Notebookcheck Logo

Apple S9 SiP vs Samsung Exynos W1000

Apple S9 SiP

► remove from comparison Apple S9

The Apple S9 SiP (System in a Package) is a 64-bit processor with two cores (Sawtooth Dual-Core) that is used in the Apple Watch Series 9. The two CPU cores are based on the same microarchitecture as in the Apple A15 SoC. The chip also includes a Neural Engine (with 4 cores) for AI tasks for the first time.

The S9 offers 64 GB internal memory, L1 GPS, GNSS, Galileo and BaeiDou, WLAN 4 (802.11n), Bluetooth 5.3), and LTE / UMTS (optional). The ultra-wideband chip Apple U1 is also integrated.

The chip is manufactured in the modern 4nm process at TSMC (N4P).

Samsung Exynos W1000

► remove from comparison Samsung Exynos W1000

The Samsung Exynos W1000 is a comparatively fast processor (SoC) for use in smart wearables that was unveiled in July 2024. It features 5 CPU cores (1 Cortex-A78 performance core and 4 Cortex-A55 efficient cores running at ~1.6 GHz and ~1.5 GHz respectively) along with a 4G LTE modem, satellite navigation module, and the Mali-G68 MP2 iGPU. Bluetooth 5.3, Wi-Fi 4 and NFC are all supported as well.

Performance

Octane and Speedometer put it in the same ballpark as the Snapdragon 680 4G. It must be said that the Exynos W930 and W920 both had just 2 CPU cores, meaning the jump in performance that the newer chip brings to the table is quite frankly staggering.

Graphics

We expect the Mali-G68 MP2 to be exactly as fast as the G57 MP2 (assuming the G68 MP2 is half as fast as the G68 MP4, which it should be). As a GPU unveiled in 2020, this humble Mali series member does not have hardware ray tracing or any other modern skills.

While the W930 and the W920 came equipped with the very same GPU, it probably runs at somewhat higher clock speeds in the W1000.

Power consumption

As an SoC for smartwatches, the Exynos is unlikely to ever consume more than 2 W or 3 W (even briefly) because that would obliterate the device's battery life.

The Exynos series SoC is built with a 3 nm process for good, as of late 2024, power efficiency.

ModelApple S9 SiPSamsung Exynos W1000
CodenameThunder
Clock1800 MHz1500 MHz
Cores / Threads2 / 25 / 5
1 x ARM Cortex-A78
4 x ARM Cortex-A55
Technology4 nm3 nm
ArchitectureARMARM
Announced
TDP Turbo PL23 Watt
iGPUARM Mali-G68 MP2
Manufacturersemiconductor.samsung.com

Benchmarks

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Kraken 1.1 Total Score *
100%
S9 +
min: 46038.4     avg: 46196     median: 46195.8 (54%)     max: 46353.1 ms
min: 2801.5     avg: 2870     median: 2870.3 (3%)     max: 2939.1 ms
Sunspider - Sunspider 1.0 Total Score *
100%
S9 +
min: 902.3     avg: 905     median: 905 (10%)     max: 907.7 ms
min: 481.8     avg: 486     median: 486 (5%)     max: 490.1 ms
Octane V2 - Octane V2 Total Score
0 Points (0%)
min: 12676     avg: 12783     median: 12783 (9%)     max: 12890 Points

Average Benchmarks Apple S9 SiP → 100% n=2

Average Benchmarks Samsung Exynos W1000 → 898% n=2

- 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

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:
v1.33
log 18. 13:31:44

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

#1 checking url part for id 16392 +0s ... 0s

#2 checking url part for id 18011 +0s ... 0s

#3 redirected to Ajax server, took 1755516704s time from redirect:0 +0s ... 0s

#4 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Sat, 16 Aug 2025 05:18:17 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#5 composed specs +0.005s ... 0.006s

#6 did output specs +0s ... 0.006s

#7 getting avg benchmarks for device 16392 +0.001s ... 0.006s

#8 got single benchmarks 16392 +0.004s ... 0.01s

#9 getting avg benchmarks for device 18011 +0.001s ... 0.011s

#10 got single benchmarks 18011 +0.003s ... 0.014s

#11 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.014s

#12 No cached benchmark found, getting uncached values +0.002s ... 0.017s

#13 min, max, avg, median took s +0s ... 0.017s

#14 return log +0s ... 0.017s

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