Skip to content
InnoReviews

Samsung Exynos 990 vs Unisoc T8200

Samsung Exynos 990
30.8Inno Score
VS
Unisoc T8200
—Inno Score
29.8CPU28
25.7GPU55
37.4Benchmarks—
32.1Efficiencyspec-based36
1 spec wins — Samsung Exynos 9902 spec wins — Unisoc T8200

InnoReviews verdict

No overall winner yet: Unisoc T8200 lacks the published benchmark results an Inno Score requires, so there is no Inno Score to compare — we don't rank chips on their spec sheet alone. The spec table below still shows every difference we track.

Which would you pick?

Key differences

Reasons to pick the Samsung Exynos 990

  • 19% higher Max clock: 2.73 GHz vs 2.3 GHz

Reasons to pick the Unisoc T8200

  • Stronger GPU score: 55 vs 26
  • 14% lower process: 6 nm vs 7 nm

General

General comparison: Samsung Exynos 990 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecSamsung Exynos 990Unisoc T8200
Announced20202025
Process7 nm6 nm+14%
TDP (typical)10 W—
ArchitectureArmv8.2Armv8.2

CPU

CPU comparison: Samsung Exynos 990 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecSamsung Exynos 990Unisoc T8200
Cores88
Core configuration2x2.73 GHz Exynos M5 + 2x2.5 GHz Cortex-A76 + 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A552x2.3 GHz Cortex-A76 + 6x2.1 GHz Cortex-A55
Max clock2.73 GHz+19%2.3 GHz

GPU

GPU comparison: Samsung Exynos 990 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecSamsung Exynos 990Unisoc T8200
GPUArm Mali-G77 MP11Arm Mali-G57 MC2
GPU clock—850 MHz

Memory

Memory comparison: Samsung Exynos 990 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecSamsung Exynos 990Unisoc T8200
Memory typeLPDDR5-2750LPDDR4X-2133
Max bandwidth44 GB/s—

Connectivity

Connectivity comparison: Samsung Exynos 990 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecSamsung Exynos 990Unisoc T8200
ModemExynos 5123 5G (external)Integrated 5G (SA/NSA)
Wi-FiWi-Fi 6Wi-Fi 6 (1x1, optional)
Bluetooth5.05.4

Media

Media comparison: Samsung Exynos 990 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecSamsung Exynos 990Unisoc T8200
Max displayWQHD+ @ 120HzFHD+ @ 120Hz
Video capture8K@30fps4K@30fps

Benchmarks

Benchmarks comparison: Samsung Exynos 990 versus Unisoc T8200
SpecSamsung Exynos 990Unisoc T8200
AnTuTu500,000—
Geekbench 6 (single)900Bottom 37%—
Geekbench 6 (multi)2,650Bottom 44%—
3DMark Wild Life Extreme900Bottom 24%—

Related comparisons

Try another matchup