Samsung's Exynos 2600 may ditch AMD's RDNA GPU for an in-house solution

06 May 2024
Development started long ago.

Sort by:

  • ?
  • Anonymous
  • tA{
  • 14 May 2024

Atleast if they sell with exynos, there's no way it can be priced similar to the snapdragon variant. The price should be less

    • ?
    • Anonymous
    • tA{
    • 14 May 2024

    Was really looking up for trying Samsung S24 this year but Exynos failed miserably. The basic use case of a phone is to get good network reception and that is impacted badly. Exynos has crappy modem leading to battery drainage. Also samsung has double standards. For US/Canada/China they ship with Qualcomm whereas everywhere in the world with Exynos unless one goes for Ultra. Atleast they should give option to buy Snapdragon variants. I hope they come with Snapdragon for S25 series.

      • ?
      • Anonymous
      • 0U2
      • 14 May 2024

      Damn. Not even Samsung wants AMD GPUs...

        Ahad10923, 10 May 2024Actually, Apple SoC and Android SoC work differently regard... moreSamsung has the ability to do something similar to what Apple is able achieve with their own chips. If Samsung can improve their chips to be as good as or better than Snapdragon and Mediatek, they can then further optimise their software for their Exynos chips (such as drivers and their OS skin) to even be able to match what Apple is able to do.

          Leanzazzy, 10 May 2024Bro, I don't mean to come off as rude or condescending... moreMy point about Apple's products being well optimised isn't based on what Apple says, but on battery life and performance tests by reviewers. For several generations of products now Apple has been able to match or even surpass competing products in terms of these two metrics despite having on paper inferior hardware. For example, their phones often have significantly lower capacity batteries than most competing android phones, yet are able to beat it at least match their battery life. It's a similar thing with raw performance. They often beat the best Android phones. A lot of this is likely down to excellent optimisation of the OS and software for the specific hardware, which is simply much harder to accomplish when using a wide range of third party hardware. This is also extremely apparent in their Mac PCs. When they were still relying on off the shelf Intel x86 processors, they ran hot and were very power inefficient. They were effectively held back by Intel's engineering issues, as were most Windows PC manufacturers as well. However, once they switched to their custom ARM based Apple Silicon chips, they left the x86 competition behind in both performance and especially power efficiency. This is likely down to the combination of their own chips running their own operating system, with both tailored to each other, something that is simply not possible with off the shelf components.
          To be clear, this is coming from someone who doesn't use a single apple product and instead uses Android, Windows and Linux. I fully support and prefer open source software, and the reason I avoid apple products is that I simply don't like how restrictive their software is as well as how anti-consumer they are as a company. Even so, I can't deny the effects of their software and hardware optimisation.
          Regarding your point about about being fair to consumers, I would the say the current arrangement used by Samsung is less fair than what I suggested. If you're a customer of a non ultra S series Galaxy phone, you get an objectively inferior product if you're outside of the US, Canada or China, since these are the only markets where the Snapdragon chip is used even on the non ultra phones. Their own Exynos chip is used everywhere else, simply becuase it is more cost effective for them from a logistical standpoint. Would you say this is fair, that a customer should get an inferior product just because they live somewhere different? I wouldn't. My point was for them to instead switch their entire lineup globally to Exynos chips, such that there is no discrepancy depending on where one purchases their phone. This has the added benefit of allowing for greater optimisation on their phones, given they are able to pull it off as Apple has been able to of course. They would have to invest more to improve their chips first of course, sincs they're currently inferior from a hardware perspective, but if they could pull it off, it would likely be greatly beneficial to them.
          This doesn't result in a monopoly either, as other manufacturers (that don't produce their own chips) can continue to use off shelf chips for their products. This would likely result in greater competition as well, since we would effectively have a new major competitor in the processor space, Exynos, competing directly against Qualcomm Snapdragon and Mediatek Dimensity.

            • R
            • Russel
            • XZE
            • 11 May 2024

            Ahad10923, 10 May 2024Actually, Apple SoC and Android SoC work differently regard... moreYou're missing the point mate.
            Exynos can claim the 1st spot for benchmarks in this generation yet still be considered mediocre and unreliable.
            They have been like that for ages and to change the perception, they have to be much better than Snapdragon by a mile for a significant period of time.

            Blindly trusting some manufacturer or brand is never good.
            And monopoly is only good for the monopolies.

              Shamdung69, 09 May 2024What I mean is that each manufacturer can choose to use one... moreActually, Apple SoC and Android SoC work differently regarding the software itself. while Apple uses its own SOC, it can't compare Android SOC with many types of SOC (Qualcomm, Mediatek, Unisoc and Exynos) except iOS can use other SOCs, maybe Apple's SOC can compare other SOCs with Android OS. (According to me, the Exynos 2400 is ranked number 4 in the SoC ranking, which is good. It's not yet ranked No. 1 in the SoC ranking, like the Mediatek dimensty 9300) (Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 for Galaxy aka leading version, sold in China, the United States and Canada only. different from everyone ) (reportedly Samsung is making 3 nm using AI synchronization, it can increase performance by 10% and improve yield quality, with the help of AI technology)

                • ?
                • Anonymous
                • 6D6
                • 10 May 2024

                I hope they keep the Ray Tracing

                  Shamdung69, 09 May 2024What I mean is that each manufacturer can choose to use one... moreBro, I don't mean to come off as rude or condescending, but neither of your points are valid or make any sense, nor do they refute anything that I said. But I will still debate them to further help you understand:

                  1) This "optimising" business that you talk of is absolute hogwash. Go figure it is what Apple uses to justify their monopoly. How do you know it's "optimal"? By whose standard or benchmark is it "optimal"? By Apple, the ONLY people out there who have ever tested it or tried it? Are you supposed to rely on their word alone?

                  Let me give you an example. Any study or experiment is reliable ONLY if many people repeat it and verify it and can prove it does what it says. If only ONE person does it, and ironically enough, that same person is the one who is benefitting financially from it (is obviously biased and actually has the most interest in upselling it), there's no way in hell anyone would believe them.

                  In fact, that's not even allowed because that's a conflict of interest. Would you trust a spokesman from Apple to fairly represent a product (knowing that he's obviously biased) or would you trust thousands of reviews from customers?

                  There's only one right answer to this question, and you know it. Monopolies are always bad, for all the reasons I mentioned above. Having the same manufacturer may mean the products integrate better, doesn't mean they necessarily ARE better, in fact, monopolies stifle innovation and increase prices because, at the end of the day, businesses are businesses and they exist to make money. They will always put their own interests before those of the customer.

                  Another example: Nearly all of the new "features" Android comes out with were actually developed privately by people and made for custom ROMs, then Google copied them and made them official. The reason Android is the most popular mobile OS ever to exist is because it's open source and anyone can make stuff for it. Do you see this kind of innovation in closed-source software, like Apple's? No, you don't. The only reason people make stuff for Apple at all is because of the money.

                  Again, there's very clearly only one right answer here. Democratising something, ESPECIALLY something digital, is always better than a monopoly because it encourages innovation.

                  2) If something is wrong, it's wrong. It doesn't matter if the person knows it or not. If you cheat or swindle someone and they don't notice and you are successful, it doesn't make it right or acceptable. It is still wrong, and you are a bad person.

                  I don't know how you are trying to defend this unless there's something seriously wrong with your moral compass. By any and all metrics, Snapdragon is better than Exynos. Reviews, benchmarks, spec sheets, thermals, you name it, EVERYTHING points in the same direction. Whether the average customer is educated or not, you don't cheat them.

                    Leanzazzy, 08 May 20241) People like Snapdragon because it's way better than... moreWhat I mean is that each manufacturer can choose to use one brand of chipset in their devices, such as for Samsung, using their Exynos chips across their entire mobile line-up. This wouldn't be any more of a monopoly than what Samsung already has in the Android space, as they would r just stop using their party processors in their phones. This could even allow them to have highly optimised software tailored specifically to their chips, which isn't as easy to achieve when using off the shelf (or close to off the shelf, since they're technically using an overclocked variant of the snapdragon chips known under the name 'for Galaxy') currently. Other manufacturers could partner up with various chipset manufacturers, and use that brand of processor across their entire product line. Currently, Samsung uses Exynos in most regions other than the US, other than in their flagship ultra device. This is primarily due to the Exynos chips lacking the necessary support for bands that US carriers use since Qualcomm is holding the patents for them. However, if they can switch their entire product range to use Exynos chips, they can potentially optimise the hardware and software a lot better, similar to what Apple has ultimately managed to do by not using third party chips across their lineup.

                    Regardjng your point about most consumers not preferring Exynos chips, most manufacturers don't know the difference between them and Exynos, or what chip their phone even has for that matter. They just care that it works. Samsung buyers in the US get Snapdragon chips, while non flagship S series buyers in most other markets get Exynos chips, yet don't know the difference. Most people who complain about Exynos and say they prefer Snapdragon are tech enthusiasts. Most regular consumers don't know or care.

                      • ?
                      • Anonymous
                      • vaS
                      • 08 May 2024

                      Anonymous, 07 May 2024You think people care about hz crying about people who have... moreIf you educate costumers, they will. Apple users are stuck inside their own world and are unaware that lots of "innovations" present by past and current CEOs are old features from Android/nokia symbian.

                        Shamdung69, 06 May 2024No. They should switch their entire lineup to their in hous... more1) People like Snapdragon because it's way better than Exynos. If Exynos was any good, you wouldn't see people preferring the Snapdragon variant ALL the time.

                        2) Competition is ALWAYS good. It means more innovation, better/lower prices, more choice etc. Giving ONE company a monopoly/the entire market literally is the worst possible thing because they can do whatever they want and everyone has no choice but to buy it because they're the only one.

                        We can see how well a certain fruit company is literally milking their customers for mediocre hardware, restricted features, "innovative" features being added only years after everyone else already has them, being locked to the same ecosystem, paying hundreds of dollars for simply a little more storage (when in reality it would barely cost $10 to $20), punishing them if they use unofficial parts for repairs, not allowing them to sideload apps, so on and so forth.

                        There is literally no other more anti-consumer company out there, but still their customers lap it up because they have no choice. That is what a monopoly looks like.

                          • ?
                          • Anonymous
                          • X@8
                          • 08 May 2024

                          Anton .el PAPI., 06 May 2024That's not the fault of the manufacturers, that's... moreToo many chipset manufacturer for Android kinda makes the game developer difficult to optimize compared to Apple (still some chipset but their numbers are much fewer than Android).

                            MindTheGap, 07 May 2024Optimize their phone better? Their A55 is barely any better... moreIf they can improve their chips they have the potential to do something similar to Apple, with a highly optimised hardware and software combination. Even if they don't improve the chips and they stay as they currently are, they are still decent enough that most people won't notice the switch to Exynos. The majority of consumers don't know or care about what chip their phone uses, as long as it works. Plus if they switch their entire lineup to Exynos globally, they can even avoid the negative press of people comparing their Snapdragon variants to their Exynos variants, although this is likely challenging to do due to Qualcomm holding the patents to some bands used in the US.

                              Anonymous, 07 May 2024You think people care about hz crying about people who have... moreIn fact, if they already used a high refresh rate screen before, they do.

                                Anonymous, 07 May 2024You think people care about hz crying about people who have... moremost people don't care or don't know about refresh rate because they still use old budget phones and old iphones to this day.

                                  • ?
                                  • Anonymous
                                  • 4BT
                                  • 07 May 2024

                                  MindTheGap, 07 May 2024More like "Poor Apple fanboy" Because nowadays y... moreYou think people care about hz crying about people who have opinions

                                    Anonymous, 07 May 2024"most people don't care if their phone's pan... moreMore like "Poor Apple fanboy"
                                    Because nowadays you can even get an Android phone with 90Hz screen for under $90.

                                      Anton .el PAPI., 06 May 2024You must live underground hahahahaha! I'm going to fi... moreWhen you come back to 60Hz screen after using 120Hz screen for a long time, there's no way you wouldn't notice the difference. Except if you have problem with your eyes.
                                      It's not everyday I've heard someone on the Apple community said something like: "If only the base iPhone/iPad Air has a 120Hz screen instead of 60Hz screen, I would just get it instead of the iPhone/iPad Pro."

                                        Anonymous, 06 May 2024Most of people are not using their phone for gaming. On... more*under $90

                                          1 of 5