Test: Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus Smartphone (Sammanfattning)

Name: Test: Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus Smartphone (Sammanfattning)
Item: Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Rating: 91
Author: Daniel Schmidt

Daniel Schmidt (översatt av Daniel Eriksson), 03/30/2018

Android ARM Galaxy S Smartphone Phablet Touchscreen

Finjustering. Den stora modellen från Samsungs flaggskepps-serie har inte bara en större skärm, den erbjuder också en dualkamera och mer RAM. Den här recensionen avslöjar om det höga priset är berättigat och hur Galaxy S9+ står sig i jämförelse med sina konkurrenter.

Test device courtesy of Samsung Deutschland

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Size Comparison

Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus HTC U11 Plus Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus Google Pixel 2 XL OnePlus 5T Huawei Mate 10 Pro Motorola Moto Z2 Force LG V30 Apple iPhone X

Topp 10...
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara allround/multimediadatorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara speldatorerna
» Topp 10: Bärbara budget/kontorsdatorer
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara kontors/premiumdatorerna
» Topp 10: Bärbara arbetsstationer
» Topp 10: De bästa små/kompakta bärbara datorerna
» T opp 10: Bästa ultrabooks
» Topp 10: Bästa hybriddatorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa surfplattorna
» Topp 10: Marknadens bästa smartphones

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone X A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash	939 MBit/s ∼100% +44%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	652 MBit/s ∼69%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	573 MBit/s ∼61% -12%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	368 MBit/s ∼39% -44%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	338 MBit/s ∼36% -48%
Google Pixel 2 XL Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	239 MBit/s ∼25% -63%
Average of class Smartphone (5.9 - 939, n=259)	186 MBit/s ∼20% -71%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	656 MBit/s ∼100% +26%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	587 MBit/s ∼89% +13%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	519 MBit/s ∼79%
Apple iPhone X A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash	456 MBit/s ∼70% -12%
Google Pixel 2 XL Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	279 MBit/s ∼43% -46%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	225 MBit/s ∼34% -57%
Average of class Smartphone (9.4 - 703, n=259)	182 MBit/s ∼28% -65%

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images


586 cd/m²	564 cd/m²	565 cd/m²
584 cd/m²	565 cd/m²	564 cd/m²
582 cd/m²	564 cd/m²	562 cd/m²

Distribution av ljusstyrkan

X-Rite i1Pro 2

Max: 586 cd/m² Medel: 570.7 cd/m² Minimum: 1.56 cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 96 %
Mitt på batteriet: 565 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Svärta: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.3 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3
ΔE Greyscale 1.9 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
Gamma: 2.16

	Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.2	Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.2	Apple iPhone X Super AMOLED, 2436x1125, 5.8	Huawei Mate 10 Pro OLED, 2160x1080, 6	Google Pixel 2 XL P-OLED, 2880x1440, 6	HTC U11 Plus Super LCD 6, 2880x1440, 6	OnePlus 5T AMOLED, 2160x1080, 6.01
Screen		11%	19%	8%	-24%	-15%	-8%
Brightness middle	565	560 -1%	600 6%	629 11%	415 -27%	361 -36%	425 -25%
Brightness	571	562 -2%	606 6%	636 11%	420 -26%	356 -38%	423 -26%
Brightness Distribution	96	93 -3%	94 -2%	94 -2%	87 -9%	90 -6%	92 -4%
Black Level *						0.21
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *	2.3	1.7 26%	1.2 48%	1.7 26%	2.7 -17%	2.5 -9%	2.1 9%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *	4.8	3.4 29%	3 37%	3.6 25%	4.3 10%	5.3 -10%	3.4 29%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *	1.9	1.6 16%	1.6 16%	2.4 -26%	3.3 -74%	1.7 11%	2.5 -32%
Gamma	2.16 ^111%	2.13 ^113%	2.23 ^108%	2.15 ^112%	2.36 ^102%	2.21 ^109%	2.32 ^103%
CCT	6332 ^103%	6435 ^101%	6707 ^97%	6337 ^103%	6787 ^96%	6580 ^99%	6455 ^101%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)		81.57
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)		99.87
Contrast						1719

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM detected

215.5 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 215.5 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 215.5 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8813 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Grayscales (profile: adaptive [optimized], color space: DCI-P3)

Mixed colors (profile: adaptive [optimized], color space: DCI-P3)

Display Response Times

ℹ

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.

↔ Response Time Black to White
6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 3 ms rise
6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 3 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.8 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 3 ms rise
8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41.3 ms).

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	222290 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	165382 Points ∼74% -26%
Apple iPhone X	197851 Points ∼89% -11%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	177341 Points ∼80% -20%
Google Pixel 2 XL	166151 Points ∼75% -25%
LG V30	173749 Points ∼78% -22%
HTC U11 Plus	183057 Points ∼82% -18%
OnePlus 5T	172124 Points ∼77% -23%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	179595 Points ∼81% -19%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (214090 - 222290, n=3)	218110 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 230642, n=350)	70775 Points ∼32% -68%

AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	250577 Points ∼98%
Apple iPhone X	256297 Points ∼100% +2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	212278 Points ∼83% -15%
Google Pixel 2 XL	204654 Points ∼80% -18%
HTC U11 Plus	217442 Points ∼85% -13%
OnePlus 5T	214815 Points ∼84% -14%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (236552 - 250577, n=3)	243663 Points ∼95% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (17073 - 290397, n=127)	100740 Points ∼39% -60%

PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	5319 Points ∼76%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	5195 Points ∼74% -2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	6932 Points ∼99% +30%
Google Pixel 2 XL	6994 Points ∼100% +31%
LG V30	5603 Points ∼80% +5%
HTC U11 Plus	6695 Points ∼96% +26%
OnePlus 5T	6595 Points ∼94% +24%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	6998 Points ∼100% +32%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (5184 - 5319, n=3)	5265 Points ∼75% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (2814 - 8601, n=214)	4398 Points ∼63% -17%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	5822 Points ∼68%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	5830 Points ∼68% 0%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	8439 Points ∼99% +45%
Google Pixel 2 XL	8258 Points ∼97% +42%
LG V30	6854 Points ∼80% +18%
HTC U11 Plus	7964 Points ∼93% +37%
OnePlus 5T	7739 Points ∼90% +33%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	8553 Points ∼100% +47%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (5736 - 5960, n=3)	5839 Points ∼68% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (5960 - 10264, n=378)	4665 Points ∼55% -20%

BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	1109 Points ∼66%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	1163 Points ∼69% +5%
Apple iPhone X	1682 Points ∼100% +52%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	1234 Points ∼73% +11%
Google Pixel 2 XL	1186 Points ∼71% +7%
LG V30	1009 Points ∼60% -9%
HTC U11 Plus	1159 Points ∼69% +5%
OnePlus 5T	1329 Points ∼79% +20%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	1300 Points ∼77% +17%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (1099 - 1132, n=3)	1113 Points ∼66% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1682, n=453)	666 Points ∼40% -40%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	6370 Points ∼69%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	6126 Points ∼66% -4%
Apple iPhone X	9248 Points ∼100% +45%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	3657 Points ∼40% -43%
Google Pixel 2 XL	6142 Points ∼66% -4%
LG V30	5949 Points ∼64% -7%
HTC U11 Plus	6086 Points ∼66% -4%
OnePlus 5T	6100 Points ∼66% -4%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	6144 Points ∼66% -4%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (6370 - 6506, n=3)	6416 Points ∼69% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 9248, n=453)	1510 Points ∼16% -76%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	2625 Points ∼63%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	3135 Points ∼76% +19%
Apple iPhone X	1219 Points ∼29% -54%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	4142 Points ∼100% +58%
Google Pixel 2 XL	2927 Points ∼71% +12%
LG V30	2091 Points ∼50% -20%
HTC U11 Plus	3376 Points ∼82% +29%
OnePlus 5T	3845 Points ∼93% +46%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	3652 Points ∼88% +39%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2068 - 2669, n=3)	2454 Points ∼59% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 4798, n=453)	1124 Points ∼27% -57%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	6413 Points ∼62%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	5319 Points ∼52% -17%
Apple iPhone X	10281 Points ∼100% +60%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	5244 Points ∼51% -18%
Google Pixel 2 XL	5914 Points ∼58% -8%
LG V30	4238 Points ∼41% -34%
HTC U11 Plus	5926 Points ∼58% -8%
OnePlus 5T	5872 Points ∼57% -8%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	5918 Points ∼58% -8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (6137 - 6413, n=3)	6261 Points ∼61% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 10281, n=453)	2257 Points ∼22% -65%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	3302 Points ∼88%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	3301 Points ∼88% 0%
Apple iPhone X	3737 Points ∼100% +13%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	3147 Points ∼84% -5%
Google Pixel 2 XL	3351 Points ∼90% +1%
LG V30	2702 Points ∼72% -18%
HTC U11 Plus	3447 Points ∼92% +4%
OnePlus 5T	3678 Points ∼98% +11%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	3625 Points ∼97% +10%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3110 - 3302, n=3)	3232 Points ∼86% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 4308, n=457)	1131 Points ∼30% -66%

Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	6202 Points ∼72%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	8295 Points ∼97% +34%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	8572 Points ∼100% +38%
Google Pixel 2 XL	7568 Points ∼88% +22%
LG V30	8016 Points ∼94% +29%
HTC U11 Plus	7946 Points ∼93% +28%
OnePlus 5T	8000 Points ∼93% +29%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (6202 - 9059, n=3)	7160 Points ∼84% +15%
Average of class Smartphone (836 - 14417, n=153)	3853 Points ∼45% -38%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	8963 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	6695 Points ∼65% -25%
Apple iPhone X	10255 Points ∼100% +14%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	6792 Points ∼66% -24%
Google Pixel 2 XL	6253 Points ∼61% -30%
LG V30	6078 Points ∼59% -32%
HTC U11 Plus	6771 Points ∼66% -24%
OnePlus 5T	6670 Points ∼65% -26%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	6711 Points ∼65% -25%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (8786 - 8963, n=3)	8874 Points ∼87% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (1099 - 10558, n=200)	3952 Points ∼39% -56%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	3776 Points ∼89%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	2015 Points ∼47% -47%
Apple iPhone X	4265 Points ∼100% +13%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	1898 Points ∼45% -50%
Google Pixel 2 XL	1916 Points ∼45% -49%
LG V30	1900 Points ∼45% -50%
HTC U11 Plus	1935 Points ∼45% -49%
OnePlus 5T	1962 Points ∼46% -48%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	1911 Points ∼45% -49%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (1698 - 3776, n=3)	3054 Points ∼72% -19%
Average of class Smartphone (394 - 4265, n=201)	1159 Points ∼27% -69%

3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	2469 Points ∼80%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	2466 Points ∼80% 0%
Apple iPhone X	2361 Points ∼77% -4%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	2871 Points ∼94% +16%
Google Pixel 2 XL	3028 Points ∼99% +23%
LG V30	2931 Points ∼96% +19%
HTC U11 Plus	3049 Points ∼99% +23%
OnePlus 5T	3068 Points ∼100% +24%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	2986 Points ∼97% +21%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2469 - 2569, n=3)	2508 Points ∼82% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (500 - 3669, n=303)	1544 Points ∼50% -37%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	3582 Points ∼89%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	3479 Points ∼87% -3%
Apple iPhone X	3463 Points ∼86% -3%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	2844 Points ∼71% -21%
Google Pixel 2 XL	3872 Points ∼96% +8%
LG V30	3903 Points ∼97% +9%
HTC U11 Plus	3987 Points ∼99% +11%
OnePlus 5T	4016 Points ∼100% +12%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	3991 Points ∼99% +11%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3553 - 3673, n=3)	3603 Points ∼90% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (70 - 5220, n=303)	1049 Points ∼26% -71%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	3256 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	3188 Points ∼85% -2%
Apple iPhone X	3138 Points ∼84% -4%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	2850 Points ∼76% -12%
Google Pixel 2 XL	3646 Points ∼97% +12%
LG V30	3635 Points ∼97% +12%
HTC U11 Plus	3732 Points ∼99% +15%
OnePlus 5T	3758 Points ∼100% +15%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	3713 Points ∼99% +14%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3244 - 3353, n=3)	3284 Points ∼87% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (87 - 4734, n=311)	1006 Points ∼27% -69%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	2496 Points ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	2465 Points ∼80% -1%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	2896 Points ∼94% +16%
Google Pixel 2 XL	2995 Points ∼98% +20%
LG V30	2808 Points ∼91% +13%
HTC U11 Plus	3071 Points ∼100% +23%
OnePlus 5T	3031 Points ∼99% +21%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	3071 Points ∼100% +23%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2496 - 2600, n=3)	2537 Points ∼83% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (474 - 3642, n=334)	1449 Points ∼47% -42%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	4637 Points ∼77%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	4786 Points ∼79% +3%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	3353 Points ∼55% -28%
Google Pixel 2 XL	5856 Points ∼97% +26%
LG V30	5895 Points ∼97% +27%
HTC U11 Plus	6060 Points ∼100% +31%
OnePlus 5T	5791 Points ∼96% +25%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	6035 Points ∼100% +30%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (4569 - 4826, n=3)	4677 Points ∼77% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (107 - 8312, n=334)	1423 Points ∼23% -69%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	3895 Points ∼78%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	3958 Points ∼79% +2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	3239 Points ∼65% -17%
Google Pixel 2 XL	4831 Points ∼97% +24%
LG V30	4738 Points ∼95% +22%
HTC U11 Plus	4982 Points ∼100% +28%
OnePlus 5T	4816 Points ∼97% +24%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	4969 Points ∼100% +28%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3895 - 4008, n=3)	3938 Points ∼79% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (120 - 6378, n=342)	1223 Points ∼25% -69%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	26226 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	20892 Points ∼80% -20%
Apple iPhone X	25633 Points ∼98% -2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	22629 Points ∼86% -14%
Google Pixel 2 XL	20233 Points ∼77% -23%
LG V30	14601 Points ∼56% -44%
HTC U11 Plus	20820 Points ∼79% -21%
OnePlus 5T	21348 Points ∼81% -19%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	21239 Points ∼81% -19%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (18756 - 26851, n=3)	23944 Points ∼91% -9%
Average of class Smartphone (8065 - 36762, n=489)	12157 Points ∼46% -54%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	46610 Points ∼41%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	33077 Points ∼29% -29%
Apple iPhone X	112489 Points ∼100% +141%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	34008 Points ∼30% -27%
Google Pixel 2 XL	54156 Points ∼48% +16%
LG V30	55271 Points ∼49% +19%
HTC U11 Plus	58307 Points ∼52% +25%
OnePlus 5T	58097 Points ∼52% +25%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	55485 Points ∼49% +19%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (36190 - 48433, n=3)	43744 Points ∼39% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (2465 - 113380, n=489)	15596 Points ∼14% -67%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	39745 Points ∼62%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	29282 Points ∼46% -26%
Apple iPhone X	64169 Points ∼100% +61%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	30590 Points ∼48% -23%
Google Pixel 2 XL	39456 Points ∼61% -1%
LG V30	34139 Points ∼53% -14%
HTC U11 Plus	41644 Points ∼65% +5%
OnePlus 5T	42022 Points ∼65% +6%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	40848 Points ∼64% +3%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (29994 - 41093, n=3)	36944 Points ∼58% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 64405, n=490)	13491 Points ∼21% -66%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	147 fps ∼83%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	104 fps ∼59% -29%
Apple iPhone X	177.4 fps ∼100% +21%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	112 fps ∼63% -24%
Google Pixel 2 XL	112 fps ∼63% -24%
LG V30	113 fps ∼64% -23%
HTC U11 Plus	113 fps ∼64% -23%
OnePlus 5T	113 fps ∼64% -23%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	105 fps ∼59% -29%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (144 - 147, n=3)	146 fps ∼82% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 177, n=517)	27.4 fps ∼15% -81%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	60 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	58 fps ∼97% -3%
Apple iPhone X	59.4 fps ∼99% -1%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	60 fps ∼100% 0%
Google Pixel 2 XL	59 fps ∼98% -2%
LG V30	60 fps ∼100% 0%
HTC U11 Plus	60 fps ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 5T	60 fps ∼100% 0%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	60 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (60 - 60, n=3)	60 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=520)	23.6 fps ∼39% -61%

GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	74 fps ∼84%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	50 fps ∼57% -32%
Apple iPhone X	88.2 fps ∼100% +19%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	54 fps ∼61% -27%
Google Pixel 2 XL	59 fps ∼67% -20%
LG V30	59 fps ∼67% -20%
HTC U11 Plus	60 fps ∼68% -19%
OnePlus 5T	60 fps ∼68% -19%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	54 fps ∼61% -27%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (73 - 76, n=3)	74.3 fps ∼84% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 88.2, n=440)	14.5 fps ∼16% -80%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	45 fps ∼77%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	38 fps ∼65% -16%
Apple iPhone X	58.5 fps ∼100% +30%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	56 fps ∼96% +24%
Google Pixel 2 XL	35 fps ∼60% -22%
LG V30	35 fps ∼60% -22%
HTC U11 Plus	35 fps ∼60% -22%
OnePlus 5T	53 fps ∼91% +18%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	36 fps ∼62% -20%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (45 - 47, n=3)	45.7 fps ∼78% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (4.4 - 115, n=442)	14.6 fps ∼25% -68%

GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	47 fps ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	42 fps ∼86% -11%
Apple iPhone X	48.9 fps ∼100% +4%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	37 fps ∼76% -21%
Google Pixel 2 XL	41 fps ∼84% -13%
LG V30	40 fps ∼82% -15%
HTC U11 Plus	41 fps ∼84% -13%
OnePlus 5T	41 fps ∼84% -13%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	40 fps ∼82% -15%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (45 - 47, n=3)	46 fps ∼94% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (1.3 - 60, n=304)	12.5 fps ∼26% -73%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	24 fps ∼54%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	23 fps ∼52% -4%
Apple iPhone X	44.1 fps ∼100% +84%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	38 fps ∼86% +58%
Google Pixel 2 XL	20 fps ∼45% -17%
LG V30	19 fps ∼43% -21%
HTC U11 Plus	21 fps ∼48% -12%
OnePlus 5T	37 fps ∼84% +54%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	22 fps ∼50% -8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (24 - 25, n=3)	24.3 fps ∼55% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (2.6 - 110, n=306)	12.6 fps ∼29% -47%

GFXBench
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	28 fps ∼88%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	25 fps ∼79% -11%
Apple iPhone X	31.8 fps ∼100% +14%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	21 fps ∼66% -25%
Google Pixel 2 XL	24 fps ∼75% -14%
LG V30	24 fps ∼75% -14%
HTC U11 Plus	25 fps ∼79% -11%
OnePlus 5T	25 fps ∼79% -11%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	25 fps ∼79% -11%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (28 - 28, n=3)	28 fps ∼88% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (0.72 - 35, n=236)	8.57 fps ∼27% -69%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	14 fps ∼51%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	13 fps ∼47% -7%
Apple iPhone X	27.7 fps ∼100% +98%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	22 fps ∼79% +57%
Google Pixel 2 XL	13 fps ∼47% -7%
LG V30	13 fps ∼47% -7%
HTC U11 Plus	13 fps ∼47% -7%
OnePlus 5T	23 fps ∼83% +64%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force	15 fps ∼54% +7%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (14 - 15, n=3)	14.3 fps ∼52% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (1.1 - 50, n=239)	7.84 fps ∼28% -44%

Lightmark - 1920x1080 1080p (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	35.83 fps ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	25.06 fps ∼65% -30%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	21.49 fps ∼56% -40%
Google Pixel 2 XL	37.71 fps ∼97% +5%
HTC U11 Plus	38.71 fps ∼100% +8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (34 - 35.8, n=2)	34.9 fps ∼90% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (1.06 - 38.7, n=72)	12.1 fps ∼31% -66%

Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	1481 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	1280 Points ∼75% -14%
Apple iPhone X	1702 Points ∼100% +15%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro	788 Points ∼46% -47%
Google Pixel 2 XL	853 Points ∼50% -42%
HTC U11 Plus	868 Points ∼51% -41%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (1436 - 1481, n=3)	1466 Points ∼86% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (36.3 - 1702, n=64)	596 Points ∼35% -60%

Legend

Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus Samsung Exynos 9810, ARM Mali-G72 MP18, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus Samsung Exynos 8895 Octa, ARM Mali-G71 MP20, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

Apple iPhone X Apple A11 Bionic, Apple A11 Bionic GPU, 64 GB eMMC Flash

Huawei Mate 10 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 970, ARM Mali-G72 MP12, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

Google Pixel 2 XL Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

LG V30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

HTC U11 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

OnePlus 5T Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

Motorola Moto Z2 Force Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

Average Samsung Exynos 9810

Average of class Smartphone

JetStream 1.1 | Octane V2 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1 | WebXPRT 2015

JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Apple iPhone X (IOS 11.1.1)	224 Points ∼100% +222%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)	69.59 Points ∼31%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (63 - 69.6, n=3)	66.8 Points ∼30% -4%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)	66.689 Points ∼30% -4%
OnePlus 5T (Chrome 63)	66.477 Points ∼30% -4%
HTC U11 Plus (Chrome 63)	64.948 Points ∼29% -7%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)	64.709 Points ∼29% -7%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)	62.198 Points ∼28% -11%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)	56.63 Points ∼25% -19%
LG V30 (Chrome 62)	52.9 Points ∼24% -24%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 224, n=372)	33.4 Points ∼15% -52%

Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone X (IOS 11.1.2)	35255 Points ∼100% +139%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (14663 - 15233, n=3)	14885 Points ∼42% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)	14760 Points ∼42%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)	14050 Points ∼40% -5%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)	12929 Points ∼37% -12%
OnePlus 5T (Chrome 63)	12509 Points ∼35% -15%
HTC U11 Plus (Chrome 63)	11553 Points ∼33% -22%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)	11308 Points ∼32% -23%
LG V30 (Chrome 62)	10506 Points ∼30% -29%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)	10406 Points ∼30% -29%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 35255, n=508)	4996 Points ∼14% -66%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (718 - 59466, n=527)	11914 ms * ∼100% -478%
LG V30 (Chrome 62)	3630 ms * ∼30% -76%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)	3590.6 ms * ∼30% -74%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)	3434.1 ms * ∼29% -67%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)	3175.3 ms * ∼27% -54%
HTC U11 Plus (Chrome 63)	3131.6 ms * ∼26% -52%
OnePlus 5T (Chrome 63)	3096 ms * ∼26% -50%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2060 - 2710, n=3)	2283 ms * ∼19% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)	2236.7 ms * ∼19% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)	2059.7 ms * ∼17%
Apple iPhone X (IOS 11.1.2)	718 ms * ∼6% +65%

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone X (Safari Mobile 11.0)	354 Points ∼100% +116%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)	194 Points ∼55% +18%
OnePlus 5T (Chrome 63)	181 Points ∼51% +10%
HTC U11 Plus (Chrome 63)	179 Points ∼51% +9%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (163 - 202, n=3)	176 Points ∼50% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)	164 Points ∼46%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)	161 Points ∼45% -2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)	158 Points ∼45% -4%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)	154 Points ∼44% -6%
LG V30 (Chrome 62)	138 Points ∼39% -16%
Average of class Smartphone (27 - 362, n=249)	99.9 Points ∼28% -39%

* ... smaller is better

	Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus	Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus	LG V30	HTC U11 Plus	Motorola Moto Z2 Force	Huawei P10 Plus	Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	Average of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5		-12%	-28%	77%	38%	82%	5%	-51%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard	67.18 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)	57.24 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401) -15%	47.2 -30%	51.26 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) -24%	54.67 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) -19%	33.61 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401) -50%	49.2 (17.1 - 67.2, n=19) -27%	43.9 (3.4 - 87.1, n=284) -35%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard	79.22 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)	71.12 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401) -10%	62.8 -21%	75.39 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) -5%	77.37 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) -2%	54.04 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401) -32%	66.1 (18 - 84.7, n=19) -17%	62.3 (8.2 - 96.5, n=284) -21%
Random Write 4KB	22.74	15.27 -33%	10.21 -55%	135.69 497%	78.62 246%	149.78 559%	42.7 (8.77 - 152, n=26) 88%	13.6 (0.14 - 164, n=566) -40%
Random Read 4KB	129.68	127.18 -2%	78.17 -40%	132.39 2%	148.76 15%	173.06 33%	135 (78.2 - 173, n=26) 4%	34.9 (1.59 - 173, n=566) -73%
Sequential Write 256KB	204.94	194.18 -5%	193.22 -6%	207.94 1%	213.61 4%	182.64 -11%	193 (133 - 214, n=26) -6%	73.2 (2.99 - 228, n=566) -64%
Sequential Read 256KB	818.69	787.6 -4%	669.48 -18%	728.37 -11%	696.35 -15%	732.94 -10%	725 (529 - 819, n=26) -11%	214 (12.1 - 832, n=566) -74%

Asphalt 8: Airborne
	Inställningar	Värde
	high	30 fps

Dead Trigger 2
	Inställningar	Värde
	high	30 fps

Battle Bay
	Inställningar	Värde
	full resolution	60 fps

World of Tanks Blitz
	Inställningar	Värde
	high, 0xAA, 0xAF	59 fps

Arena of Valor
	Inställningar	Värde
	high HD	60 fps

Shadow Fight 3
	Inställningar	Värde
	high	60 fps

Hög belastning

Låg belastning


35.8 °C	35.7 °C	35.4 °C
35 °C	35.2 °C	35.1 °C
35 °C	34.1 °C	34.6 °C

Max: 35.8 °C
Medel: 35.1 °C


32.2 °C	36.7 °C	37.9 °C
32.4 °C	34.4 °C	35.1 °C
32.6 °C	34.3 °C	33.3 °C

Max: 37.9 °C
Medel: 34.3 °C

Strömförsörjning (max.) 29.2 °C | Rumstemperatur 20 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 3% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 25% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 67% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Google Pixel 2 XL audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 41% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple iPhone X audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 34% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 61% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Strömförbrukning

Av/Standby	0 / 0.09 Watt
Låg belastning	0.68 / 0.95 / 1.09 Watt
Hög belastning	4.58 / 5.16 Watt


Förklaring: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy

	Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus 3500 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus 3500 mAh	Google Pixel 2 XL 3520 mAh	Apple iPhone X 2716 mAh	Huawei Mate 10 Pro 4000 mAh	LG V30 3300 mAh	HTC U11 Plus 3930 mAh	OnePlus 5T 3300 mAh
Power Consumption		-6%	-59%	-67%	-22%	-21%	-33%	-22%
Idle Minimum *	0.68	0.68 -0%	1.28 -88%	1.03 -51%	0.85 -25%	0.72 -6%	0.51 25%	0.58 15%
Idle Average *	0.95	1.13 -19%	1.87 -97%	2.4 -153%	1.15 -21%	1.37 -44%	1.62 -71%	1.44 -52%
Idle Maximum *	1.09	1.16 -6%	1.89 -73%	2.6 -139%	1.23 -13%	1.41 -29%	1.87 -72%	1.53 -40%
Load Average *	4.58	4.69 -2%	3.73 19%	2.96 35%	4.12 10%	3.46 24%	3.92 14%	3.17 31%
Load Maximum *	5.16	5.24 -2%	8.08 -57%	6.6 -28%	8.42 -63%	7.83 -52%	8.27 -60%	8.54 -66%

* ... smaller is better

Batteritid

Låg belastning (utan WLAN, min. ljusstyrka)		22tim 23min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Samsung Browser 7.0)		8tim 41min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		11tim 14min
Hög belastning (maximal ljusstyrka)		3tim 57min

	Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus 3500 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus 3500 mAh	Google Pixel 2 XL 3520 mAh	Apple iPhone X 2716 mAh	Huawei Mate 10 Pro 4000 mAh	OnePlus 5T 3300 mAh	Motorola Moto Z2 Force 2730 mAh	LG V30 3300 mAh
Battery Runtime		21%	17%	-7%	48%	24%	23%	32%
Reader / Idle	1343	1565 17%	1706 27%	1292 -4%	1744 30%	1754 31%	1630 21%	1914 43%
H.264	674	742 10%	672 0%	634 -6%	929 38%	799 19%	811 20%	822 22%
WiFi v1.3	521	736 41%	581 12%	564 8%	818 57%	718 38%	531 2%	774 49%
Load	237	275 16%	302 27%	180 -24%	398 68%	257 8%	354 49%	267 13%

För

+ stilfull design

+ utmärkt skärm

+ snabb SoC

+ utökningsbar lagring

+ LTE Cat. 18

+ stereohögtalare

+ IP67

+ bra sensorutrustning

+ USB 3.1 med DP, HDMI, och OTG

+ trådlös laddning

+ utmärkt dualkamera

+ dual-SIM som tillval (Duos-modell)

Emot

- ingen dual-VoLTE

- sämre batteritid än föregångaren

- lång laddningstid

- SoC stryps vid konstant belastning

- ingen garanti för skada som orsakats av vätskor

The Samsung Galaxy S9+ (SM-G965F) in review, courtesy of Samsung Germany.

Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.

Med sin Galaxy S9 Plus har Samsung återigen lyckats skapa en utmärkt smartphone som fått många vettiga förbättringar men inga riktiga innovationer. Huvudkamerans två bländarnivåer är en utmärkt sak att ha och fungerar bra i vardagen. Samsung har också optimerad kvaliteten på bilderna ytterligare. Super Slow Motion-läget är inte mycket mer än en gimmick för bra ljusförhållanden och bilderna man får ut av det är endast lämpliga för sociala nätverk. AR-emojis fungerar heller inte särskilt bra. Eventuella likheter med användaren beror i huvudsak på tur.

Men hur det än ligger till med det så har det Koreanska företaget ändå levererat en utmärkt produkt. En snabb processor, fantastisk skärm, bättre placering av fingeravtrycksläsaren, lagring som lätt kan utökas, bra stereohögtalare och skydd från damm och vatten är alla definitivt fördelar. Det finns till och med en variant med dual-SIM tillgänglig.

Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus är en kraftfull smartphone, men den måste ändå brottas med en del inledande svårigheter.

Denna Samsung-smartphone är lite mindre övertygande när det kommer till batteritiderna, som är märkbart sämre än dom var på den föregående modellen. Quick Charge fungerade heller inte på vår testenhet, så den behövde mer än fyra timmar att laddas till fullo i vårt test – alldeles för långt. Samsung kommer antagligen att lösa dom här problemen med en uppdatering, men det lämnar ändå en dålig smak i munnen hos användare som redan från början köpt denna telefon till fullpris.

Om du redan äger en Galaxy S8+ så finns det ingen akut anledning att byta nu. Skillnaderna i vardaglig användning är för små för att rättfärdiga prisskillnaden.

Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus - 2018-03-2603/26/2018 v6
Daniel Schmidt

Design

92%

Tangentbord

70 / 75 → 94%

Mus

98%

Anslutningar

66 / 60 → 100%

Vikt

89%

Batteri

92%

Skärm

91%

Spelprestanda

66 / 63 → 100%

Programprestanda

68 / 70 → 97%

Temperatur

94%

Ljudnivå

100%

Audio

75 / 91 → 82%

Camera

95%