Notebookcheck

Testrapport Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) Smartphone

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, 27-12-2018

Vier samenwerkend? Het unieke verkoopargument van de Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) is de hoofdcamera met in totaal 4 lenzen. Toch kon de middenklasse smartphone ons ook op andere vlakken verrassen, en smartphones uit Samsungs S-serie bijhouden.

Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Galaxy Serie)
Grafische kaart
Qualcomm Adreno 512
Geheugen
6144 MB 
Beeldscherm
6.3 inch 18.5:9, 2220 x 1080 pixel 392 PPI, capacitief, Super AMOLED, OLED, glimmend: ja
Opslag
128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 109 GB beschikbaar
Verbindingen
1 USB 2.0, Audio Verbindingen: 3.5mm aansluiting, Card Reader: MicroSD max. 512 GB (FAT, FAT32, exFAT), 1 Vingerafdruklezer, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensoren: versnellingssensor, nabijheidssensor, kompas, gyroscoop, USB Type-C, Miracast, OTG
Netwerkmogelijkheden
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM bands GSM 850 MHz, GSM 900 MHz, DCS 1800 MHz, PCS 1900 MHz; UMTS bands B1 (2100), B2 (1900), B4 (AWS), B5 (850), B8 (900); LTE bands B1 (2100), B2 (1900), B3 (1800), B4 (AWS), B5 (850), B7 (2600), B8 (900), B12 (700), B13 (700), B17 (700), B20 (800), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Afmetingen
hoogte x breedte x diepte (in mm): 7.8 x 162.5 x 77
Batterij
3800 mAh Lithium-Polymer, Gesprekstijd 3G (volgens fabrikant): 23 h
Besturingssysteem
Android 8.0 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 24 MPix Quad-camera: 24MP (f/1.7) 8MP (f/2.4, 12mm) 10MP (f/2.4,2x optische zoom) 5MP (f/2.2)
Secondary Camera: 24 MPix f/2.0
Bijkomende functionaliteiten
Luidsprekers: mono luidspreker, Toetsenbord: virtueel, modulaire stroomadapter, USB-kabel, in-oor headset, Experience UI 9.0, 24 Maanden Garantie, SAR value hoofd : 0.351 W/Kg, SAR value lichaam: 1.587 W/Kg , fanless
Gewicht
183 g, Voeding: 48 g
Prijs
600 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)

Size Comparison

162.5 mm 77 mm 7.8 mm 183 g158.4 mm 75.64 mm 9.55 mm 186 g157.5 mm 74.8 mm 8.2 mm 185 g155.5 mm 75.2 mm 8.8 mm 182 g153.2 mm 71.9 mm 7.9 mm 162 g150.7 mm 72.3 mm 8.35 mm 168 g149.1 mm 70.8 mm 7.65 mm 165 g147.7 mm 68.7 mm 8.5 mm 163 g
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
675 (min: 630, max: 704) MBit/s ∼100% +16%
LG G7 ThinQ
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
656 MBit/s ∼97% +12%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
652 MBit/s ∼97% +12%
Huawei P20
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
637 MBit/s ∼94% +9%
OnePlus 6T
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
629 (min: 621, max: 638) MBit/s ∼93% +8%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Adreno 512, 660, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
584 (min: 557, max: 605) MBit/s ∼87%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
281 MBit/s ∼42% -52%
Nokia 7 Plus
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
247 MBit/s ∼37% -58%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=348)
217 MBit/s ∼32% -63%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
LG G7 ThinQ
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
651 MBit/s ∼100% +128%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
647 (min: 598, max: 665) MBit/s ∼99% +127%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
519 MBit/s ∼80% +82%
OnePlus 6T
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
474 (min: 241, max: 497) MBit/s ∼73% +66%
Huawei P20
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
397 MBit/s ∼61% +39%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
346 MBit/s ∼53% +21%
Nokia 7 Plus
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
307 MBit/s ∼47% +8%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Adreno 512, 660, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
285 (min: 249, max: 304) MBit/s ∼44%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=348)
209 MBit/s ∼32% -27%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø583 (557-605)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø285 (249-304)
GPS Garmin Edge500
GPS Garmin Edge500
GPS Garmin Edge500
GPS Garmin Edge500
GPS Garmin Edge500
GPS Garmin Edge500
GPS Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
GPS Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
GPS Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
GPS Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
GPS Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
GPS Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
24 MP camera
24 MP camera
2x zoom
2x zoom
8 MP ultra wide-angle camera
8 MP ultra wide-angle camera
24 MP camera
24 MP camera
2x zoom
2x zoom
8 MP ultra wide-angle camera
8 MP ultra wide-angle camera
Automatic mode
Automatic mode
Live focus
Live focus
Automatic mode
Automatic mode
Live focus
Live focus
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)

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
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018)
552
cd/m²
554
cd/m²
555
cd/m²
539
cd/m²
553
cd/m²
555
cd/m²
548
cd/m²
557
cd/m²
560
cd/m²
Helderheidsverdeling
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 560 cd/m² Gemiddelde: 552.6 cd/m² Minimum: 2.12 cd/m²
Helderheidsverdeling: 96 %
Helderheid in Batterij-modus: 553 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Zwart: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.2 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 1.7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.4
97% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.06
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
OLED, 2220x1080, 6.3
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
IPS, 2246x1080, 6.18
OnePlus 6T
Optic AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.41
Samsung Galaxy S9
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 5.8
Huawei P20
LTPS, 2240x1080, 5.8
LG G7 ThinQ
IPS, 3120x1440, 6.1
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
LTPS, 2160x1080, 5.65
Nokia 7 Plus
IPS, 2160x1080, 6
Screen
-50%
-8%
9%
28%
-57%
-84%
-57%
Brightness middle
553
489
-12%
437
-21%
529
-4%
753
36%
974
76%
675
22%
458
-17%
Brightness
553
486
-12%
442
-20%
527
-5%
748
35%
975
76%
650
18%
463
-16%
Brightness Distribution
96
93
-3%
95
-1%
96
0%
96
0%
96
0%
92
-4%
92
-4%
Black Level *
0.34
0.37
0.49
0.46
0.22
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.2
3.8
-73%
2.21
-0%
1.4
36%
1.3
41%
5.4
-145%
5.9
-168%
4
-82%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
5.1
7.1
-39%
4.27
16%
4
22%
2.3
55%
13.1
-157%
9.5
-86%
7.4
-45%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.7
4.4
-159%
2.1
-24%
1.6
6%
1.7
-0%
5
-194%
6.6
-288%
4.7
-176%
Gamma
2.06 107%
2.22 99%
2.307 95%
2.16 102%
2.18 101%
2.31 95%
2.36 93%
2.19 100%
CCT
6434 101%
7213 90%
6353 102%
6358 102%
66.76 9736%
7480 87%
7846 83%
7425 88%
Contrast
1438
2035
1988
1467
2082

* ... 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 250 Hz ≤ 99 % helderheid instelling

Het backlight van het scherm flikkert aan 250 Hz (hoogstwaarschijnlijk met PWM - Pulse-Width Modulation) aan een helderheid van 99 % en lager. Boven deze helderheid zou er geen flickering / PWM mogen optreden.

De frequentie van 250 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: 52 % van alle geteste toestellen maakten geen gebruik van PWM om de schermhelderheid te verlagen. Als het wel werd gebruikt, werd een gemiddelde van 9868 (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
4 ms ... stijging ↗ en daling ↘ gecombineerd↗ 2 ms stijging
↘ 2 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. » 1 % van alle toestellen zijn beter.
Dit betekent dat de gemeten responstijd beter is dan het gemiddelde (25.5 ms) van alle geteste toestellen.
       Responstijd 50% Grijs naar 80% Grijs
4.8 ms ... stijging ↗ en daling ↘ gecombineerd↗ 2.4 ms stijging
↘ 2.4 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 0.9 (minimum) tot 636 (maximum) ms. » 1 % van alle toestellen zijn beter.
Dit betekent dat de gemeten responstijd beter is dan het gemiddelde (40.8 ms) van alle geteste toestellen.
Geekbench 4.3
Compute RenderScript Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
5542 Points ∼39%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
14369 Points ∼100% +159%
OnePlus 6T
13341 Points ∼93% +141%
Samsung Galaxy S9
6219 Points ∼43% +12%
LG G7 ThinQ
13497 Points ∼94% +144%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
5688 Points ∼40% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (4983 - 5811, n=9)
5524 Points ∼38% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (1077 - 21070, n=238)
4591 Points ∼32% -17%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
5826 Points ∼63%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
9182 Points ∼100% +58%
OnePlus 6T
8995 Points ∼98% +54%
Samsung Galaxy S9
8786 Points ∼96% +51%
Huawei P20
6557 Points ∼71% +13%
LG G7 ThinQ
9029 Points ∼98% +55%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
5856 Points ∼64% +1%
Nokia 7 Plus
5867 Points ∼64% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (4895 - 5913, n=11)
5694 Points ∼62% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (1634 - 11598, n=290)
4408 Points ∼48% -24%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
1601 Points ∼43%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2468 Points ∼67% +54%
OnePlus 6T
2384 Points ∼65% +49%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3688 Points ∼100% +130%
Huawei P20
1886 Points ∼51% +18%
LG G7 ThinQ
2448 Points ∼66% +53%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1579 Points ∼43% -1%
Nokia 7 Plus
1646 Points ∼45% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1431 - 1646, n=11)
1598 Points ∼43% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (590 - 4824, n=291)
1293 Points ∼35% -19%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
5789 Points ∼68%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
8101 Points ∼95% +40%
OnePlus 6T
8487 Points ∼100% +47%
Samsung Galaxy S9
5291 Points ∼62% -9%
Huawei P20
7002 Points ∼83% +21%
LG G7 ThinQ
7717 Points ∼91% +33%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
5965 Points ∼70% +3%
Nokia 7 Plus
6077 Points ∼72% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (5789 - 6187, n=10)
6022 Points ∼71% +4%
Average of class Smartphone (2828 - 9868, n=301)
4744 Points ∼56% -18%
Work performance score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
6338 Points ∼60%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
9664 Points ∼91% +52%
OnePlus 6T
10590 Points ∼100% +67%
Samsung Galaxy S9
5736 Points ∼54% -9%
Huawei P20
8700 Points ∼82% +37%
LG G7 ThinQ
9503 Points ∼90% +50%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
6332 Points ∼60% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
6825 Points ∼64% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (6274 - 7026, n=10)
6654 Points ∼63% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (3977 - 13531, n=469)
5176 Points ∼49% -18%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
2774 Points ∼75%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2257 Points ∼61% -19%
OnePlus 6T
3681 Points ∼100% +33%
Samsung Galaxy S9
2590 Points ∼70% -7%
Huawei P20
2762 Points ∼75% 0%
LG G7 ThinQ
3416 Points ∼93% +23%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2615 Points ∼71% -6%
Nokia 7 Plus
2789 Points ∼76% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (2121 - 2797, n=10)
2654 Points ∼72% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (939 - 4439, n=316)
1762 Points ∼48% -36%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
1268 Points ∼22%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
4468 Points ∼76% +252%
OnePlus 6T
5877 Points ∼100% +363%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3697 Points ∼63% +192%
Huawei P20
2597 Points ∼44% +105%
LG G7 ThinQ
5322 Points ∼91% +320%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1268 Points ∼22% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
1239 Points ∼21% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1134 - 1268, n=10)
1235 Points ∼21% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (138 - 8206, n=316)
1492 Points ∼25% +18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
1433 Points ∼28%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3669 Points ∼71% +156%
OnePlus 6T
5189 Points ∼100% +262%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3376 Points ∼65% +136%
Huawei P20
2632 Points ∼51% +84%
LG G7 ThinQ
4735 Points ∼91% +230%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1432 Points ∼28% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
1441 Points ∼28% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1270 - 1442, n=10)
1403 Points ∼27% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (170 - 5200, n=319)
1393 Points ∼27% -3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
2645 Points ∼78%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2832 Points ∼84% +7%
OnePlus 6T
3374 Points ∼100% +28%
Samsung Galaxy S9
2650 Points ∼79% 0%
Huawei P20
2896 Points ∼86% +9%
LG G7 ThinQ
3109 Points ∼92% +18%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2756 Points ∼82% +4%
Nokia 7 Plus
2768 Points ∼82% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (2238 - 2815, n=10)
2700 Points ∼80% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (375 - 4493, n=332)
1731 Points ∼51% -35%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
1757 Points ∼21%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
6898 Points ∼82% +293%
OnePlus 6T
8397 Points ∼100% +378%
Samsung Galaxy S9
4843 Points ∼58% +176%
Huawei P20
3683 Points ∼44% +110%
LG G7 ThinQ
7882 Points ∼94% +349%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2024 Points ∼24% +15%
Nokia 7 Plus
1980 Points ∼24% +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1734 - 2033, n=10)
1934 Points ∼23% +10%
Average of class Smartphone (131 - 14951, n=332)
2053 Points ∼24% +17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
1898 Points ∼30%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
5230 Points ∼83% +176%
OnePlus 6T
6310 Points ∼100% +232%
Samsung Galaxy S9
4091 Points ∼65% +116%
Huawei P20
3463 Points ∼55% +82%
LG G7 ThinQ
5877 Points ∼93% +210%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2151 Points ∼34% +13%
Nokia 7 Plus
2114 Points ∼34% +11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1887 - 2151, n=10)
2055 Points ∼33% +8%
Average of class Smartphone (159 - 7856, n=333)
1743 Points ∼28% -8%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
2073 Points ∼59%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2528 Points ∼71% +22%
OnePlus 6T
3537 Points ∼100% +71%
Samsung Galaxy S9
2486 Points ∼70% +20%
Huawei P20
2795 Points ∼79% +35%
LG G7 ThinQ
3255 Points ∼92% +57%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2628 Points ∼74% +27%
Nokia 7 Plus
2749 Points ∼78% +33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1883 - 2759, n=10)
2573 Points ∼73% +24%
Average of class Smartphone (918 - 4216, n=392)
1695 Points ∼48% -18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
1185 Points ∼23%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
4746 Points ∼91% +301%
OnePlus 6T
5241 Points ∼100% +342%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3553 Points ∼68% +200%
Huawei P20
3040 Points ∼58% +157%
LG G7 ThinQ
5006 Points ∼96% +322%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1196 Points ∼23% +1%
Nokia 7 Plus
1161 Points ∼22% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1061 - 1201, n=10)
1173 Points ∼22% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 5246, n=394)
1222 Points ∼23% +3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
1354 Points ∼29%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3972 Points ∼84% +193%
OnePlus 6T
4734 Points ∼100% +250%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3244 Points ∼69% +140%
Huawei P20
2982 Points ∼63% +120%
LG G7 ThinQ
4471 Points ∼94% +230%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1361 Points ∼29% +1%
Nokia 7 Plus
1332 Points ∼28% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1175 - 1372, n=11)
1339 Points ∼28% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (184 - 4734, n=402)
1171 Points ∼25% -14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
2741 Points ∼79%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2720 Points ∼78% -1%
OnePlus 6T
3483 Points ∼100% +27%
Samsung Galaxy S9
2600 Points ∼75% -5%
Huawei P20
2811 Points ∼81% +3%
LG G7 ThinQ
3150 Points ∼90% +15%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2638 Points ∼76% -4%
Nokia 7 Plus
2734 Points ∼78% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (2383 - 2834, n=10)
2700 Points ∼78% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (512 - 4215, n=426)
1593 Points ∼46% -42%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
1918 Points ∼23%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
8261 Points ∼100% +331%
OnePlus 6T
8272 Points ∼100% +331%
Samsung Galaxy S9
4569 Points ∼55% +138%
Huawei P20
3550 Points ∼43% +85%
LG G7 ThinQ
7633 Points ∼92% +298%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1938 Points ∼23% +1%
Nokia 7 Plus
1895 Points ∼23% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1711 - 1938, n=10)
1891 Points ∼23% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (43 - 8312, n=426)
1658 Points ∼20% -14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
2054 Points ∼32%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
5687 Points ∼90% +177%
OnePlus 6T
6336 Points ∼100% +208%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3911 Points ∼62% +90%
Huawei P20
3354 Points ∼53% +63%
LG G7 ThinQ
5799 Points ∼92% +182%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2059 Points ∼32% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
2035 Points ∼32% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1825 - 2073, n=10)
2025 Points ∼32% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (55 - 6454, n=434)
1423 Points ∼22% -31%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
18523 Points ∼53%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
34928 Points ∼100% +89%
OnePlus 6T
35022 Points ∼100% +89%
Samsung Galaxy S9
26851 Points ∼77% +45%
Huawei P20
23046 Points ∼66% +24%
LG G7 ThinQ
27817 Points ∼79% +50%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
19050 Points ∼54% +3%
Nokia 7 Plus
20085 Points ∼57% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (15088 - 21016, n=10)
19357 Points ∼55% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (3958 - 37475, n=585)
13215 Points ∼38% -29%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
29065 Points ∼34%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
82125 Points ∼97% +183%
OnePlus 6T
84998 Points ∼100% +192%
Samsung Galaxy S9
48433 Points ∼57% +67%
Huawei P20
34146 Points ∼40% +17%
LG G7 ThinQ
80534 Points ∼95% +177%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
29306 Points ∼34% +1%
Nokia 7 Plus
29333 Points ∼35% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (25561 - 29496, n=10)
28566 Points ∼34% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (1152 - 162695, n=585)
18721 Points ∼22% -36%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
25783 Points ∼40%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
63159 Points ∼98% +145%
OnePlus 6T
64534 Points ∼100% +150%
Samsung Galaxy S9
41093 Points ∼64% +59%
Huawei P20
30845 Points ∼48% +20%
LG G7 ThinQ
56669 Points ∼88% +120%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
26175 Points ∼41% +2%
Nokia 7 Plus
26610 Points ∼41% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (22145 - 26731, n=10)
25808 Points ∼40% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 77599, n=586)
15739 Points ∼24% -39%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
46 fps ∼30%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
150 fps ∼99% +226%
OnePlus 6T
152 fps ∼100% +230%
Samsung Galaxy S9
144 fps ∼95% +213%
Huawei P20
125 fps ∼82% +172%
LG G7 ThinQ
144 fps ∼95% +213%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
46 fps ∼30% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
50 fps ∼33% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (43 - 51, n=10)
48.2 fps ∼32% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 251, n=609)
32.5 fps ∼21% -29%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
50 fps ∼83%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
60 fps ∼100% +20%
OnePlus 6T
60 fps ∼100% +20%
Samsung Galaxy S9
60 fps ∼100% +20%
Huawei P20
59 fps ∼98% +18%
LG G7 ThinQ
60 fps ∼100% +20%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
51 fps ∼85% +2%
Nokia 7 Plus
48 fps ∼80% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (42 - 52, n=10)
47.8 fps ∼80% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=612)
25.9 fps ∼43% -48%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
23 fps ∼32%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
71 fps ∼97% +209%
OnePlus 6T
59 fps ∼81% +157%
Samsung Galaxy S9
73 fps ∼100% +217%
Huawei P20
59 fps ∼81% +157%
LG G7 ThinQ
63 fps ∼86% +174%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
23 fps ∼32% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
23 fps ∼32% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (20 - 23, n=10)
22.3 fps ∼31% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 132, n=530)
17.6 fps ∼24% -23%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
21 fps ∼36%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
58 fps ∼98% +176%
OnePlus 6T
59 fps ∼100% +181%
Samsung Galaxy S9
45 fps ∼76% +114%
Huawei P20
56 fps ∼95% +167%
LG G7 ThinQ
41 fps ∼69% +95%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
22 fps ∼37% +5%
Nokia 7 Plus
22 fps ∼37% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (19 - 23, n=10)
21.3 fps ∼36% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 115, n=534)
16.7 fps ∼28% -20%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
15 fps ∼25%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
35 fps ∼59% +133%
OnePlus 6T
59 fps ∼100% +293%
Samsung Galaxy S9
46 fps ∼78% +207%
Huawei P20
39 fps ∼66% +160%
LG G7 ThinQ
51 fps ∼86% +240%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
15 fps ∼25% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
14 fps ∼24% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (13 - 15, n=10)
14.5 fps ∼25% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (2.6 - 88, n=391)
14.9 fps ∼25% -1%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
14 fps ∼26%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
54 fps ∼100% +286%
OnePlus 6T
53 fps ∼98% +279%
Samsung Galaxy S9
24 fps ∼44% +71%
Huawei P20
39 fps ∼72% +179%
LG G7 ThinQ
26 fps ∼48% +86%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
14 fps ∼26% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
15 fps ∼28% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (12 - 15, n=11)
13.7 fps ∼25% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (3.5 - 110, n=394)
14.3 fps ∼26% +2%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
3 fps ∼14%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
22 fps ∼100% +633%
OnePlus 6T
22 fps ∼100% +633%
LG G7 ThinQ
13 fps ∼59% +333%
Nokia 7 Plus
5.2 fps ∼24% +73%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (3 - 6.3, n=5)
4.88 fps ∼22% +63%
Average of class Smartphone (0.61 - 59, n=97)
9.25 fps ∼42% +208%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
4.8 fps ∼34%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
14 fps ∼100% +192%
OnePlus 6T
14 fps ∼100% +192%
LG G7 ThinQ
14 fps ∼100% +192%
Nokia 7 Plus
3.2 fps ∼23% -33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (3.2 - 4.8, n=5)
3.52 fps ∼25% -27%
Average of class Smartphone (0.21 - 31, n=97)
6.32 fps ∼45% +32%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
7.5 fps ∼22%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
31 fps ∼91% +313%
OnePlus 6T
34 fps ∼100% +353%
LG G7 ThinQ
20 fps ∼59% +167%
Nokia 7 Plus
8.2 fps ∼24% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (7.5 - 9.7, n=5)
8.22 fps ∼24% +10%
Average of class Smartphone (1.4 - 59, n=97)
13.8 fps ∼41% +84%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
8.6 fps ∼23%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
32 fps ∼86% +272%
OnePlus 6T
37 fps ∼100% +330%
LG G7 ThinQ
37 fps ∼100% +330%
Nokia 7 Plus
8.6 fps ∼23% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (8.5 - 8.7, n=5)
8.6 fps ∼23% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (0.77 - 63, n=96)
15.1 fps ∼41% +76%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
9.1 fps ∼26%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
35 fps ∼100% +285%
OnePlus 6T
35 fps ∼100% +285%
Samsung Galaxy S9
28 fps ∼80% +208%
Huawei P20
23 fps ∼66% +153%
LG G7 ThinQ
33 fps ∼94% +263%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
9.1 fps ∼26% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
8.3 fps ∼24% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (8.1 - 9.1, n=10)
8.88 fps ∼25% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (9 - 54, n=321)
10.1 fps ∼29% +11%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
8.3 fps ∼25%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
33 fps ∼100% +298%
OnePlus 6T
31 fps ∼94% +273%
Samsung Galaxy S9
14 fps ∼42% +69%
Huawei P20
23 fps ∼70% +177%
LG G7 ThinQ
17 fps ∼52% +105%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
8.6 fps ∼26% +4%
Nokia 7 Plus
9.1 fps ∼28% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (7.5 - 9.8, n=11)
8.58 fps ∼26% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (9.4 - 58, n=324)
9.12 fps ∼28% +10%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
140878 Points ∼48%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
263165 Points ∼89% +87%
OnePlus 6T
294488 Points ∼100% +109%
Samsung Galaxy S9
243861 Points ∼83% +73%
Huawei P20
200756 Points ∼68% +43%
LG G7 ThinQ
256276 Points ∼87% +82%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
140875 Points ∼48% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
141701 Points ∼48% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (116346 - 143551, n=10)
137699 Points ∼47% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (41483 - 348178, n=213)
121109 Points ∼41% -14%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
116969 Points ∼51%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
227026 Points ∼99% +94%
OnePlus 6T
228939 Points ∼100% +96%
Samsung Galaxy S9
217950 Points ∼95% +86%
Huawei P20
179393 Points ∼78% +53%
LG G7 ThinQ
223464 Points ∼98% +91%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
115834 Points ∼51% -1%
Nokia 7 Plus
117165 Points ∼51% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (110680 - 120479, n=10)
117216 Points ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 273655, n=428)
79983 Points ∼35% -32%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
1105 Points ∼79%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
1296 Points ∼93% +17%
OnePlus 6T
1398 Points ∼100% +27%
Samsung Galaxy S9
1099 Points ∼79% -1%
Huawei P20
1313 Points ∼94% +19%
LG G7 ThinQ
1374 Points ∼98% +24%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1146 Points ∼82% +4%
Nokia 7 Plus
1101 Points ∼79% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1027 - 1146, n=10)
1092 Points ∼78% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1731, n=542)
714 Points ∼51% -35%
Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
2332 Points ∼29%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
7945 Points ∼100% +241%
OnePlus 6T
7969 Points ∼100% +242%
Samsung Galaxy S9
6373 Points ∼80% +173%
Huawei P20
3697 Points ∼46% +59%
LG G7 ThinQ
7906 Points ∼99% +239%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2279 Points ∼29% -2%
Nokia 7 Plus
2298 Points ∼29% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1970 - 2332, n=10)
2257 Points ∼28% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 15969, n=542)
1806 Points ∼23% -23%
Memory (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
2393 Points ∼55%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3239 Points ∼75% +35%
OnePlus 6T
4344 Points ∼100% +82%
Samsung Galaxy S9
2669 Points ∼61% +12%
Huawei P20
4154 Points ∼96% +74%
LG G7 ThinQ
3744 Points ∼86% +56%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2494 Points ∼57% +4%
Nokia 7 Plus
2503 Points ∼58% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1737 - 2799, n=10)
2360 Points ∼54% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 6283, n=542)
1328 Points ∼31% -45%
System (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
5063 Points ∼62%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
6506 Points ∼80% +29%
OnePlus 6T
8156 Points ∼100% +61%
Samsung Galaxy S9
6234 Points ∼76% +23%
Huawei P20
5797 Points ∼71% +14%
LG G7 ThinQ
8070 Points ∼99% +59%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
5048 Points ∼62% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
4976 Points ∼61% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (3745 - 5282, n=10)
4957 Points ∼61% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 12202, n=542)
2662 Points ∼33% -47%
Overall (sorteer op waarde)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
2364 Points ∼53%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3838 Points ∼86% +62%
OnePlus 6T
4458 Points ∼100% +89%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3285 Points ∼74% +39%
Huawei P20
3288 Points ∼74% +39%
LG G7 ThinQ
4257 Points ∼95% +80%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2394 Points ∼54% +1%
Nokia 7 Plus
2369 Points ∼53% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (1905 - 2428, n=11)
2314 Points ∼52% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 6097, n=546)
1319 Points ∼30% -44%

Legende

 
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Qualcomm Adreno 512, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy S9 Samsung Exynos 9810, ARM Mali-G72 MP18, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Huawei P20 HiSilicon Kirin 970, ARM Mali-G72 MP12, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
LG G7 ThinQ Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Qualcomm Adreno 512, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Nokia 7 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Qualcomm Adreno 512, 64 GB eMMC Flash
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
88.081 Points ∼100% +70%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
86.123 Points ∼98% +66%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
75.959 Points ∼86% +47%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
67.721 Points ∼77% +31%
Huawei P20 (Chrome 66.0.3359.126)
56.188 Points ∼64% +9%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
53.89 Points ∼61% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (45.3 - 55.5, n=10)
52.4 Points ∼59% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Chrome 70)
51.786 Points ∼59%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro (Chrome 67)
49.396 Points ∼56% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 273, n=467)
37.7 Points ∼43% -27%
Octane V2 - Total Score
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
16824 Points ∼100% +66%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
16720 Points ∼99% +65%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
15233 Points ∼91% +50%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
14514 Points ∼86% +43%
Huawei P20 (Chrome 66.0.3359.126)
11468 Points ∼68% +13%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
10945 Points ∼65% +8%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Chrome 70)
10145 Points ∼60%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (8463 - 10945, n=11)
10080 Points ∼60% -1%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro (Chrome 67)
9582 Points ∼57% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=603)
5838 Points ∼35% -42%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=622)
11167 ms * ∼100% -191%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro (Chrome 67)
4093.5 ms * ∼37% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (3796 - 4769, n=10)
4057 ms * ∼36% -6%
Huawei P20 (Chrome 66.0.3359.126)
3978.9 ms * ∼36% -4%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
3937.3 ms * ∼35% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Chrome 70)
3841.8 (min: 1) ms * ∼34%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
2713.6 ms * ∼24% +29%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
2484.1 ms * ∼22% +35%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
2281.6 ms * ∼20% +41%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
2077.8 ms * ∼19% +46%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
97 Points ∼100% +64%
Huawei P20
69 Points ∼71% +17%
Average of class Smartphone (24 - 161, n=84)
64.3 Points ∼66% +9%
Samsung Galaxy S9
63 Points ∼65% +7%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
63 Points ∼65% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (58 - 63, n=6)
60.7 Points ∼63% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Chrome 70)
59 Points ∼61%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro (Chrome 67)
58 Points ∼60% -2%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
260 Points ∼100% +56%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
252 Points ∼97% +51%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
223 Points ∼86% +34%
Huawei P20 (Chrome 66.0.3359.126)
182 Points ∼70% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (159 - 182, n=8)
171 Points ∼66% +2%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
168 Points ∼65% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Chrome 70)
167 Points ∼64%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
163 Points ∼63% -2%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro (Chrome 67)
159 Points ∼61% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (74 - 362, n=307)
117 Points ∼45% -30%

* ... kleiner is beter

Samsung Galaxy A9 2018Xiaomi Pocophone F1OnePlus 6TSamsung Galaxy S9Huawei P20LG G7 ThinQBQ Aquaris X2 ProNokia 7 PlusAverage 128 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
8%
27%
25%
209%
15%
-15%
-11%
82%
-35%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
59.66 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
65.58 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
10%
67.18 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
13%
62.67 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
5%
61.13 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
62.31
4%
64.9 (51.3 - 72.4, n=9)
9%
47 (19.2 - 87.1, n=355)
-21%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
73.66 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
85.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
16%
79.22 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
8%
84.72 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
15%
83.35 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
13%
82.21
12%
80.8 (73.7 - 85.4, n=9)
10%
65.2 (29.8 - 96.5, n=355)
-11%
Random Write 4KB
19.79
17.81
-10%
22
11%
23.07
17%
161.49
716%
23.26
18%
15.43
-22%
19.62
-1%
93 (19.5 - 250, n=23)
370%
17.7 (0.14 - 250, n=650)
-11%
Random Read 4KB
116.76
101.01
-13%
138.5
19%
131
12%
147.04
26%
110.46
-5%
51.25
-56%
54.65
-53%
140 (117 - 158, n=23)
20%
41 (1.59 - 173, n=650)
-65%
Sequential Write 256KB
194.65
155.57
-20%
204.4
5%
206.94
6%
193.56
-1%
176.45
-9%
204.83
5%
211.6
9%
200 (183 - 212, n=23)
3%
85.5 (2.99 - 253, n=650)
-56%
Sequential Read 256KB
426.63
705.38
65%
735.3
72%
815.43
91%
826.76
94%
695.15
63%
280.78
-34%
283.12
-34%
756 (427 - 912, n=23)
77%
240 (12.1 - 912, n=650)
-44%
PUBG Molbile
010203040Tooltip
: Ø29.8 (25-31)
Asphalt 9 Legends
0102030Tooltip
: Ø27.7 (24-30)
Max. Belasting
 33.8 °C32.8 °C29.4 °C 
 33.4 °C32.1 °C29.6 °C 
 32.8 °C32.6 °C29.5 °C 
Maximum: 33.8 °C
Gemiddelde: 31.8 °C
28.6 °C30.7 °C32 °C
29 °C29.5 °C33.4 °C
28 °C30.4 °C33 °C
Maximum: 33.4 °C
Gemiddelde: 30.5 °C
Stroomadapter (max.)  29.7 °C | Kamertemperatuur 22 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 31.8 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 33.1 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33.8 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 35.6 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 33.4 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.2 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.8392524.328.53118.619.94024.330.15033.835.26321.223.48024.82310018.525.212516.436.616017.144.520017.941.825016.850.731514.953.940015.158.750014.262.963013.966.580014.868100014.269.4125014.771.2160014.473.4200014.372.325001475.3315013.880.2400014.881500014.475.663001573.7800014.773.61000014.870.51250014.860.81600014.755SPL26.787.5N0.865.9median 14.8median 68Delta0.610.435.430.133.236.823.730.131.933.139.738.830.233.925.221.521.923.822.326.419.338.316.646.916.347.916.552.41858.715.463.715.663.114.269.614.876.314.672.614.468.414.575.214.870.814.674.114.871.614.871.115.266.614.663.815.162.114.654.415.344.927.183.40.954median 15.1median 63.71.211.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy A9 2018Xiaomi Pocophone F1
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 20% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 49% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 43% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi Pocophone F1 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 37% of all tested devices in this class were better, 14% similar, 49% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 62% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 29% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Stroomgebruik
Uit / Standbydarklight 0.02 / 0.28 Watt
Inactiefdarkmidlight 1.06 / 1.94 / 1.98 Watt
Belasting midlight 3.56 / 7.49 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
3800 mAh
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
4000 mAh
OnePlus 6T
3700 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S9
3000 mAh
Huawei P20
3400 mAh
LG G7 ThinQ
3000 mAh
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
3100 mAh
Nokia 7 Plus
3800 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 660
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-1%
8%
30%
-11%
-11%
-2%
2%
-4%
7%
Idle Minimum *
1.06
0.65
39%
0.7
34%
0.65
39%
0.67
37%
1.16
-9%
0.63
41%
0.65
39%
0.736 (0.56 - 1.2, n=9)
31%
0.882 (0.2 - 3.4, n=681)
17%
Idle Average *
1.94
1.97
-2%
1.1
43%
0.81
58%
2.05
-6%
1.98
-2%
2.16
-11%
1.76
9%
1.872 (1.4 - 2.2, n=9)
4%
1.731 (0.6 - 6.2, n=680)
11%
Idle Maximum *
1.98
2.01
-2%
2.1
-6%
0.92
54%
2.11
-7%
2.07
-5%
2.18
-10%
1.78
10%
2.2 (1.54 - 4.1, n=9)
-11%
2.01 (0.74 - 6.6, n=681)
-2%
Load Average *
3.56
4.29
-21%
4.2
-18%
4.76
-34%
6.15
-73%
4.51
-27%
4.48
-26%
4.47
-26%
4.73 (3.56 - 8.2, n=9)
-33%
4.06 (0.8 - 10.8, n=675)
-14%
Load Maximum *
7.49
9.05
-21%
8.3
-11%
5.16
31%
8.09
-8%
8.3
-11%
7.87
-5%
9.13
-22%
8.33 (5.93 - 12.2, n=9)
-11%
5.82 (1.2 - 14.2, n=675)
22%

* ... kleiner is beter

Batterijduur
Inactief (zonder WLAN, minimale helderheid)
29h 40min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
11h 29min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16h 45min
Belast (maximale helderheid)
3h 25min
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
3800 mAh
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
4000 mAh
OnePlus 6T
3700 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S9
3000 mAh
Huawei P20
3400 mAh
LG G7 ThinQ
3000 mAh
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
3100 mAh
Nokia 7 Plus
3800 mAh
Batterijduur
9%
13%
-31%
13%
-1%
-25%
-15%
Reader / Idle
1780
2088
17%
1936
9%
1182
-34%
1888
6%
1662
-7%
1374
-23%
1703
-4%
H.264
1005
936
-7%
903
-10%
609
-39%
810
-19%
908
-10%
658
-35%
706
-30%
WiFi v1.3
689
808
17%
865
26%
474
-31%
818
19%
591
-14%
605
-12%
672
-2%
Load
205
220
7%
261
27%
164
-20%
295
44%
260
27%
145
-29%
158
-23%

Pro

+ aantrekkelijk OLED-beeldscherm
+ hoge helderheid
+ 128 GB UFS opslag
+ design
+ goede selfie camera
+ quad-camera...

Contra

- ...met slechts een gemiddelde beeldkwaliteit
- hoge adviesprijs
- SoC uit 2017
- prestaties
- snelheid opslag
In review: Samsung Galaxy A9 2018. Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de.
In review: Samsung Galaxy A9 2018. Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de.

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

Met de opvallende glazen achterzijde is het uiterlijk van de Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) een waar hoogtepunt. De bouwkwaliteit is ook erg goed, al heeft ons testmodel enkele kleine foutjes. Zoals de Koreaanse fabrikant vaker dan niet doet is het nieuwste lid van de Galaxy A-serie uitgerust met een erg goed OLED-paneel. Wat betreft de kleurweergave en helderheid kan de Galaxy A9 (2018) de concurrentie aan met de topklasse. Hetzelfde kan echter niet gezegd worden van de systeemprestaties. Door alle voorgeïnstalleerde animaties voelt de middenklasse smartphone wat traag aan - de enige remedie hiertegen is om in het ontwikkelaarsmenu deze animaties uit te zetten.

De gebruikte chip laat ook te wensen over. Natuurlijk hoeven niet alle iets duurdere smartphones direct vergeleken te worden met de Xiaomi Pocophone F1, maar de Chinese fabrikant heeft wel zijn middenklasse smartphone weten uit te rusten met het huidige vlaggenschip van Qualcomm. Dat, en de adviesprijs van € 600, maakt dat Samsung in elk geval een vlaggenschip chip van vorig jaar had kunnen gebruiken - gezien de fabrikant nu ook een chip uit 2017 gebruikt.    

De Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) is een erg goede en aantrekkelijke middenklasse smartphone - maar voor de huidige winkelprijs van ongeveer € 480 zijn er betere alternatieven te koop.

Het unieke verkoopargument van de Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) - de quad camera aan de achterzijde - kan voor veel toepassingen ingezet worden, dankzij de vier verschillende lenzen. Het combineert de gebruikelijke voordelen van multi-cameras (bokeh effect, ultrabreedhoek, optische zoom) in een apparaat. Je moet echter geen aannames doen over de kwaliteit van de camera gebaseerd op de adviesprijs. De camera is erg snel, maar qua beeldkwaliteit is deze niet beter dan gemiddeld voor een middenklasse smartphone.

Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 - 22-12-2018 v6
Marcus Herbrich

Behuizing
88%
Toetsenbord
67 / 75 → 90%
Aanwijsapparaat
93%
Aansluitmogelijkheden
47 / 60 → 79%
Gewicht
90%
Batterij
96%
Beeldscherm
90%
Gaming-performance
54 / 63 → 85%
Applicatie-performance
61 / 70 → 87%
Temperatuur
94%
Luidheid
100%
Audio
71 / 91 → 78%
Camera
74%
Gemiddelde
79%
88%
Smartphone - Gewogen Gemiddelde

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Overzichten en testrapporten over laptops en mobieltjes > Testrapporten > Testrapport Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) Smartphone
Marcus Herbrich, 2018-12-27 (Update: 2018-12-27)