Every year, Samsung changes its flagship smartphone range, and there's always one point of contention: which is better, Snapdragon or Exynos? Exynos is the company's in-house chipset that drives some of its phones each year, while Europe is virtually always the one market assured to get an Exynos processor. The United States usually gets a Snapdragon processor, and the rest of the world is up in the air as to which chipset they'll get. For the first time this year, India received a Snapdragon chip in the Samsung Galaxy S22 series, while Europe received Exynos as usual.
As previously said, it looks that retail units of the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra have serious issues. There were display flickering issues that have now been resolved, as well as performance difficulties. Since releasing our report, I've received multiple tweets from customers claiming to have experienced identical performance issues with their Exynos-based S22 handsets. Some people have even reported that it has become worse with the most recent upgrade. Keep in mind that, at least according to noted leaker Max Jambor, Samsung is aware of the present performance issues with Exynos smartphones.
To be fair to Samsung, I've also heard from a number of customers who say they've had no difficulties with their devices. The goal of this essay is not to imply that every user will have this experience, but there are a sizable number of users who are dissatisfied with the performance of their gadgets. I was able to obtain a Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1-powered Galaxy S22 Ultra from Samsung PR in the United States, and I put it to the test against my Exynos-powered retail device acquired straight from Samsung Ireland. The outcomes are most likely in accordance with your expectations.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra: Snapdragon vs Exynos
For background, I was going to set up each of these devices as fresh to compare against one other, but I thought that any tests would not be representative of a real-world gadget. Benchmarks on an empty device with nothing installed might be utopian, but people buy phones for reasons other than benchmarks, right?
Instead, developer settings were used to disable any background processes on the devices, and "don't keep activities" was activated on both devices. Where feasible, these devices were also removed from the internet to prevent push notifications from interfering with the test. In essence, I made certain that no background programmes were running and that there was no network interference.
Both devices have also been upgraded to the most recent software versions, and their build numbers and dates are listed below.
Exynos Version: S908BXXU1AVBF / S908BOXm1AVBF (Build date: February 23rd)
Snapdragon Version: S908U1UEU1AVA6 / S908U1OYM1AVA6 (Build date: January 8th)
Benchmarks
First and foremost, I compared both devices to see if there were any changes. I did a Geekbench 5 test on both of my Galaxy S22 Ultras and invited TechnikNews' Nils Ahrensmeier to do the same on his Exynos device.
These findings already demonstrate a significant performance difference between the Exynos model of the Galaxy S22 Ultra and the Snapdragon variant, as well as between two runs on the same unit. Benchmarks, however, aren't everything, and it's completely conceivable for a phone to perform well while simultaneously failing to meet the precise key markers in a benchmark that would earn it a high score.
Throttling and sustained performance
When using a smartphone, one of the most crucial factors to consider is sustained performance. If the sustained performance is inadequate, you will have significantly diminished performance after what may be a short amount of time. I ran the test comparing both of these devices, and while both performed consistently, the Snapdragon chipset came out on top the entire time. However, this resulted in a far more logical consequence for the Exynos and is not symptomatic of an issue in and of itself.
Power consumption
While conducting the CPU Throttling Test, I was able to measure the peak power usage of both Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra smartphones in my possession. I was surprised to see that with the screen set to the lowest brightness on both smartphones, the Exynos variant and the Snapdragon variant drained 11.84W and 7.76W, respectively, at the top of the test. That is a significant variation in power usage, demonstrating how inefficient the Exynos chipset can be. This indicates that the Exynos 2200 device's battery life will be reduced while under load over time.
To be sure, other aspects of the phone, like as the screen, contribute to part of this. Nonetheless, there is a significant variation in energy use.
In my tests, I also discovered a significant idle consumption, implying that Exynos devices will have shorter standby durations than Snapdragon devices.
App launch test
We created a real-world app launch speed test that starts a few popular applications we use every day in succession for ten iterations. These applications are all "cold" launched on the device, which means they aren't cached in memory prior to being started. Timing is paused when the app's primary activity first starts drawing, so there is no waiting for material to load from the network. As a result, this test can evaluate how rapidly a device can load an app from storage into memory, with the caveat that this test is susceptible to app and OS version updates. However, because we are comparing two variations of the same phone, it is much simpler to draw straightforward conclusions.
The Snapdragon smartphone launches apps considerably faster than the Exynos device. The Exynos device is one of the worst-performing devices I've ever seen in this category. Apps take more than a full second to launch on average. That may not seem like much, but picture attempting to perform numerous tasks on your smartphone at the same time. It quickly becomes annoying when you encounter every tiny impediment in your path to your task.
The Exynos Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra falters in general usage
I've attached a video above to highlight just a few of the issues I've seen with the Exynos model that do not present on the Snapdragon variant. It's provided as proof to demonstrate the real-world repercussions of some of these issues, and I'm signed into all of the same applications on both devices. I'm not using either device any differently than usual, and all of the applications I'm logged into on the Exynos smartphone are the same apps I'm connected into on the OPPO Find N, the OnePlus 9 Pro, and the Google Pixel 6 Pro, to name a few.
All of these performance issues, from the delayed login to the UI stutters and delayed S Pen integrations, add up to a bad user experience. The phone is sluggish and aggressively interferes with my job, and a firmware upgrade did not help. It takes many seconds only to capture a screenshot and crop it, but on the Snapdragon smartphone it's a near-instantaneous operation. The Exynos 2200 experience is practically identical to that of a cheap handset, with everything taking a second longer than one would expect from a top-tier flagship.
As I previously stated, some people have contacted me to express their dissatisfaction with the Exynos 2200 model of this smartphone. Not a single consumer with a Snapdragon chipset has contacted me to express their dissatisfaction. I'm not sure if every Exynos user will have these issues, but a sizable proportion will. I even tried using high-performance mode in my battery options, but it made no difference. I'm also not seeing any indications of a memory management problem, since there is always free RAM accessible.
Other than that, I haven't observed any significant changes between these devices. Cameras are comparable, if not identical (though I believe Qualcomm has a little advantage based on my personal experience), and stabilisation looks to be about the same for anything not very intense. Walking about Barcelona and recording works exactly as well on both smartphones, and I haven't run into any issues.
Exynos is important to the Android ecosystem, but this experience is unacceptable
It hurts me to say it, but Exynos is significant when it comes to Android devices. In the Android flagship market, Qualcomm has a near-monopoly... MediaTek, on the other hand, is swiftly catching up. Having Samsung, the largest Android OEM in the sector, utilise its own chipsets in a considerable portion of its portfolio puts some pressure on Qualcomm, and in a perfect world, an equal amount of consumers would choose an Exynos chipset as a Qualcomm chipset.
It's difficult to pinpoint the source of these issues. It might be the Exynos 2200, as previous Exynos haven't exactly competed head-to-head with Snapdragon. Or it's possible that Samsung has inadvertently messed up the firmware on Exynos models. It doesn't appear like Samsung has made a public announcement on Exynos variants, as ComputerBase reports that while the business reached out, it declined to indicate if an upgrade will be forthcoming.
Previously, like with the Exynos Galaxy S21 Ultra, gaming performance remained low throughout the product lifespan since the Exynos 2100 just couldn't perform, and no number of software upgrades could bring it up to speed with its Snapdragon equivalent. As a result, the Galaxy S21 Ultra did not receive a blanket endorsement as an amazing performance since how effectively you could game on the device was heavily dependant on where you acquired it. And this is particularly disappointing given that the phone's initial price of 1,06,000/€1,249 was not reduced.
For the time being, the only thing I can recommend is that if you reside in Europe, you postpone getting the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra. As it is, the Exynos 2200 Galaxy S22 Ultra is absolutely unsuitable for regular use. It's quite sluggish, and the battery life is abysmal. It hasn't gotten any better, and I've had to charge my phone several times during the day.
I find it hard to recommend a product that costs this much and performs this poorly, and I would be doing a disservice as a reviewer if I did not highlight these issues that I face on my retail unit. As long as other OEMs offer top-tier flagships that consistently perform like top-tier flagships in your region, there’s very little reason to buy the Exynos Galaxy S22 series and play a lottery of whether you will get a device that performs like a top-tier flagship. Some Exynos users get a good device, some don’t — and that’s unacceptable.
Finally, in my opinion, the Snapdragon Galaxy S22 Ultra and the Exynos Galaxy S22 Ultra are two completely different devices. When you purchase the latest Samsung Galaxy S series smartphone, you are purchasing a completely different smartphone depending on where you reside. In almost any other smartphone series, buying a handset in one nation does not guarantee that it would perform significantly better than buying the identical device in another, but that is precisely the contradiction that Samsung has established.
