Google Tensor G5 vs Samsung Exynos 2500
Across 12 measured categories, the Samsung Exynos 2500 comes out ahead.
I put the Google Tensor G5 and the Samsung Exynos 2500 side by side to see how they really compare. On graphics, the Google Tensor G5 runs the PowerVR DXT-48-1536 while the Samsung Exynos 2500 runs the Samsung Xclipse 950. Below I go through the CPU, GPU, memory and connectivity, then the benchmark scores, so you can work out which one is the better fit for you.
Where each chip wins
Google Tensor G5
3 advantages
-
3% faster Geekbench single-core score
2,298 vs 2,228
-
480 MHz higher CPU clock
3780 MHz vs 3300 MHz
-
533 MHz higher RAM speed
5333 MHz vs 4800 MHz
Samsung Exynos 2500
4 advantages
-
62% higher AnTuTu score
21.55 Lakhs vs 13.27 Lakhs
-
17% faster Geekbench multi-core score
7,361 vs 6,301
-
Larger L3 cache
16 MB vs 8 MB
-
Higher GPU FLOPS
4091.9 GFLOPS vs 1689.6 GFLOPS
Benchmark charts
AnTuTu v11 Total
Geekbench Single-Core
Geekbench Multi-Core
Specifications Comparison
Here is how the Google Tensor G5 and the Samsung Exynos 2500 compare across every spec. In each row, the stronger value is highlighted so the differences are easy to spot.
| Launch Date | August 2025 | June 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Chipset Class | Flagship | Flagship |
| Manufacturer | Samsung | |
| Model Number | GS501 | S5E9955 |
| Total Cores | 8 | 10 |
|---|---|---|
| Core Configuration | 1x Cortex X4 - 3.78GHz 5x Cortex A725 - 3.05GHz 2x Cortex A520 - 2.25GHz |
1x 3.3GHz - Cortex X925 2x 2.74GHz - Cortex A725 5x 2.36GHz - Cortex A725 2x 1.8GHz - Cortex A520 |
| Max Frequency | 3780 MHz | 3300 MHz |
| Instruction Set | ARMv9.2-A | ARMv9.2-A |
| Process Node | 3 nm | 3 nm |
| Manufacturing | TSMC | Samsung |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 11 MB |
| L3 Cache | 8 MB | 16 MB |
| TDP | 6 W | 6 Watts |
| GPU Name | PowerVR DXT-48-1536 | Samsung Xclipse 950 |
|---|---|---|
| GPU Frequency | 1100 MHz | 999 MHz |
| Shading Units | 128 | 64 |
| FLOPS | 1689.6 GFLOPS | 4091.9 GFLOPS |
| Ray Tracing Support | No | Yes |
| NPU | - | - |
| API Support | Vulkan 1.4, OpenCL 3.0, OpenGL ES 3.2 | OpenGL ES 3.2, OpenCL 3.0, Vulkan 1.3 |
| RAM Type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |
|---|---|---|
| RAM Frequency | 5333 MHz | 4800 MHz |
| Memory Bus | 4x 16-bit | 4x 16-bit |
| Max Bandwidth | 68.2 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |
| Max RAM Size | 16 GB | 24 GB |
| Storage Type | UFS 4.0 | UFS 4.0 |
| Camera Support | 200MP | 320MP |
|---|---|---|
| Video Capture | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS |
| Max Display Resolution | WQHD+ | 4K |
| Video Playback | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS | 8K at 30FPS |
| Video Codecs | H.264, H.265, HEVC, AV1, VP9 | H.264, H.265, HEVC, VP9, AV1 |
| Audio Codecs | AAC, AIFF, CAF, MP3, MP4, WAV | AAC LC, FLAC, HE-AACv1, HE-AACv2, MP3 |
| Modem | Samsung Exynos 5400 5G | Exynos 5400 5G |
|---|---|---|
| Network Support | 5G | 5G |
| Download Speed | 14.79 Gbps | 9.64 Gbps |
| Upload Speed | 3.5 Gbps | 2.55 Gbps |
| Wi-Fi | 7 | 7 |
| Bluetooth | 6.0 | 5.4 |
| Navigation | GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou, Galileo, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou, Galileo, QZSS |
| Official page | - | Visit |
|---|
Benchmark results
| Total | 13,26,623 | 21,54,825 |
|---|---|---|
| CPU | 4,63,275 | 5,14,532 |
| GPU | 4,11,537 | 9,46,368 |
| Memory | 2,33,612 | 3,83,044 |
| UX | 2,12,199 | 3,10,881 |
| Single-Core | 2,298 | 2,228 |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-Core | 6,301 | 7,361 |
Overall Score
Each category scored out of 100.
| Category | Google Tensor G5 | Samsung Exynos 2500 |
|---|---|---|
| CPU Score |
|
|
| GPU Score |
|
|
| Memory Score |
|
|
| Total Score |
|
|
Related comparisons
- 1 Apple A16 Bionic vs Google Tensor G5
- 2 Google Tensor G5 vs Snapdragon 8 Elite
- 3 Exynos 2600 vs Google Tensor G5
- 4 Google Tensor G5 vs Apple A19 Pro
- 5 Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 vs Google Tensor G5
- 6 Apple A16 Bionic vs Samsung Exynos 2500
- 7 Samsung Exynos 2500 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8500
- 8 Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs Samsung Exynos 2500
- 9 Samsung Exynos 2500 vs Apple A17 Pro
- 10 MediaTek Dimensity 9300 vs Samsung Exynos 2500
Discussion