Tuesday, February 15th 2022
Samsung RDNA2-based Exynos 2200 GPU Performance Significantly Worse than Snapdragon 8 Gen1, Both Power Galaxy S22 Ultra
The Exynos 2200 SoC powering the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra in some regions such as the EU, posts some less-than-stellar graphics performance numbers, for all the hype around its AMD-sourced RDNA2 graphics solution, according to an investigative report by Erdi Özüağ, aka "FX57." Samsung brands this RDNA2-based GPU as the Samsung Xclipse 920. Further, Özüağ's testing found that the Exynos 2200 is considerably slower than the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 powering the S22 Ultra in certain other regions, including the US and India. He has access to both kinds of the S22 Ultra.
In the UL Benchmarks 3DMark Wildlife test, the Exynos 2200 posted a score of 6684 points, compared to 9548 points by the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 (a difference of 42 percent). What's even more interesting, is that the Exynos 2200 is barely 7 percent faster than the previous-gen Exynos 2100 (Arm Mali GPU) powering the S21 Ultra, which scored 6256 points. The story repeats with the GFXBench "Manhattan" off-screen render benchmark. Here, the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 is 30 percent faster than the Exynos 2200, which performs on-par with the Exynos 2100. Find a plethora of other results in the complete review comparing the two flavors of the S22 Ultra.
Özüağ predicts that Samsung could be working on a major software update that could improve or normalize performance between the two phone types. and that the Exynos 2200 is in need of significant software-level optimization. Özüağ also offers valuable insights into a possible cause the RDNA2-based Xclipse 920 is underwhelming. The iGPU could be starved for engine clocks, or we think possibly even memory bandwidth. Engine clocks play a decisive role in the performance of RDNA2-based discrete GPUs. AMD also spent significant engineering capital on lubricating the memory sub-system with the on-die Infinity Cache memory that operates at bandwidths typically 3-4 times that of the GDDR6 memory. The extremely tight power budget and Samsung 4 nm node could be impacting the iGPU's ability to sustain high engine clocks. We'll keep track on this story, as it marks AMD's second rodeo with smartphone graphics since the ATI Imageon days (over 14 years ago).
Source:
Erdi Özüağ (YouTube)
In the UL Benchmarks 3DMark Wildlife test, the Exynos 2200 posted a score of 6684 points, compared to 9548 points by the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 (a difference of 42 percent). What's even more interesting, is that the Exynos 2200 is barely 7 percent faster than the previous-gen Exynos 2100 (Arm Mali GPU) powering the S21 Ultra, which scored 6256 points. The story repeats with the GFXBench "Manhattan" off-screen render benchmark. Here, the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 is 30 percent faster than the Exynos 2200, which performs on-par with the Exynos 2100. Find a plethora of other results in the complete review comparing the two flavors of the S22 Ultra.
84 Comments on Samsung RDNA2-based Exynos 2200 GPU Performance Significantly Worse than Snapdragon 8 Gen1, Both Power Galaxy S22 Ultra
AMD sold that GPU division to Qualcomm.
Just as well, the only mobiles I'm touching from Samsung is tablets anyway. Probably not even that, now that they've moved the A series over to Unisoc :shadedshu:
But yeah AMD hasn't gone for super low power GPU's in a long time.
www.computerbase.de/2022-02/samsung-exynos-2200-rdna-2-gpu-benchmarks/
:)
Mobile is optimized for tile-based deferred rendering. While desktop GPUs do a different style of rendering/rasterization. Maybe these mobile-GPU benchmarks are largely a test that favors tile-based deferred rendering?
Basically, who says the SoC stack is clocked same to estimate IPC perf?
The adreno gpu architecture has been changed so many times I doubt it has too much in common with the last GPU the team under amd had.
For a first effort it is good, BUT Samsung works with AMD to get an upper hand on competition in this space, not to lament themselves that "something better will come".
This isn't a GPU made in a year, they have been working on this project for at least a couple of years, so this is quite bad given their initial ambitions.
The EU already has usually to pay some more for the same product on US but now it comes with an objectively worse hardware. Which I personally wouldn't mind if it was priced accordingly, but you know, things don't work like that.
But it's not all bad, the Snapdragon versions are usually locked down pretty tigth and see no custom rom development contrary to Exynos.
I think it would be in any case good upgrade as I am coming from S10 plus.
Gaming is not my thing on the phone so GPU performance is not the most important for me as long as I can still watch YouTube videos. :rolleyes:
I use the camera more often though.
For gaming I have this special AMD machine: :D
www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/the-rx-6000-series-owners-club.276164/post-4678352
I was also first thinking about iPhone 13 Pro max but I am long term Samsung user since first Galaxy S in 2010 and more used to Android.
I have nothing against Apple as now I own iPad Pro 11 3rd generation (5G with 256GB).
This guy is talking about the S22 Ultra version with Snapdragon 8 gen 1.
www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-Galaxy-S22-Ultra-lags-behind-S21-Ultra-and-is-demolished-by-Apple-iPhone-13-Pro-Max-in-battery-life-comparison.600038.0.html
Without mentioning the reduced RAM configuration sold at the same price points of the previous model (S21 Ultra topped at 16GB, S22 Ultra tops at 12GB), another great "upgrade" that Samsung shamelessly offers to its customers.
Honestly the only redeeming point of the S22 is the pledge of 4 OS updates and 5 years of security support, in other regards it's just a waste of money.
now the real question is, are you going to make memories with friends and loved ones and be able to save those memories in high quality? at end of day, thats all that phone is, a tool to enhance life and remember it more clearly - imo anyway
I have not carried my SLR camera in a long while expect on some special occasions.
I save the original photos and videos from the phone regularly to my own home Synology server.
If for example grandparents like to print a nice picture for the kids, I usually send it as zip file wih email otherwise it loses quality if you share it with WhatsApp.
2668MHz Cores, 2160MHz Memory, +20% power: 145-155W
2360 Cores, 2160 Memory: 95-105W
2040 Cores, 2000 Memory: 70-80W
1740 Cores, 2000 Memory: 55-60W
1350 Cores, 2000 Memory: 40-45W
FYI games actually seem to load the GPU less than Valley so the 2360/2160 @95-105W was actually using 85-90W in SotTR, HZD, Minecraft w/shaders. BTW, I was getting 10% lower FPS in SotTR for that 33% power reduction, showing that RDNA2 can be much more efficient at saner GPU speeds.
Not sure how much you'd need to cut 1350/2000 to get to something you could stick in a phone at a little more than 1/10 the power, though. Certainly way fewer cores and memory bandwidth but you can see the power savings still decreasing faster than linear, even from 2040 to 1350.