The Samsung Exynos 1330 and Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 power multiple budget and midrange smartphones in the market. Both chipsets carry 5G capabilities, feature similar clock speeds and are comparably matched in synthetic benchmarks. So where do the differences lie? Find out below in our Exynos 1330 vs Snapdragon 695 comparison where we'll examine the key differences in their specifications, AnTuTu, Geekbench, GFXBench, and PCMark scores, as well as the advantages of choosing one over the other.
Table of Contents
AnTuTu benchmark evaluates the chipset's performance by testing the CPU, GPU, memory, and user experience (UX). The higher the score, the better the chipset is in particular aspects.
ANTUTU (v10) | Exynos 1330 | Snapdragon 695 |
AnTuTu score | 4,09,771 | 4,01,418 |
CPU | 1,31,896 | 1,20,025 |
GPU | 84,030 | 99,725 |
Memory | 78,109 | 72,741 |
UX | 1,15,736 | 1,08,927 |
*Scores are based on tests conducted by 91mobiles.
Geekbench determines a chipset's performance by running heavy tests in the background that test the single-core and multi-core prowess of the processor.
GEEKBENCH SCORES | Exynos 1330 | Snapdragon 695 |
Single-core | 772 | 829 |
Multi-core | 2,123 | 2,019 |
GFXBench is a cross-platform benchmarking app that measures and tests the ability to run 3D tasks and render detailed environments.
Tests | Exynos 1330 | Snapdragon 695 |
Manhattan (ran for 30 min) | 1,329 | 2,421 |
T-Rex | 2,961 | 3,330 |
*Phones used for the test are Samsung Galaxy A14 5G (Exynos 1330) and POCO X5 (Snapdragon 695)
PCMark attempts to replicate real-world modern office tasks. The benchmark tests the device's battery's endurance by running hours-long tests.
Tests | Exynos 1330 | Snapdragon 695 |
PCMark battery performance | 13 hours 8 minutes | 16 hours 6 minutes |
*Phones used for the test are Samsung Galaxy A14 5G (Exynos 1330) and POCO X5 (Snapdragon 695) equipped with a 5,000mAh battery.
BASIS | Exynos 1330 | Snapdragon 695 |
Manufacturer | Samsung | TSMC |
CPU cores | Octa-core (8) | Octa-core (8) |
CPU structure | Cortex-A78x2 2.4GHz Cortex-A55x6 2.0GHz | 2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 660 Silver |
CPU architecture | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Process node | 5nm | 6nm |
GPU | Mali-G68 MP2 | Adreno 619 |
GPU APIs | OpenCL 2.0 and Vulkan 1.1 | OpenGL ES 3.2, OpenCL 2.0, and Vulkan 1.1 |
Memory type | LPDDR4x, LPDDR5 | LPDDR4x |
Storage type | UFS 2.2, UFS 3.1 | eMMC 5.1, UFS 2.2 |
Display resolution | FHD+ at 120Hz | FHD+ at 120Hz or HD+ at 120Hz |
Display pixels | 2960x1440 | 1600x900 and 2520x1080 |
Video capture | Up to 4K at 30FPS | Up to 1080p at 60FPS |
Video playback | Up to 4K at 30FPS | Up to 1080p at 60FPS |
Image Signal Processor (ISP) | Information unavailable | Qualcomm Spectra 346T |
Single camera | Up to 108MP or 16MP + 16MP | Up to 108MP |
Slow-motion video capture | Information unavailable | Up to 720p at 120FPS |
WiFi | Wi-Fi 5 | Wi-Fi 4 and Wi-Fi 5 |
Bluetooth | Bluetooth 5.2 | Bluetooth 5.2 |
Modem | Information unavailable | Snapdragon X51 |
Cellular technology | 2G, 3G, 4G, and 5G | 2G, 3G, 4G, and 5G sub-6 GHz and mmWave |
Satellite systems | GLONASS, Beidou, GPS, and Galileo | GLONASS, NavIC, Beidou, GPS, QZSS, and Galileo |
NFC | Supported | Supported |
The Exynos 1330 should be reliable for running 2D and less graphic-intensive games. Pushing the processor to its limits could result in jitters and frame drops. The Snapdragon 695 on the other hand should be a tad better at running 3D tasks such as playing heavy games due to a better GPU. Since both are budget-oriented chipsets, don't expect them to deliver an absolutely smooth gaming experience, especially for long durations.
The Exynos 1330 has an edge over the Snapdragon 695 in terms of efficient fabrication, video capture and playback capabilities, advanced RAM type, and a tad higher clock speeds which look better on paper. However, real-world performance would differ depending on how manufacturers tune both the chipsets. Exynos 1330 is found exclusively on Samsung phones while Snapdragon 695 powers several phones from different brands.