Exynos 9611 vs Snapdragon 675: Debunking Performance Myths

Introduction

When it comes to choosing the best chipset for your smartphone, the decision can often be clouded by marketing gimmicks and misleading benchmarks. In this article, we compare the Exynos 9611 versus the Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 based on their performance, efficiency, and real-world usage. We will also explore the broader implications of ecosystem, budget considerations, and specific features that differentiate these chipsets.

Performance and Efficiency

Many wonder which chipset is better, and the answer often hinges on your priorities. The number of cores and clock speeds alone do not define performance; efficiency and real-world usability are equally important. Exynos 9611 may have fewer cores and cores with lower base clock speeds compared to the Snapdragon 675, but it excels in efficiency. This means it can deliver better battery life and smoother performance in various real-world scenarios.

Key Features of Exynos 9611

CPU Cores: 4 x 2.3GHz, 4 x 1.7GHz RAM Speed: 3200MHz (1200MHz higher than Snapdragon 675) Process Technology: 10nm (1nm smaller than Snapdragon 675) Memory Channels: 4 (2 more than Snapdragon 675) Performance: Slightly better in memory performance and features

Key Features of Snapdragon 675

CPU Cores: 2 x 2.0GHz, 6 x 1.7GHz RAM Speed: 2000MHz Process Technology: 11nm Memory Bandwidth: 14.9GB/s (2.98GB/s more than Exynos 9611) Maximum Memory: 8GB (2GB larger than Exynos 9611)

Comparison in Context

The comparison of Exynos 9611 and Snapdragon 675 often falls short when the budget for the smartphones using these chips is taken into account. While the Snapdragon 675 is commonly found in budget phones, the Exynos 9611 is mostly used in mid-range models, such as Samsung's M30 and A50 series. When we consider the budget, it's more relevant to compare Exynos 9611 with the Snapdragon 710, 712, or even 720, as the 730 is becoming more common in mid-range segments.

Real-World Usage and Efficiency

Efficiency is a crucial factor to consider. For instance, the Poco X3 is capable of maintaining 60FPS in PUBG, but they cap it rather than allowing maximum performance. This purported efficiency is actually a reflection of battery management, not genuine efficiency. The Snapdragon 845, despite its marketing, may not be as efficient as it is made out to be, often being influenced by market pressures.

Conclusion

In the end, it's clear that Exynos 9611 performs slightly better than the Snapdragon 675 in terms of memory performance and features. However, the choice between the two should be based not just on benchmark scores but also on real-world usability, battery life, and the ecosystem support available. Whether you are prioritizing efficiency, performance, or a combination of both, these chipsets offer different but valuable attributes.