Notebookcheck Logo

Qualcomm Adreno 644 vs Samsung Xclipse 920 vs Qualcomm Adreno 642

Qualcomm Adreno 644

► remove from comparison Qualcomm Adreno 644

The Qualcomm Adreno 644 is a smartphone and tablet GPU that is integrated within the Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 1 SoC. The chip was announced mid 2022 and was available in early 2023 in upper mid-range Android smartphones.

According to Qualcomm, the Adreno 644 GPU offers a 20% improved performance over the Adreno 642, its predecessor, which is integrated in the Snapdragon 780G SoC. This is also thanks to the fast LPDDR5 with 3200 MHz. In our benchmarks with the Mi 13 Lite however, the performance was only on par with the old Adreno 642.

The Adreno 644 supports OpenCL 2.0 FP, OpenGL ES 3.2 and Vulkan 1.1.

The Snapdragon 7 Gen 1 is manufactured in the modern 4nm process with EUV at Samsung that should provide a good power efficiency.

Samsung Xclipse 920

► remove from comparison Samsung Xclipse 920

The Samsung Xclipse 920 GPU is an integrated graphics card in the Samsung Exynos 2200 SoC that is used in Android based smartphones and tablets. It was introduced in some models of the Galaxy S21 line. The iGPU is the first that uses an architecture by AMD (RDNA 2, like the Radeon 660M in the Ryzen 6000 chips). Current information from Geekbench ML points to 3 CUs (=192 shaders).

The performance is slightly below current high end iGPUs for phones like the Adreno 730 (Snapdrageon 8 Gen 1) or Apple A15 GPU, but still sufficient for all mobile games in 2022.

The Xclipse 920 is produced in the modern 4nm EUV process at Samsung (as its integrated in the Exynos 2200).

Qualcomm Adreno 642

► remove from comparison Qualcomm Adreno 642

The Qualcomm Adreno 642 is a smartphone and tablet GPU that is integrated within the Qualcomm Snapdragon 780G SoC. The chip will be available from mid 2021 and will be used mainly in upper mid-range Android devices.

According to Qualcomm, the Adreno 642 GPU offers a 50% improved performance over the Adreno 620, its predecessor, which is integrated in the Snapdragon 768G SoC. This is also thanks to the fast LPDDR4X-4200 memory support of the SoC.

The Adreno 642 supports OpenCL 2.0 FP, OpenGL ES 3.2 and Vulkan 1.1.

The Snapdragon 780G is manufactured in the modern 5nm LPPE process with EUV at Samsung that should provide a good power efficiency.

Qualcomm Adreno 644Samsung Xclipse 920Qualcomm Adreno 642
Adreno 600 Series
Adreno 660
Adreno 650 @ 0.25 - 0.67 GHz
Adreno 690
Adreno 685
Adreno 680
Adreno 644
Adreno 643 @ 0.81 GHz
Adreno 642
Adreno 642L
Adreno 640
Adreno 630
Adreno 620
Adreno 619
Adreno 619L
Adreno 618
Adreno 616
Adreno 613 @ 0.96 GHz
Adreno 612
Adreno 610
Xclipse 950 8
Xclipse 940
Xclipse 920 192 @ 0.56 GHz
Adreno 660
Adreno 650 @ 0.25 - 0.67 GHz
Adreno 690
Adreno 685
Adreno 680
Adreno 644
Adreno 643 @ 0.81 GHz
Adreno 642
Adreno 642L
Adreno 640
Adreno 630
Adreno 620
Adreno 619
Adreno 619L
Adreno 618
Adreno 616
Adreno 613 @ 0.96 GHz
Adreno 612
Adreno 610
Shared Memoryyesyesyes
APIOpenGL ES 3.2OpenGL ES 3.2
technology4 nm4 nm5 nm
FeaturesOpenGL ES 3.2, OpenCL 2.0, DirectX 12, Vulkan 1.1OpenGL ES 3.2, OpenCL 2.0, DirectX 12, Vulkan 1.1OpenGL ES 3.2, OpenCL 2.0, DirectX 12, Vulkan 1.1
Date of Announcement07.05.2021 18.01.2022 07.05.2021
PredecessorAdreno 642
CodenameRDNA 2
ArchitectureRDNA 2
Pipelines192 - unified
Core Speed555 (Boost) MHz
Link to Manufacturer Pagesemiconductor.samsung.com
CPU in Adreno 644GPU Base SpeedGPU Boost / Turbo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 18 x 1800 MHz? MHz? MHz
CPU in Xclipse 920GPU Base SpeedGPU Boost / Turbo
Samsung Exynos 22008 x 1820 MHz? MHz555 MHz
CPU in Adreno 642GPU Base SpeedGPU Boost / Turbo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 780G 5G8 x 1900 MHz? MHz? MHz

Benchmarks

3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot (ES 3.0) Unlimited
min: 6303     avg: 6921     median: 6953.5 (30%)     max: 7472 Points
min: 10206     avg: 10662     median: 10610 (46%)     max: 11221 Points
5587 Points (24%)
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot (ES 3.0) Unlimited Graphics
min: 8656     avg: 8893     median: 8751 (19%)     max: 9414 Points
min: 17842     avg: 19764     median: 18631.5 (41%)     max: 23949 Points
8380 Points (18%)
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
min: 5501     avg: 6187     median: 6286 (26%)     max: 6466 Points
min: 8268     avg: 8617     median: 8547.5 (36%)     max: 9105 Points
4478 Points (19%)
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
min: 6767     avg: 7042     median: 7023 (17%)     max: 7388 Points
min: 11774     avg: 12830     median: 12432.5 (31%)     max: 14680 Points
6148 Points (15%)
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot (ES 3.0)
min: 6114     avg: 6700     median: 6700 (60%)     max: 7285 Points
6989 Points (62%)
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot (ES 3.0) Graphics
min: 8410     avg: 8641     median: 8487 (51%)     max: 9025 Points
8588 Points (52%)
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
min: 5090     avg: 5524     median: 5565 (27%)     max: 5876 Points
5098 Points (25%)
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
min: 5779     avg: 6156     median: 6159.5 (21%)     max: 6524 Points
min:      avg: 0 (0%)     max: 0 Points
6087 Points (20%)
3DMark - 3DMark Wild Life Unlimited
min: 3035     avg: 3133     median: 3137 (2%)     max: 3184 Points
min: 6440     avg: 7269     median: 7373 (4%)     max: 7890 Points
3212 Points (2%)
3DMark - 3DMark Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
min: 825     avg: 832     median: 829 (1%)     max: 854 Points
min: 1702     avg: 1852     median: 1885.5 (2%)     max: 1935 Points
786 Points (1%)
GFXBench - GFXBench 5.0 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
min: 7     avg: 7.4     median: 7.5 (3%)     max: 7.9 fps
12 fps (4%)
GFXBench - GFXBench 5.0 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
min: 15     avg: 16.4     median: 17 (3%)     max: 18 fps
min: 28     avg: 29.5     median: 29.5 (5%)     max: 31 fps
18 fps (3%)
GFXBench - GFXBench 5.0 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
min: 41     avg: 45.3     median: 46 (3%)     max: 49 fps
min: 60     avg: 68     median: 67.5 (5%)     max: 77 fps
50 fps (4%)
GFXBench - GFXBench Car Chase Offscreen
min: 37     avg: 38.2     median: 38 (4%)     max: 40 fps
min: 63     avg: 67.5     median: 67.5 (6%)     max: 72 fps
40 fps (4%)
GFXBench 3.1 - GFXBench Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
min: 52     avg: 62.4     median: 65 (1%)     max: 67 fps
min: 101     avg: 120.3     median: 125 (3%)     max: 130 fps
65 fps (1%)
GFXBench 3.0 - GFXBench 3.0 Manhattan Offscreen
min: 86     avg: 89.2     median: 88 (4%)     max: 94 fps
min: 135     avg: 182.3     median: 190 (8%)     max: 214 fps
90 fps (4%)
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
GFXBench T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 + Qualcomm Adreno 644
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 - GFXBench T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
min: 147     avg: 150.2     median: 148 (1%)     max: 158 fps
GFXBench T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 + Samsung Xclipse 920
min: 218     avg: 285.5     median: 302 (2%)     max: 320 fps
GFXBench T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 + Qualcomm Adreno 642
153 fps (1%)
Antutu v9 - AnTuTu v9 GPU
min: 174679     avg: 177977     median: 175343 (18%)     max: 187645 Points
min: 306511     avg: 328113     median: 319781 (32%)     max: 366379 Points
162946 Points (16%)
Antutu v10 - AnTuTu v10 GPU
170281 Points (14%)
402385 Points (32%)
Basemark GPU 1.2 - Basemark GPU 1.2 Vulkan Official Medium Offscreen 1080
min: 50.74     avg: 51.7     median: 51.7 (1%)     max: 52.63 fps
136.6 fps (3%)
48 fps (1%)
Geekbench 6.4 - Geekbench 6.4 GPU OpenCL
min: 2448     avg: 2513     median: 2497 (1%)     max: 2610 Points
8042 Points (2%)
Geekbench 6.4 - Geekbench 6.4 GPU Vulkan
min: 2650     avg: 2776     median: 2729.5 (1%)     max: 2993 Points
8695 Points (2%)
PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1 - PerformanceTest Mobile V1 2D Graphics Tests
30029 Points (10%)
PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1 - PerformanceTest Mobile V1 3D Graphics Tests
42541 Points (70%)
Power Consumption - GFXBench Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen Power Consumption 150cd *
min: 4.19     avg: 4.8     median: 4.6 (2%)     max: 5.9 Watt
min: 8.3     avg: 9.8     median: 9.2 (4%)     max: 12.6 Watt

Average Benchmarks Qualcomm Adreno 644 → 100% n=18

Average Benchmarks Samsung Xclipse 920 → 150% n=18

Average Benchmarks Qualcomm Adreno 642 → 97% n=18

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
red legend - Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Game Benchmarks

The following benchmarks stem from our benchmarks of review laptops. The performance depends on the used graphics memory, clock rate, processor, system settings, drivers, and operating systems. So the results don't have to be representative for all laptops with this GPU. For detailed information on the benchmark results, click on the fps number.

Diablo Immortal

Diablo Immortal

2022
low Medium
100%
Adreno 644:
42  fps
ultra Ultra
100%
Adreno 644:
45  fps
League of Legends: Wild Rift

League of Legends: Wild Rift

2020
high
Xclipse 920:
60  fps
Call of Duty Mobile

Call of Duty Mobile

2020
low
Xclipse 920:
60  fps
Genshin Impact

Genshin Impact

2020
low
Xclipse 920:
59.5  fps
med.
Xclipse 920:
59.3  fps
ultra
Xclipse 920:
58.2  fps
Armajet

Armajet

2020
high
100%
Adreno 644:
45 89 ~ 67 fps
100%
Xclipse 920:
30 103 ~ 67 fps
45%
Adreno 642:
30  fps
PUBG Mobile

PUBG Mobile

2018
low
100%
Adreno 644:
60 60 ~ 60 fps
73%
Xclipse 920:
30 58.3 ~ 44 fps
100%
Adreno 642:
60  fps
med.
100%
Adreno 644:
40  fps
99%
Xclipse 920:
39.5  fps
148%
Adreno 642:
59  fps
high
100%
Adreno 644:
40 40 40 40 40 ~ 40 fps
80%
Xclipse 920:
30 30 30 39.8 ~ 32 fps
150%
Adreno 642:
60  fps
ultra
Adreno 642:
40  fps
Dead Trigger 2

Dead Trigger 2

2013
high
100%
Adreno 644:
60  fps
Asphalt 9: Legends

Asphalt 9: Legends

2013
low
Adreno 642:
60  fps
high
Adreno 642:
60  fps
Subway Surfers

Subway Surfers

2012
high
100%
Adreno 644:
60 61 ~ 61 fps

Average Gaming Qualcomm Adreno 644 → 100%

Average Gaming 30-70 fps → 100%

Average Gaming Samsung Xclipse 920 → 88%

Average Gaming 30-70 fps → 88%

Average Gaming Qualcomm Adreno 642 → 111%

Average Gaming 30-70 fps → 133%

Qualcomm Adreno 644Samsung Xclipse 920Qualcomm Adreno 642
lowmed.highultraQHD4Klowmed.highultraQHD4Klowmed.highultraQHD4K
Diablo Immortal4245
Armajet676730
PUBG Mobile6040404439.53260596040
Dead Trigger 260
Subway Surfers61
Qualcomm Adreno 644Samsung Xclipse 920Qualcomm Adreno 642
lowmed.highultraQHD4Klowmed.highultraQHD4Klowmed.highultraQHD4K
< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps

1
1

1


1
3

1







< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps

1


1


1
1









< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps


1

1


1
1

1







For more games that might be playable and a list of all games and graphics cards visit our Gaming List

v1.33
log 21. 23:11:24

#0 ran 0s before starting gpusingle class +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 11580 +0s ... 0s

#2 checking url part for id 11147 +0s ... 0s

#3 checking url part for id 10693 +0s ... 0s

#4 redirected to Ajax server, took 1753132284s time from redirect:0 +0s ... 0s

#5 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Mon, 21 Jul 2025 11:01:06 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#6 composed specs +0.032s ... 0.032s

#7 did output specs +0s ... 0.032s

#8 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.032s

#9 getting avg benchmarks for device 11580 +0.019s ... 0.051s

#10 got single benchmarks 11580 +0.008s ... 0.059s

#11 getting avg benchmarks for device 11147 +0s ... 0.059s

#12 got single benchmarks 11147 +0.005s ... 0.064s

#13 getting avg benchmarks for device 10693 +0s ... 0.064s

#14 got single benchmarks 10693 +0.003s ... 0.067s

#15 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.067s

#16 No cached benchmark found, getting uncached values +0.005s ... 0.073s

#17 No cached benchmark found, getting uncached values +0.001s ... 0.074s

#18 No cached benchmark found, getting uncached values +0.001s ... 0.075s

#19 No cached benchmark found, getting uncached values +0.001s ... 0.076s

#20 min, max, avg, median took s +0.015s ... 0.091s

#21 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 0.091s

#22 Got 36 rows for game benchmarks. +0.005s ... 0.096s

#23 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 0.096s

#24 got data and put it in $dataArray +0s ... 0.096s

#25 benchmarks composed for output. +0.003s ... 0.099s

#26 calculated avg scores. +0s ... 0.099s

#27 return log +0s ... 0.099s

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Benchmarks / Tech > Graphics Card Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2023-07- 1)