It seems Samsung’s next Ultra might buck that trend. There have been rumors from a few Korean publications stating that the Galaxy S26 Ultra could come with Samsung’s homebrewed Exynos 2600 instead of Qualcomm’s next Snapdragon. If true, it would be a moment of reckoning for Samsung silicon, and indeed power users — one that asks a straightforward question of anyone who demands nothing short of power user performance: Do you trust Exynos in the company’s most premium device?
Why an Exynos Ultra could be important for Samsung
Samsung has, for as long as anyone can remember, segregated chips by region, and more recently has leapt onto Snapdragon to ensure regular top-end performance for the Ultra. That strategy assuaged gripes with previous generations of Exynos that ran hotter under sustained load and couldn’t keep up in gaming. But reuniting the Ultra with an Exynos would be a signal of extreme faith in the platform — and focus attention on real-world improvements, not “on paper” specifications.
What the Exynos 2600 needs to do to win trust
The pitch, on paper, is a good one. Samsung Foundry’s roadmap suggests a 2nm-class node should be doable around that time and would hopefully offer significant performance improvements. Anticipate a modern Arm CPU cluster and an overhauled Xclipse GPU co-developed with AMD, presumably inheriting RDNA features such as near-end ray tracing and improved scheduler behavior. An NPU has also been bolstered, according to the cards, as on-device AI takes its suggested place in the headlines.
Paper doesn’t win buyers. The Exynos 2400 made progress: independent testing from publications such as AnandTech, Notebookcheck, and GSMArena showed that CPU performance was more often than not within 10–15% of Snapdragon 8 Gen 3, while sustained GPU throughput was still 15–25% off during long gaming runs, and efficiency varied by workload. The 2600 will need to close those gaps, especially under prolonged heat, to win Ultra-level trust.
Performance is only half the story
Battery life, thermals, and network reliability make more of a day-to-day difference than raw benchmarks. Prior Exynos generations have sometimes throttled early in 3D gaming or heavy camera use. Modem efficiency can sock endurance in patchy coverage. If Samsung puts the Ultra on Exynos, buyers will expect it to run cooler, play games at stable frame rates over half-hour sessions, and do all sub-6 5G identically, particularly in terms of maintaining a strong reception on busy sub-6 bands and supporting carrier features.
Camera processing is another must-win. Samsung’s Ultra line depends heavily on computational photography. Image signal processing quality — skin tones, noise handling in 4K60 video, autofocus tracking — has to match the Snapdragon-powered Ultras’ video and still abilities; any regression here, and chipset pride vanishes fast.
The market reality check
Consumer sentiment is real. Counterpoint Research and IDC surveys show that Ultra buyers are disproportionately interested in performance consistency and gaming stability. They also compare phone battery life across AnTuTu benchmarks and GameBench, a la Apple Pro iPhones vs. other Snapdragon flagship Androids. If Exynos falls short here, the story writes itself, regardless of process node wins.
There are upside scenarios. A domestic processor could absorb supply, lessen reliance on external roadmaps, and potentially offer greater pricing flexibility. It also provides Samsung with greater dominion over the software stack that can help boost on-device AI features and improve one-shot HDR, object eraser, or live translation models. With Samsung now promising quinquennial updates on flagships, silicon-software integration planning makes a seven-year view that may become profitable.
Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 looms large over the S26 Ultra
Qualcomm’s next-generation flagship chip is expected to land on a refined 3nm TSMC node, which will be all about single-threaded CPU gains and sustained GPU efficiency. Qualcomm’s AI accelerators and well-evolved modem stack are tested strong points already, and thermal behavior in recent Snapdragon Ultras has been consistent. Any Exynos alternative has to clear that bar when running real-world workloads, not just brief bursts or happy lab tests.
So, would I buy it if Exynos meets key promises?
If Samsung can demonstrate that the Exynos 2600 gives:
- Consistent GPU performance only a hair (10% or less) below its Snapdragon rival over 20 to 30 minutes of gaming
- Battery life that surpasses or equals that of the current best Ultras in mixed 5G use
- Cooler chassis temperatures under camera and video workloads, and modem efficiency that doesn’t sucker-punch endurance
- Camera pipeline parity with robust autofocus and low-light video stability
An Exynos-powered S26 Ultra would then make sense. If those promises aren’t made very clear at launch, power users will wait for reviews — or consider Snapdragon alternatives from other brands.
Your take
The conviction that matters most is your judgment. Do you appreciate the potential integration and AI gains from a Samsung-made chip, or is Snapdragon’s reliability nonnegotiable in an Ultra phone that (we hope) will last for years to come? The response will define not only an individual model, but also Samsung’s silicon strategy for the long term.
