FPSVersusApple A16 Bionic vs Exynos 2400
Performance score
Apple A16 Bionic is 8% faster than Exynos 2400 by our estimate.
The score is our own estimate from the specs (cores, threads, clocks, architecture generation), not a benchmark run. 100 = the fastest CPU in our database. A phone without a fan drops its clocks under long load, so in long tasks (hours of gaming, video) it will be slower than the number shows.
Overview
| Apple A16 Bionic | Exynos 2400 | |
|---|---|---|
| Score (0–100) | 24.95 | 23.08 |
| Ranking position | 18 | 21 |
| Type | Smartphone | Smartphone |
| Manufacturer | Apple | Samsung |
| Architecture | Apple Silicon (Arm) | Armv9.2-A |
| Release date | Q3 2022 | Q1 2024 |
Specifications
| Apple A16 Bionic | Exynos 2400 | |
|---|---|---|
| Cores | 6 | 10 |
| Threads | 6 | 10 |
| Core layout | 2× Apple A16 3.46 GHz + 4× Apple E 2.02 GHz | 1× Cortex-X4 3.21 GHz + 2× Cortex-A720 2.9 GHz + 3× Cortex-A720 2.6 GHz + 4× Cortex-A520 1.95 GHz |
| Boost clock | 3.46 GHz | 3.21 GHz |
| Process node | TSMC N4 | Samsung 4 нм |
| Graphics | Apple GPU (5 cores) | Samsung Xclipse 940 |
Memory
| Apple A16 Bionic | Exynos 2400 | |
|---|---|---|
| Memory type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR5X |
Pros and cons
Apple A16 Bionic
- 8% higher overall score
- 18% faster single core
Exynos 2400
- more cores: 10 vs 6
- more threads: 10 vs 6
- newer: released in 2024
Other comparisons
Preliminary data: specs are still being checked against the manufacturer's website.
Visitor rating
Questions and comments
Share your experience, ask a question or tell us about a mistake on this page: Apple A16 Bionic / Exynos 2400.
No comments yet — be the first.