We may earn a commission for purchases using our links. Learn more.

Like previous generations, Samsung is offering two variants of the Galaxy S20. Samsung sells Snapdragon 865-powered phones in North America, and in most global markets the Galaxy S20 series is powered by Samsung's in-house Exynos 990 chipset. This isn't new — Samsung has been dual sourcing chipsets going as far back as the Galaxy Note 3, which debuted back in 2013.

With two distinct variants of the Galaxy S20 up for sale, it's time to find out if the Exynos 990-powered version of the S20 is on par with the Snapdragon version.

Snapdragon 865 vs. Exynos 990 design: 7nm nodes, external modems

While Samsung hasn't detailed why it uses both Qualcomm and its own Exynos designs in its phones, we can make a few guesses. Qualcomm has an effective monopoly on the CDMA standard, and for Samsung to offer its phones on Verizon, it needs to use a Snapdragon chipset. So why doesn't Samsung just use the Snapdragon 865 everywhere? The manufacturer stands to make more money in global markets by pushing its in-house solution instead of paying Qualcomm, so it uses Exynos chipsets in GSM-only markets.

Both chipsets are built on a 7nm node, and they both use external 5G modems for connectivity.

There are several differences between the two designs, but let's focus on the commonalities. Both the Exynos 990 and Snapdragon 865 are built on a 7nm node — the Exynos is manufactured at Samsung Foundry on a 7nm LPP process, and Qualcomm's design is manufactured at TSMC on an N7P process.

Samsung's extreme ultraviolet lithography (EUV) solution is the way forward for mobile chipsets as it leads to smaller, faster, and more energy-efficient designs, and TSMC's deep ultraviolet lithography (DUV) is a refinement of a proven formula.

Both designs also lack cellular connectivity, with Samsung pairing its chipset with the Exynos 5G Modem 5123 and Qualcomm using its Snapdragon X55 5G modem alongside the 865. As Samsung has more control over its in-house design, it is selling the Exynos 990 in both 4G-only and 5G configurations, with the former available in countries like India where there won't be any 5G connectivity for a few years.

In doing so, it is able to save costs and pass on those savings to customers. As a result, the Galaxy S20 series in India is more affordable than its U.S. counterpart, with the base model retailing at the equivalent of $905 (₹66,900). Samsung has a £100 differential between the 4G and 5G models of the Galaxy S20 in the UK, so if you're wondering, that's what the 5G modem is worth in a phone right now.

Snapdragon 865 vs. Exynos 990 benchmarks: Qualcomm still in the lead

Although Samsung made considerable gains in the mobile SoC segment with its Exynos chipsets, its designs aren't quite on par with what the best that Qualcomm has to offer. That was clearly the case in previous years, and things are unchanged in 2020 with the Galaxy S20 series.

Qualcomm has been in the lead for three years now, but Samsung gained a lot of ground with the Exynos 990.

Before we get started, let's take a look at what's on offer with each chipset. The Exynos 990 has a combination of three cores: there are two high-performance Mongoose M5 cores at 2.73GHz, along with two Cortex A76 cores at 2.50GHz, and four energy-efficient A55 cores at 2.0GHz. The Snapdragon 865, meanwhile, has newer cores: there's a single A77 core running at 2.84GHz, three A77 cores at 2.50GHz, with the four A55 cores at 1.80GHz.

On the GPU side of things, the Exynos 990 has the Mali-G77 MP11, with the MP11 indicating that 11 shader cores are active. The Snapdragon 865 has the Adreno 650, a refresh of last year's Adreno 640. Qualcomm has been the runaway leader in this area for the last three years, so it will be interesting to see if the Mali-G77 with its new Valhall architecture is able to hold its own against the Adreno 650.

I'm on the 4G-only variant of the Exynos 990 Galaxy S20 (SM-G980F/DS), and my North American colleagues are using the Snapdragon 865 versions: Ara Wagoner has the regular Galaxy S20, and Andrew Martonik is using the Galaxy S20 Ultra. I'm also adding the Realme X50 — a $500 value flagship — to the list as a baseline for the Snapdragon 865.

We ran the tests at 120Hz and 60Hz just to see if there was a noticeable difference between the two modes. As the 120Hz mode is limited to FHD, that's the resolution we used for 60Hz as well. Interestingly, we found that the S20 performed worse in 60Hz mode, suggesting Samsung is throttling the chipset to conserve power.

Snapdragon 865 vs. Exynos 990 battery life: Better than last year

One of the biggest issues with Exynos designs in the past was battery life. Samsung's decision to chase higher frequencies meant that the Exynos versions of the Galaxy S9 and S10 had poor battery life figures when compared to their Snapdragon counterparts. The Exynos 9810-powered Galaxy S9 was so bad that Samsung had to issue a software update throttling the chipset to fix battery life issues. The Exynos 9820-powered S10 was similarly dogged by battery life woes last year.

With the Galaxy S20 series, Samsung seems to have made amends to an extent. I've used the Exynos 990-powered Galaxy S20 for just over two weeks, and I didn't have any issues with battery life. I regularly got screen-on-time of over five hours over the course of the day with 120Hz enabled throughout. That said, there are plenty of users over on Reddit that are seeing less-than-stellar battery figures from the Exynos-powered S20 series, so it looks like Samsung still has some work to do in this area.

Overall, the Snapdragon 865 version of the Galaxy S20 is once again the better option over the Exynos 990 variant, but not by a huge margin. Samsung fixed a lot of the underlying issues with Exynos-based designs in the past, and the Exynos 990 variant of the S20 is a great phone. It may not be quite on the same level as what Qualcomm is offering in terms of energy efficiency, but it is faring better than previous generations.

Keep in Touch

Sign up now to get the latest news, deals & more from Android Central!

No spam, we promise. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details without your permission.