There is no substantiated benchmark winner between Samsung’s Exynos 2400 and Google’s Tensor G6 in the official sources reviewed. Samsung publishes detailed CPU, GPU and platform specifications for Exynos 2400; Google identifies Tensor G6 as the Pixel 11 processor and reports selected performance gains against its own stated baselines. Those figures do not form a head-to-head test. The useful comparison is what each company confirms—and what remains unknown.
At a glance: confirmed differences
| Area | Samsung Exynos 2400 | Google Tensor G6 |
|---|---|---|
| Device context | Samsung publishes it as a mobile processor; configurations and realized performance may vary by device. | Google identifies it as the processor in the Pixel 11. |
| CPU | Deca-core configuration with Cortex-X4, Cortex-A720 and Cortex-A520 cores, according to Samsung’s detailed specifications. | Google confirms the processor but does not provide a full CPU core or clock specification in the reviewed official pages. |
| GPU | Xclipse 940, based on AMD RDNA 3; Samsung documents hardware-accelerated ray tracing. | A directly comparable GPU architecture specification is not provided in the reviewed official Google pages. |
| AI | Samsung describes an AI engine and claims a 14.7-fold improvement over Exynos 2200; that is Samsung’s comparison to its own prior chip. | Google emphasizes on-device AI and says its TPU is 50% more powerful; the statement does not compare it with Exynos 2400. |
| Memory and process | Samsung specifies LPDDR5X, UFS 4.0 and a third-generation 4 nm low-power process. | Not stated in the reviewed official Google materials. |
| Head-to-head benchmark | No equivalent test on representative retail phones using a shared benchmark protocol was established in the reviewed sources. | |
These are published capabilities, not a prediction that every phone using a chip will perform identically. Samsung cautions that Exynos 2400 specifications and performance can vary with system configuration and use conditions.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
What the CPU specifications tell you
Samsung documents Exynos 2400’s deca-core mix: Cortex-X4, Cortex-A720 and Cortex-A520 cores. That identifies the CPU architecture and core count, but it does not by itself tell you how the chip compares with Tensor G6 in app launches, sustained workloads or everyday responsiveness.
Google’s reviewed official materials confirm Tensor G6 in Pixel 11 and make CPU responsiveness claims, but do not list a matching core layout or clock speeds. Without those details and common-device test results, a paper comparison of CPU configurations is incomplete.
#1 Best Overall
- COMPATIBILITY: Exynos 2400 CPU chip designed for integration into various smartphone models as a central processing unit
- PACKAGE TYPE: BGA (Ball Grid Array) chip IC format for secure and reliable surface mounting on circuit boards
- MODEL SPECIFICATION: S5E9945 IC chip variant of the Exynos 2400 processor series
- QUANTITY: Single unit (1 piece) of high-performance processor chip for electronic device integration
- APPLICATION: Suitable for use in smartphone motherboard repairs and electronic component replacements
GPU, gaming and ray tracing
Samsung specifies the Xclipse 940 GPU and associates it with AMD RDNA 3. Samsung also describes hardware-accelerated ray tracing as an Exynos 2400 capability in its mobile ray tracing overview. This establishes feature support, not a measured frame-rate advantage over Tensor G6.
The reviewed Google pages do not provide a directly comparable Tensor G6 GPU architecture specification or game benchmark. To decide which phone games better, look for tests on the actual retail devices: frame rates over sustained play, graphics settings, temperature and power draw matter alongside GPU features.
AI claims use different baselines
Google says Tensor G6 has a “50% more powerful TPU” for on-device capabilities such as Gemini Intelligence’s proactive assistance and Live Translate for media. Google also reports “up to 25% faster browsing” and “up to 20% better power efficiency” for the upgraded CPU. These are Google-reported claims on its Pixel performance page; they are not measurements against Exynos 2400.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsSamsung, meanwhile, states that Exynos 2400 delivers 14.7-fold improved AI performance over Exynos 2200. That is a Samsung-reported comparison with its previous-generation baseline, not Tensor G6. Because the two manufacturers use different claims and reference points, these numbers cannot be used to rank the chips against each other.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Platform features beyond benchmark scores
Exynos 2400
Samsung lists LPDDR5X memory and UFS 4.0 storage support, along with a third-generation 4 nm low-power process. Its detailed platform specifications also list support for displays up to 4K/WQUXGA at 120 Hz, camera and video capabilities, and modem rates. These describe supported platform capabilities; they do not guarantee that every phone using the chip implements every feature or reaches each rated maximum.
Tensor G6
Google’s official pages reviewed here identify Tensor G6 as the Pixel 11 processor and Titan M3 as a security coprocessor. They are not a comparable full SoC data sheet, so details such as process node, memory support and GPU architecture should be treated as unconfirmed here rather than filled in from unattributed specifications.
How to read a fair benchmark comparison
A meaningful direct comparison would test representative retail phones with both chips using the same benchmark version and protocol. Results should identify the phone model and software build, separate single-core, multi-core and GPU scores, and report sustained-load duration and thermal behavior where available. AI tests should specify the model and task; battery comparisons should control brightness, network and workload because phone-level efficiency is not determined by the processor alone.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →- For CPU: compare single-core and multi-core results separately, then check sustained performance.
- For graphics: use the same game or GPU test, settings and duration, with frame rate and temperature reported.
- For AI: compare equivalent on-device tasks and models, including latency and output quality—not just a vendor’s TPU percentage.
- For battery life: compare complete phones under matched conditions rather than inferring endurance from a chip-level efficiency claim.
Until such results are available, the defensible conclusion is limited: Exynos 2400 has more publicly specified CPU, GPU and platform details in the sources reviewed, while Google’s Tensor G6 messaging emphasizes on-device AI, CPU responsiveness and efficiency. Neither establishes a benchmark win over the other.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
