Notebookcheck

Kort testrapport Samsung Galaxy Note 9 Smartphone

Florian Wimmer, 29-08-2018

Go penning. Samsung's high-end phablet wordt geleverd met een revolutionaire S Pen, die dankzij de Bluetooth ondersteuning gebruikt kan worden als afstandsbediening voor de camera of voor het bedienen van presentaties. Het grote beeldscherm wordt aangevuld met een intelligente camera. Of dat genoeg is om van de Note 9 de beste zakelijke smartphone van het jaar te maken lees je in dit testrapport.

Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Galaxy Note Serie)
Processor
Samsung Exynos 9810
Grafische kaart
ARM Mali-G72 MP18
Geheugen
6144 MB 
Beeldscherm
6.4 inch 18.5:9, 2960 x 1440 pixel 514 PPI, capacitief touchscherm, Super AMOLED, Gorilla Glass 5, HDR10, glimmend: ja
Opslag
128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 109 GB beschikbaar
Verbindingen
1 USB 3.0, Audio Verbindingen: 3.5-mm audio aansluiting, Card Reader: microSD max. 256 GB, 1 Vingerafdruklezer, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensoren: bewegingssensor, gyroscoop, nabijheidssensor, kompas, barometer, irisscanner, hartslagsensor, USB-OTG, ANT+,
Netwerkmogelijkheden
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM (850/​900/​1800/​1900), UMTS (850/​900/​1800/​1900), LTE (1,2,3,4,5,7,8,12,14,18,19,20,28,29,30), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Afmetingen
hoogte x breedte x diepte (in mm): 8.8 x 162 x 76.4
Batterij
15.2 Wh, 4000 mAh Lithium-Ion, snelladen, Qi, Powermat
Besturingssysteem
Android 8.1 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix f/​1.5-f/​2.4, phase detection autofocus (Dual pixel), OIS, LED flits, Videos @2160p/​60fps, Videos @720p/​960fps (hoofdcamera); 12.0MP, f/​2.4, depth detection, telephoto lens (secundaire camera)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/​1.7, contrast detection autofocus, Videos @1080p/​30fps
Bijkomende functionaliteiten
Luidsprekers: stereo luidsprekers, Toetsenbord: virtueel toetsenbord, S Pen, snellader, USB-C-kabel, Smart Things, Samsung Health, Galaxy Apps, Galaxy Wearable, PENUP, 24 Maanden Garantie, IP68 gecertificeerd; LTE-A Pro Cat 18 (1200/150 Mbit/s); SAR-value: 0,381W/​kg (hoofd), 1,509W/​kg (lichaam), fanless
Gewicht
201 g
Prijs
999 Euro

 

Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Samsung Galaxy Note 9

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
914 MBit/s ∼100% +88%
LG G7 ThinQ
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
656 MBit/s ∼72% +35%
OnePlus 6
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
609 MBit/s ∼67% +26%
HTC U12 Plus
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
579 MBit/s ∼63% +19%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
503 MBit/s ∼55% +4%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
485 MBit/s ∼53%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
338 MBit/s ∼37% -30%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=259)
186 MBit/s ∼20% -62%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
653 MBit/s ∼100% +35%
LG G7 ThinQ
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
651 MBit/s ∼100% +34%
OnePlus 6
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
612 MBit/s ∼94% +26%
HTC U12 Plus
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
573 MBit/s ∼88% +18%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
485 MBit/s ∼74%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
374 MBit/s ∼57% -23%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
225 MBit/s ∼34% -54%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=259)
182 MBit/s ∼28% -62%
GPS Samsung Galaxy Note 9 – overview
GPS Samsung Galaxy Note 9 – overview
GPS Samsung Galaxy Note 9 – grove
GPS Samsung Galaxy Note 9 – grove
GPS Samsung Galaxy Note 9 – bridge
GPS Samsung Galaxy Note 9 – bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – grove
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – grove
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge

Beeldvergelijking

Bekijk een scène en navigeer binnen het eerste beeld. Eén klik wijzigt het zoomniveau. Eén klik op het ingezoomde beeld opent het origineel in een nieuw venster. Het eerste beeld toont de verschaalde foto van het testtoestel.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
klik om beelden te laden
515
cd/m²
502
cd/m²
501
cd/m²
509
cd/m²
499
cd/m²
502
cd/m²
521
cd/m²
504
cd/m²
502
cd/m²
Helderheidsverdeling
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 521 cd/m² Gemiddelde: 506.1 cd/m² Minimum: 1.67 cd/m²
Helderheidsverdeling: 96 %
Helderheid in Batterij-modus: 499 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Zwart: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.62 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3
ΔE Greyscale 2.2 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
144.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.103
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.4
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
HTC U12 Plus
Super LCD 6, 2880x1440, 6
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
OLED, 2160x1080, 6
OnePlus 6
Optic AMOLED, 2280x1080, 6.28
LG G7 ThinQ
IPS, 3120x1440, 6.1
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.3
Screen
30%
23%
29%
10%
4%
14%
Brightness middle
499
559
12%
395
-21%
629
26%
430
-14%
974
95%
530
6%
Brightness
506
538
6%
402
-21%
636
26%
437
-14%
975
93%
536
6%
Brightness Distribution
96
90
-6%
90
-6%
94
-2%
87
-9%
96
0%
93
-3%
Black Level *
0.38
0.37
0.49
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.62
1.3
72%
1.6
65%
1.7
63%
2.3
50%
5.4
-17%
2.6
44%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
10.91
2.7
75%
3.4
69%
3.6
67%
4.6
58%
13.1
-20%
5.1
53%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.2
1.8
18%
1.1
50%
2.4
-9%
2.4
-9%
5
-127%
2.7
-23%
Gamma
2.103 114%
2.25 107%
2.14 112%
2.15 112%
2.28 105%
2.31 104%
2.04 118%
CCT
6115 106%
6797 96%
6536 99%
6337 103%
6160 106%
7480 87%
6206 105%
Contrast
1471
1068
1988

* ... kleiner is beter

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Om de schermhelderheid te verlagen schakelen sommige laptops het backlight erg snel aan en uit. Dit gebeurt aan een dergelijk hoge frequentie dat het niet zichtbaar is voor het menselijk oog. Als de frequentie te laag is kunnen personen met gevoelige ogen geïrriteerd geraken, hoofdpijn krijgen en zelfs flickering waarnemen.
Screen flickering / PWM waargenomen 227 Hz

Het backlight van het scherm flikkert aan 227 Hz (hoogstwaarschijnlijk met PWM - Pulse-Width Modulation) .

De frequentie van 227 Hz is redelijk laag en de meeste mensen die gevoelig zijn aan flickering kunnen dit dus waarnemen of geïrriteerde ogen krijgen (gebruikmakend van de vermelde helderheid en lager).

Ter vergelijking: 53 % van alle geteste toestellen maakten geen gebruik van PWM om de schermhelderheid te verlagen. Als het wel werd gebruikt, werd een gemiddelde van 8813 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz waargenomen.

Responstijd Scherm

De responstijden van het scherm tonen hoe snel het scherm in staat is om van één kleur naar de andere te veranderen. Trage responstijden kunnen aanleiding geven tot 'nabeelden' rond bewegende objecten of het scherm wazig maken (blur). Vooral spelers van snelle 3D-games hebben baat bij een scherm met snelle responstijden.
       Responstijd Zwart naar Wit
6 ms ... stijging ↗ en daling ↘ gecombineerd↗ 3 ms stijging
↘ 3 ms daling
Het scherm vertoonde erg snelle responstijden in onze tests en zou zeer geschikt moeten zijn voor snelle games.
Ter vergelijking: alle testtoestellen variëren van 0.8 (minimum) tot 240 (maximum) ms. » 3 % van alle toestellen zijn beter.
Dit betekent dat de gemeten responstijd beter is dan het gemiddelde (25.8 ms) van alle geteste toestellen.
       Responstijd 50% Grijs naar 80% Grijs
10 ms ... stijging ↗ en daling ↘ gecombineerd↗ 5 ms stijging
↘ 5 ms daling
Het scherm vertoonde prima responstijden in onze tests maar is misschien wat te traag voor competitieve games.
Ter vergelijking: alle testtoestellen variëren van 0.9 (minimum) tot 636 (maximum) ms. » 4 % van alle toestellen zijn beter.
Dit betekent dat de gemeten responstijd beter is dan het gemiddelde (41.3 ms) van alle geteste toestellen.
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
214090 Points ∼93%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
218158 Points ∼95% +2%
HTC U12 Plus
221971 Points ∼96% +4%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
177341 Points ∼77% -17%
OnePlus 6
230421 Points ∼100% +8%
LG G7 ThinQ
223464 Points ∼97% +4%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
173997 Points ∼76% -19%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (214090 - 222290, n=3)
218110 Points ∼95% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 230642, n=350)
70775 Points ∼31% -67%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
236552 Points ∼89%
HTC U12 Plus
255739 Points ∼96% +8%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
212278 Points ∼80% -10%
OnePlus 6
266686 Points ∼100% +13%
LG G7 ThinQ
256276 Points ∼96% +8%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
201210 Points ∼75% -15%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (236552 - 250577, n=3)
243663 Points ∼91% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (17073 - 290397, n=127)
100740 Points ∼38% -57%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
5184 Points ∼60%
HTC U12 Plus
8601 Points ∼100% +66%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
6932 Points ∼81% +34%
OnePlus 6
8282 Points ∼96% +60%
LG G7 ThinQ
7717 Points ∼90% +49%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
5096 Points ∼59% -2%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (5184 - 5319, n=3)
5265 Points ∼61% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (2814 - 8601, n=214)
4398 Points ∼51% -15%
Work performance score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
5960 Points ∼58%
HTC U12 Plus
10264 Points ∼100% +72%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
8439 Points ∼82% +42%
OnePlus 6
9630 Points ∼94% +62%
LG G7 ThinQ
9503 Points ∼93% +59%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6084 Points ∼59% +2%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (5736 - 5960, n=3)
5839 Points ∼57% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (5960 - 10264, n=378)
4665 Points ∼45% -22%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
1132 Points ∼79%
HTC U12 Plus
1437 Points ∼100% +27%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
1234 Points ∼86% +9%
OnePlus 6
1386 Points ∼96% +22%
LG G7 ThinQ
1374 Points ∼96% +21%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
1235 Points ∼86% +9%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (1099 - 1132, n=3)
1113 Points ∼77% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1682, n=453)
666 Points ∼46% -41%
Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
6506 Points ∼82%
HTC U12 Plus
7945 Points ∼100% +22%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3657 Points ∼46% -44%
OnePlus 6
7949 Points ∼100% +22%
LG G7 ThinQ
7906 Points ∼99% +22%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6121 Points ∼77% -6%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (6370 - 6506, n=3)
6416 Points ∼81% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 9248, n=453)
1510 Points ∼19% -77%
Memory (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2068 Points ∼50%
HTC U12 Plus
3641 Points ∼88% +76%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
4142 Points ∼100% +100%
OnePlus 6
3799 Points ∼92% +84%
LG G7 ThinQ
3744 Points ∼90% +81%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3095 Points ∼75% +50%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2068 - 2669, n=3)
2454 Points ∼59% +19%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 4798, n=453)
1124 Points ∼27% -46%
System (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
6137 Points ∼75%
HTC U12 Plus
7862 Points ∼96% +28%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
5244 Points ∼64% -15%
OnePlus 6
8228 Points ∼100% +34%
LG G7 ThinQ
8070 Points ∼98% +31%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
5308 Points ∼65% -14%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (6137 - 6413, n=3)
6261 Points ∼76% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 10281, n=453)
2257 Points ∼27% -63%
Overall (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3110 Points ∼72%
HTC U12 Plus
4252 Points ∼99% +37%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3147 Points ∼73% +1%
OnePlus 6
4308 Points ∼100% +39%
LG G7 ThinQ
4257 Points ∼99% +37%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3338 Points ∼77% +7%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3110 - 3302, n=3)
3232 Points ∼75% +4%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 4308, n=457)
1131 Points ∼26% -64%
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
9059 Points ∼67%
HTC U12 Plus
12493 Points ∼93% +38%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
8572 Points ∼64% -5%
LG G7 ThinQ
13497 Points ∼100% +49%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
8310 Points ∼62% -8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (6202 - 9059, n=3)
7160 Points ∼53% -21%
Average of class Smartphone (836 - 14417, n=153)
3853 Points ∼29% -57%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
8874 Points ∼84%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
10558 Points ∼100% +19%
HTC U12 Plus
8812 Points ∼83% -1%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
6792 Points ∼64% -23%
LG G7 ThinQ
9029 Points ∼86% +2%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6744 Points ∼64% -24%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (8786 - 8963, n=3)
8874 Points ∼84% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (1099 - 10558, n=200)
3952 Points ∼37% -55%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
1698 Points ∼40%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
4263 Points ∼100% +151%
HTC U12 Plus
2429 Points ∼57% +43%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
1898 Points ∼45% +12%
LG G7 ThinQ
2448 Points ∼57% +44%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2028 Points ∼48% +19%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (1698 - 3776, n=3)
3054 Points ∼72% +80%
Average of class Smartphone (394 - 4265, n=201)
1159 Points ∼27% -32%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2569 Points ∼75%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2109 Points ∼61% -18%
HTC U12 Plus
3197 Points ∼93% +24%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2871 Points ∼84% +12%
OnePlus 6
3432 Points ∼100% +34%
LG G7 ThinQ
3255 Points ∼95% +27%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2346 Points ∼68% -9%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2469 - 2569, n=3)
2508 Points ∼73% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (500 - 3669, n=303)
1544 Points ∼45% -40%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3673 Points ∼70%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
3069 Points ∼59% -16%
HTC U12 Plus
3488 Points ∼67% -5%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2844 Points ∼55% -23%
OnePlus 6
5212 Points ∼100% +42%
LG G7 ThinQ
5006 Points ∼96% +36%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2661 Points ∼51% -28%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3553 - 3673, n=3)
3603 Points ∼69% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (70 - 5220, n=303)
1049 Points ∼20% -71%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3353 Points ∼72%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2781 Points ∼60% -17%
HTC U12 Plus
3419 Points ∼73% +2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2850 Points ∼61% -15%
OnePlus 6
4673 Points ∼100% +39%
LG G7 ThinQ
4471 Points ∼96% +33%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2584 Points ∼55% -23%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3244 - 3353, n=3)
3284 Points ∼70% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (87 - 4734, n=311)
1006 Points ∼22% -70%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2515 Points ∼73%
HTC U12 Plus
2774 Points ∼80% +10%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2896 Points ∼84% +15%
OnePlus 6
3452 Points ∼100% +37%
LG G7 ThinQ
3150 Points ∼91% +25%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2342 Points ∼68% -7%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2496 - 2600, n=3)
2537 Points ∼73% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (474 - 3642, n=334)
1449 Points ∼42% -42%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4826 Points ∼58%
HTC U12 Plus
5637 Points ∼68% +17%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3353 Points ∼41% -31%
OnePlus 6
8252 Points ∼100% +71%
LG G7 ThinQ
7633 Points ∼92% +58%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3928 Points ∼48% -19%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (4569 - 4826, n=3)
4677 Points ∼57% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (107 - 8312, n=334)
1423 Points ∼17% -71%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4008 Points ∼64%
HTC U12 Plus
4585 Points ∼73% +14%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3239 Points ∼51% -19%
OnePlus 6
6304 Points ∼100% +57%
LG G7 ThinQ
5799 Points ∼92% +45%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3414 Points ∼54% -15%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3895 - 4008, n=3)
3938 Points ∼62% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (120 - 6378, n=342)
1223 Points ∼19% -69%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
18756 Points ∼55%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
25641 Points ∼75% +37%
HTC U12 Plus
33810 Points ∼99% +80%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
22629 Points ∼66% +21%
OnePlus 6
34191 Points ∼100% +82%
LG G7 ThinQ
27817 Points ∼81% +48%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
22829 Points ∼67% +22%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (18756 - 26851, n=3)
23944 Points ∼70% +28%
Average of class Smartphone (8065 - 36762, n=489)
12157 Points ∼36% -35%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
36190 Points ∼32%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
113380 Points ∼100% +213%
HTC U12 Plus
81726 Points ∼72% +126%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
34008 Points ∼30% -6%
OnePlus 6
81269 Points ∼72% +125%
LG G7 ThinQ
80534 Points ∼71% +123%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
36807 Points ∼32% +2%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (36190 - 48433, n=3)
43744 Points ∼39% +21%
Average of class Smartphone (2465 - 113380, n=489)
15596 Points ∼14% -57%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
29994 Points ∼47%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
64405 Points ∼100% +115%
HTC U12 Plus
62152 Points ∼97% +107%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
30590 Points ∼47% +2%
OnePlus 6
62241 Points ∼97% +108%
LG G7 ThinQ
56669 Points ∼88% +89%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
32399 Points ∼50% +8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (29994 - 41093, n=3)
36944 Points ∼57% +23%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 64405, n=490)
13491 Points ∼21% -55%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
146 fps ∼87%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
166.9 fps ∼100% +14%
HTC U12 Plus
98 fps ∼59% -33%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
112 fps ∼67% -23%
OnePlus 6
150 fps ∼90% +3%
LG G7 ThinQ
144 fps ∼86% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
105 fps ∼63% -28%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (144 - 147, n=3)
146 fps ∼87% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 177, n=517)
27.4 fps ∼16% -81%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
60 fps ∼50%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
119.4 fps ∼100% +99%
HTC U12 Plus
59 fps ∼49% -2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
60 fps ∼50% 0%
OnePlus 6
60 fps ∼50% 0%
LG G7 ThinQ
60 fps ∼50% 0%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
59 fps ∼49% -2%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (60 - 60, n=3)
60 fps ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=520)
23.6 fps ∼20% -61%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
76 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
71 fps ∼93% -7%
HTC U12 Plus
72 fps ∼95% -5%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
54 fps ∼71% -29%
OnePlus 6
66 fps ∼87% -13%
LG G7 ThinQ
63 fps ∼83% -17%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
51 fps ∼67% -33%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (73 - 76, n=3)
74.3 fps ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 88.2, n=440)
14.5 fps ∼19% -81%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
47 fps ∼59%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
79.2 fps ∼100% +69%
HTC U12 Plus
35 fps ∼44% -26%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
56 fps ∼71% +19%
OnePlus 6
58 fps ∼73% +23%
LG G7 ThinQ
41 fps ∼52% -13%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
38 fps ∼48% -19%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (45 - 47, n=3)
45.7 fps ∼58% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (4.4 - 115, n=442)
14.6 fps ∼18% -69%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
45 fps ∼80%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
49 fps ∼88% +9%
HTC U12 Plus
39 fps ∼70% -13%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
37 fps ∼66% -18%
OnePlus 6
56 fps ∼100% +24%
LG G7 ThinQ
51 fps ∼91% +13%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
42 fps ∼75% -7%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (45 - 47, n=3)
46 fps ∼82% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (1.3 - 60, n=304)
12.5 fps ∼22% -72%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
25 fps ∼44%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
56.4 fps ∼100% +126%
HTC U12 Plus
31 fps ∼55% +24%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
38 fps ∼67% +52%
OnePlus 6
54 fps ∼96% +116%
LG G7 ThinQ
26 fps ∼46% +4%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
23 fps ∼41% -8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (24 - 25, n=3)
24.3 fps ∼43% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (2.6 - 110, n=306)
12.6 fps ∼22% -50%
GFXBench
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
28 fps ∼80%
HTC U12 Plus
35 fps ∼100% +25%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
21 fps ∼60% -25%
OnePlus 6
35 fps ∼100% +25%
LG G7 ThinQ
33 fps ∼94% +18%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
25 fps ∼71% -11%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (28 - 28, n=3)
28 fps ∼80% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (0.72 - 35, n=236)
8.57 fps ∼24% -69%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
15 fps ∼47%
HTC U12 Plus
20 fps ∼63% +33%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
22 fps ∼69% +47%
OnePlus 6
32 fps ∼100% +113%
LG G7 ThinQ
17 fps ∼53% +13%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
13 fps ∼41% -13%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (14 - 15, n=3)
14.3 fps ∼45% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (1.1 - 50, n=239)
7.84 fps ∼25% -48%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
1481 Points ∼100%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
788 Points ∼53% -47%
OnePlus 6
1169 Points ∼79% -21%
LG G7 ThinQ
1176 Points ∼79% -21%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
1295 Points ∼87% -13%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (1436 - 1481, n=3)
1466 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (36.3 - 1702, n=64)
596 Points ∼40% -60%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
29.4 fps ∼83%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
14.3 fps ∼41% -51%
OnePlus 6
35.26 fps ∼100% +20%
LG G7 ThinQ
30.49 (min: 9.86, max: 49.99) fps ∼86% +4%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810
29.4 fps ∼83% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (1.45 - 35.3, n=12)
16.1 fps ∼46% -45%
Vulkan Medium Native (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
15.51 fps ∼59%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
5.45 fps ∼21% -65%
OnePlus 6
26.15 fps ∼100% +69%
LG G7 ThinQ
17.42 (min: 10.81, max: 36.84) fps ∼67% +12%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810
15.5 fps ∼59% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (5.45 - 26.2, n=9)
14.1 fps ∼54% -9%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
22.84 fps ∼81%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
5.9 fps ∼21% -74%
OnePlus 6
28.35 fps ∼100% +24%
LG G7 ThinQ
28.33 (min: 16.3, max: 60.18) fps ∼100% +24%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810
22.8 fps ∼80% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (5.9 - 28.4, n=7)
20 fps ∼71% -12%
VRMark - Amber Room (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2327 Score ∼49%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
1704 Score ∼36% -27%
OnePlus 6
4710 Score ∼100% +102%
LG G7 ThinQ
4598 Score ∼98% +98%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810
2327 Score ∼49% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (119 - 4710, n=12)
1815 Score ∼39% -22%
PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1
3D Graphics Tests (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4747 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
1501 Points ∼32% -68%
OnePlus 6
4195 Points ∼88% -12%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (4747 - 4777, n=2)
4762 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (373 - 4777, n=207)
1135 Points ∼24% -76%
2D Graphics Tests (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
8985 Points ∼83%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
8289 Points ∼77% -8%
OnePlus 6
10791 Points ∼100% +20%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (8620 - 8985, n=2)
8803 Points ∼82% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 12875, n=208)
3287 Points ∼30% -63%
Memory Tests (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
73460 Points ∼0%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
27570800 Points ∼100% +37432%
OnePlus 6
75243 Points ∼0% +2%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (69910 - 73460, n=2)
71685 Points ∼0% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (678 - 27570800, n=208)
386466 Points ∼1% +426%
Disk Tests (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
9916 Points ∼10%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
99202 Points ∼100% +900%
OnePlus 6
12497 Points ∼13% +26%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (9916 - 10239, n=2)
10078 Points ∼10% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (1033 - 117939, n=207)
20306 Points ∼20% +105%
CPU Tests (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
121702 Points ∼27%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
456258 Points ∼100% +275%
OnePlus 6
245734 Points ∼54% +102%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (121702 - 186922, n=2)
154312 Points ∼34% +27%
Average of class Smartphone (1140 - 456258, n=208)
55081 Points ∼12% -55%
System (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
14546 Points ∼95%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
8303 Points ∼54% -43%
OnePlus 6
15318 Points ∼100% +5%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (14546 - 14762, n=2)
14654 Points ∼96% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (2016 - 15318, n=209)
3994 Points ∼26% -73%

Legende

 
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 Samsung Exynos 9810, ARM Mali-G72 MP18, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Apple iPhone 8 Plus Apple A11 Bionic, Apple A11 Bionic GPU, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
 
HTC U12 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Huawei Mate 10 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 970, ARM Mali-G72 MP12, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
OnePlus 6 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
LG G7 ThinQ Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 Samsung Exynos 8895 Octa, ARM Mali-G71 MP20, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
223.5 Points ∼100% +255%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
88.081 Points ∼39% +40%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
87.695 Points ∼39% +39%
HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66)
87.036 Points ∼39% +38%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
69.57 Points ∼31% +10%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (63 - 69.6, n=3)
66.8 Points ∼30% +6%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
63.012 Points ∼28%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
56.63 Points ∼25% -10%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 224, n=372)
33.4 Points ∼15% -47%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
35209 Points ∼100% +140%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
17026 Points ∼48% +16%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
16720 Points ∼47% +14%
HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66)
16285 Points ∼46% +11%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (14663 - 15233, n=3)
14885 Points ∼42% +2%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
14663 Points ∼42%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
13265 Points ∼38% -10%
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% -340%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
3590.6 ms * ∼30% -32%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
2710 ms * ∼23%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
2484.1 ms * ∼21% +8%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
2445 ms * ∼21% +10%
HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66)
2409.6 ms * ∼20% +11%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2060 - 2710, n=3)
2283 ms * ∼19% +16%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
1876.8 ms * ∼16% +31%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
719.7 ms * ∼6% +73%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
362 Points ∼100% +79%
HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66)
257 Points ∼71% +27%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
252 Points ∼70% +25%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
252 Points ∼70% +25%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
202 Points ∼56%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (163 - 202, n=3)
176 Points ∼49% -13%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
159 Points ∼44% -21%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
158 Points ∼44% -22%
Average of class Smartphone (27 - 362, n=249)
99.9 Points ∼28% -51%

* ... kleiner is beter

Samsung Galaxy Note 9HTC U12 PlusHuawei Mate 10 ProOnePlus 6LG G7 ThinQSamsung Galaxy Note 8Average 128 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
63%
170%
-0%
-5%
-10%
66%
-50%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
66.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
63.64 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-5%
62.67 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-6%
59.27 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-11%
61 (51.3 - 66.7, n=3)
-9%
43.9 (3.4 - 87.1, n=284)
-34%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
77 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
84.32 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
10%
84.72 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
10%
67.87 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-12%
77.8 (75.4 - 81, n=3)
1%
62.3 (8.2 - 96.5, n=284)
-19%
Random Write 4KB
21
104.24
396%
164.45
683%
21.8
4%
23.26
11%
14.55
-31%
105 (20 - 164, n=11)
400%
13.6 (0.14 - 164, n=566)
-35%
Random Read 4KB
134
118.14
-12%
132.27
-1%
137
2%
110.46
-18%
122.48
-9%
139 (132 - 147, n=11)
4%
34.9 (1.59 - 173, n=566)
-74%
Sequential Write 256KB
196
195.82
0%
208.72
6%
201.4
3%
176.45
-10%
205.85
5%
201 (192 - 212, n=11)
3%
73.2 (2.99 - 228, n=566)
-63%
Sequential Read 256KB
805
709.11
-12%
732.46
-9%
725.6
-10%
695.15
-14%
796.96
-1%
771 (699 - 832, n=11)
-4%
214 (12.1 - 832, n=566)
-73%
Asphalt 9: Legends
 InstellingenWaarde
 High Quality30 fps
 Standard / low30 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
PUBG Mobile
 InstellingenWaarde
 Smooth40 fps
 HD40 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Arena of Valor
 InstellingenWaarde
 min60 fps
 high HD60 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Max. Belasting
 40.3 °C41.2 °C39.9 °C 
 41.5 °C43.2 °C41.2 °C 
 42.6 °C45.9 °C41.5 °C 
Maximum: 45.9 °C
Gemiddelde: 41.9 °C
37.1 °C42.2 °C40.3 °C
37.8 °C43 °C40.6 °C
39.1 °C47 °C41.9 °C
Maximum: 47 °C
Gemiddelde: 41 °C
Stroomadapter (max.)  43.8 °C | Kamertemperatuur 22.3 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.341.52525.6313125.733.24027.429.2503738.36323.323.68021.424.110021.725.112519.933.216017.439.9200174725016.450.131514.551.340014.256.750014.156.963012.655.580012.558.510001259.9125011.860.9160011.662.4200011.463.9250011.358.8315011.456.1400011.159.7500011.258630011.356.7800011.259.41000011.358.41250011.355.71600011.350.9SPL54.565.56767.167.365.824.171.6N9.618.919.520.221.617.80.629median 11.8Samsung Galaxy Note 9median 56.7Delta1.74.531.641.625.437.825.337.432.933.833.63831.632.328.432.32738.220.843.82249.321.351.820.852.121.253.619.454.219.562.417.765.417.965.117.866.317.365.817.468.416.767.717.267.818.270.417.971.317.669.817.77117.871.317.965.318.162.818.257.63080.11.348.9median 17.9Apple iPhone 8 Plusmedian 65.31.37.3hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (71.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 10% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 88% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple iPhone 8 Plus audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 17% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4000 mAh
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2691 mAh
HTC U12 Plus
3500 mAh
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
4000 mAh
OnePlus 6
3300 mAh
LG G7 ThinQ
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3300 mAh
Average Samsung Exynos 9810
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
6%
-3%
25%
29%
3%
30%
26%
22%
Idle Minimum *
0.9
0.72
20%
0.77
14%
0.85
6%
0.6
33%
1.16
-29%
0.73
19%
0.743 (0.65 - 0.9, n=3)
17%
0.872 (0.2 - 3.4, n=587)
3%
Idle Average *
1.9
2.45
-29%
2.18
-15%
1.15
39%
1
47%
1.98
-4%
1.44
24%
1.22 (0.81 - 1.9, n=3)
36%
1.703 (0.6 - 6.2, n=586)
10%
Idle Maximum *
3.7
2.52
32%
2.21
40%
1.23
67%
1.6
57%
2.07
44%
1.53
59%
1.903 (0.92 - 3.7, n=3)
49%
1.968 (0.74 - 6.6, n=587)
47%
Load Average *
5.3
3.84
28%
6.25
-18%
4.12
22%
4.3
19%
4.51
15%
4.56
14%
4.88 (4.58 - 5.3, n=3)
8%
3.99 (0.8 - 10.8, n=581)
25%
Load Maximum *
7.6
9.02
-19%
10.16
-34%
8.42
-11%
8.6
-13%
8.3
-9%
5.09
33%
5.97 (5.16 - 7.6, n=3)
21%
5.63 (1.2 - 14.2, n=581)
26%

* ... kleiner is beter

Batterijduur
Inactief (zonder WLAN, minimale helderheid)
28h 07min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
13h 14min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
14h 56min
Belast (maximale helderheid)
5h 54min
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4000 mAh
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2691 mAh
HTC U12 Plus
3500 mAh
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
4000 mAh
OnePlus 6
3300 mAh
LG G7 ThinQ
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3300 mAh
Batterijduur
-13%
-33%
6%
-10%
-13%
-33%
Reader / Idle
1687
2085
24%
1452
-14%
1744
3%
1806
7%
1662
-1%
1134
-33%
H.264
896
733
-18%
464
-48%
929
4%
791
-12%
908
1%
662
-26%
WiFi v1.3
794
657
-17%
507
-36%
818
3%
762
-4%
591
-26%
474
-40%
Load
354
211
-40%
230
-35%
398
12%
246
-31%
260
-27%
246
-31%
In review: Samsung Galaxy Note 9. Review device courtesy of Samsung Germany
In review: Samsung Galaxy Note 9. Review device courtesy of Samsung Germany

Dit is de verkorte versie van het originele artikel. Het volledige, Engelse testrapport vind je hier.

Zoals niet anders verwacht levert Samsung wederom de zakelijke smartphone van het jaar. Zelfs voor eigenaren van de Note 8 kan de overstap naar de Note 9 het waard zijn. Dit heeft echter niet veel te doen met de S Pen: de nieuwe afstandsbediening functionaliteit is prettig, maar niet revolutionair. Wat belangrijker is, is dat de Galaxy Note 9 uitgerust is met een significant grotere batterij dan zijn voorganger, waarmee de smartphone nu tot enkele dagen mee kan op een lading.

Er zijn minpunten, zoals de throttling bij langduriger belasting en alle voorgeïnstalleerde bloatware. Diegene die de smartphone willen gebruiken zonder beschermende hoes zullen hun smartphone eigenlijk altijd bedekt met vingervegen vinden.

Verder is er niet veel veranderd ten opzicht van de voorganger: de camera biedt enkele nieuwe features, er is optioneel een versie met extreem veel opslagruimte en het beeldscherm is marginaal groter geworden. En over heet beeldscherm gesproken: al is de kleurweergave fabrieksaf niet optimaal, met handmatig kalibreren kan dit aanzienlijk verbeterd worden. Sterker, het beeldscherm dekt het hele sRGB- en DCI-P3-kleurbereik en zelfs gedeeltelijk het AdobeRGB-kleurbereik. Al met al is de Note 9 een droom die uitkomt voor een ieder die kleurechtheid nodig heeft.

Met de Galaxy Note 9 levert Samsung wederom een fantastisch zakelijk phablet - deze keer met een grote accu.

In elk geval, wat kan er verder nog verbeterd worden? De behuizing is extreem rigide, LTE is snel, er is een veelheid aan methodes om het scherm te unlocken en dan is er ook nog de S Pen, die momenteel geen echte competitie heeft.

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Overzichten en testrapporten over laptops en mobieltjes > Testrapporten > Kort testrapport Samsung Galaxy Note 9 Smartphone
Florian Wimmer, 2018-08-29 (Update: 2018-08-31)