 GHz Cortex-A520 | 1x 3.8 GHz C1-Ultra, 3x 3.25 GHz C1-Pro, 6x 2.75 GHz C1-Pro |
| CPU Frequency: | 3100 MHz | 3800 MHz |
|
Graphics (GPU)
|
||
| GPU Model: | Mali-G715 MP7 | Samsung Xclipse 960 |
| Graphics Architecture: | Valhall 4th gen | RDNA 4 |
| GPU Frequency: | 940 MHz | 980 MHz |
| GPU Pipelines: | 7 | 8 |
| Shading Units: | 128 | 128 |
| GPU FLOPS: | 1684.4 Gigaflops | 4014.1 Gigaflops |
|
Memory Subsystem
|
||
| Memory Type: | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |
| Max Memory Size: | 16 GB | 24 GB |
| Memory Frequency: | 4266 MHz | — |
| Memory Bandwidth: | 68.2 Gb/s | 64 Gb/s |
| Memory Bus Width: | 4x 16 Bit | 4x 16 Bit |
|
Benchmark Scores
|
||
|
GEEKBENCH
|
||
| Single-Core (V6) | 1984 | 3455 |
| Multi-Core (V6) | 4825 | 11621 |
| GPU (V6) | 6549 | 27627 |
| Asset Compression | 191.8 MB/sec | 459.4 MB/sec |
| HTML 5 Browser | 148.7 pages/sec | 328.1 pages/sec |
| PDF Renderer | 158.3 Mpixels/sec | 345 Mpixels/sec |
| Image Detection | 123.4 images/sec | 259.1 images/sec |
| HDR | 134.5 Mpixels/sec | 344.2 Mpixels/sec |
| Background Blur | 15.6 images/sec | 41.7 images/sec |
| Photo Processing | 46 images/sec | 97.1 images/sec |
| Ray Tracing | 4.8 Mpixels/sec | 12.2 Mpixels/sec |
|
ANTUTU SCORE
|
||
| Overall (AnTuTu V11) | 1487240 | 3161830 |
| CPU | 520180 | 1060612 |
| GPU | 416466 | 1200578 |
| MEM | 231906 | 409429 |
| UX | 318688 | 491211 |
| Overall (AnTuTu V10) | 1291119 | 3115908 |
| CPU | 387719 | 991772 |
| GPU | 456122 | 1258872 |
| MEM | 207898 | 554880 |
| UX | 239380 | 310384 |
|
Connectivity & I/O
|
||
| Cellular Download Speed: | Up to 10000 Mbps | Up to 15000 Mbps |
| Wi-Fi Version: | Wi-Fi 7 | Wi-Fi 7 |
| Bluetooth Version: | 5.3 | 6.0 |
|
AI & Acceleration
|
||
| Neural Processor: | Tensor | 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 Tensor G4 AND Exynos 2600
The charts below visualize how Tensor G4 and Exynos 2600 stack up in key performance metrics.
Radar Chart Comparison
Bullet Chart Comparison
Release Timeline of Tensor G4 and Exynos 2600
Tensor G4 was released 1 year, 4 months, 6 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 dominates overall compared to the Tensor G4. 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.
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.