FPSVersusApple A16 Bionic vs Exynos 2600
Performance score
By our estimate, Exynos 2600 beats Apple A16 Bionic by 40%.
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 2600 | |
|---|---|---|
| Score (0–100) | 24.95 | 34.81 |
| Ranking position | 18 | 8 |
| Type | Smartphone | Smartphone |
| Manufacturer | Apple | Samsung |
| Architecture | Apple Silicon (Arm) | Armv9.3-A |
| Release date | Q3 2022 | Q1 2026 |
Specifications
| Apple A16 Bionic | Exynos 2600 | |
|---|---|---|
| Cores | 6 | 10 |
| Threads | 6 | 10 |
| Core layout | 2× Apple A16 3.46 GHz + 4× Apple E 2.02 GHz | 1× C1-Ultra 3.8 GHz + 3× C1-Pro 3.25 GHz + 6× C1-Pro 2.75 GHz |
| Boost clock | 3.46 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Process node | TSMC N4 | Samsung 2 нм GAA |
| Graphics | Apple GPU (5 cores) | Samsung Xclipse 960 |
Memory
| Apple A16 Bionic | Exynos 2600 | |
|---|---|---|
| Memory type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR5X |
Pros and cons
Apple A16 Bionic
- no notable advantages
Exynos 2600
- 40% higher overall score
- 21% faster single core
- more cores: 10 vs 6
- more threads: 10 vs 6
- newer: released in 2026
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 2600.
No comments yet — be the first.