Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy S8+ (Plus, SM-G955F)
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Apple iPhone 7 (Klaus I211) | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| LG G6 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 (Klaus I211) | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 93 %
iluminação com acumulador: 560 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.7 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 1.6 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99.87% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
81.57% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
92.3% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.3% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
83.2% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.13
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.2" | Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Super AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5" | Huawei Mate 9 IPS, 1920x1080, 5.9" | Apple iPhone 7 Plus IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5" | Google Pixel XL 2016 AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5" | Lenovo Moto Z AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5" | HTC U Ultra SLCD 5, 2560x1440, 5.7" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 1% | -81% | 3% | -83% | -21% | -149% | |
| Brightness middle | 560 | 554 -1% | 696 24% | 557 -1% | 402 -28% | 485 -13% | 470 -16% |
| Brightness | 562 | 552 -2% | 680 21% | 553 -2% | 408 -27% | 490 -13% | 445 -21% |
| Brightness Distribution | 93 | 96 3% | 93 0% | 97 4% | 85 -9% | 92 -1% | 88 -5% |
| Black Level * | 0.42 | 0.35 | 0.22 | ||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.7 | 1.59 6% | 4.3 -153% | 1.4 18% | 4 -135% | 2.1 -24% | 5.5 -224% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.4 | 2.56 25% | 9.4 -176% | 3.1 9% | 10.1 -197% | 5.5 -62% | 11.9 -250% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.6 | 2.01 -26% | 4.8 -200% | 1.3 19% | 3.2 -100% | 2.6 -63% | 7.6 -375% |
| Gamma | 2.13 103% | 2.01 109% | 2.33 94% | 2.21 100% | 2.19 100% | 2.23 99% | 2.2 100% |
| CCT | 6435 101% | 6321 103% | 7255 90% | 6667 97% | 7037 92% | 6843 95% | 7454 87% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 81.57 | 82.12 1% | 63.1 -23% | 88.14 8% | |||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99.87 | 99.98 0% | 99.83 0% | 100 0% | |||
| Contrast | 1657 | 1591 | 2136 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 250 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 250 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 250 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 8719 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 1.2 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 11 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 5.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 2.8 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 14 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Geekbench 4.4 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| LG G6 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| LG G6 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| GFXBench | |
| on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| 1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| PCMark for Android | |
| Work performance score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Lightmark - 1920x1080 1080p (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| LG G6 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Vellamo 3.x - Browser (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| HTC U Ultra | |
| LG G6 | |
| Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
* ... smaller is better
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge | Sony Xperia XZ | HTC U Ultra | Google Pixel XL 2016 | Lenovo Moto Z | Huawei Mate 9 | Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -16% | -45% | -12% | -40% | 53% | -32% | ||
| Sequential Read 256KB | 788 | 487.3 -38% | 281 -64% | 423.9 -46% | 258.2 -67% | 439.7 -44% | 594 -25% | |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 194.2 | 145.1 -25% | 138 -29% | 164.7 -15% | 83.4 -57% | 168.3 -13% | 142.9 -26% | |
| Random Read 4KB | 127.2 | 86.7 -32% | 71.5 -44% | 84.2 -34% | 87.7 -31% | 117.2 -8% | 94.7 -26% | |
| Random Write 4KB | 15.27 | 15.79 3% | 10.5 -31% | 13.7 -10% | 14.56 -5% | 74.9 391% | 8.77 -43% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 71.1 | 76.4 7% | 33.5 -53% | 82.8 16% | 78.5 10% | 54 -24% | ||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 57.2 | 50.4 -12% | 29.8 -48% | 67.6 18% | 45.64 -20% | 29.53 -48% | ||
| PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1 | -50% | -27% | -18% | 38% | 55% | |||
| Disk Tests | 92548 | 36364 -61% | 44706 -52% | 68378 -26% | 117939 27% | 48907 -47% | ||
| Memory Tests | 9844 | 6136 -38% | 9673 -2% | 8912 -9% | 14580 48% | 25299 157% | ||
| BaseMark OS II | ||||||||
| Memory | 3135 | 2072 -34% | 1434 -54% | 1581 -50% | 1677 -47% | 2190 -30% | 3850 23% | 1319 -58% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -33% /
-26% | -50% /
-46% | -31% /
-17% | -38% /
-37% | 2% /
28% | 10% /
-10% | -2% /
17% |
| Asphalt 8: Airborne | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| high | 30 fps | ||
| very low | 30 fps | ||
| Dead Trigger 2 | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| high | 30 fps | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.7 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 36 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 42% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 61% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 32% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 41% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 60% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Teufel Boomster audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (93.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(+) | good bass - only 2.9% away from median
(+) | bass is linear (3.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (1.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (8.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 8% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 2% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0.02 / 0.13 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.68 / 1.13 / 1.16 Watt |
| Carga |
4.69 / 5.24 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus 3500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge 3600 mAh | LG G6 3300 mAh | HTC U Ultra 3000 mAh | Google Pixel XL 2016 3450 mAh | Apple iPhone 7 Plus 2915 mAh | Huawei Mate 9 4000 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -16% | -33% | -77% | -1% | -50% | -50% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.68 | 0.63 7% | 0.62 9% | 1 -47% | 0.53 22% | 0.77 -13% | 0.78 -15% |
| Idle Average * | 1.13 | 1.1 3% | 1.43 -27% | 2.41 -113% | 1.07 5% | 2.04 -81% | 2.13 -88% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.16 | 1.56 -34% | 1.48 -28% | 2.46 -112% | 1.12 3% | 2.24 -93% | 2.17 -87% |
| Load Average * | 4.69 | 5.95 -27% | 5.52 -18% | 6.8 -45% | 5.53 -18% | 4.69 -0% | 6.32 -35% |
| Load Maximum * | 5.24 | 6.7 -28% | 10.47 -100% | 8.9 -70% | 6.26 -19% | 8.66 -65% | 6.49 -24% |
* ... smaller is better
| PCMark for Android - Work 2.0 battery life | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus 3500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge 3600 mAh | HTC U Ultra 3000 mAh | Google Pixel XL 2016 3450 mAh | LG G6 3300 mAh | Huawei Mate 9 4000 mAh | Sony Xperia XZ 2900 mAh | Lenovo Moto Z 2600 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 18% | -17% | -24% | 1% | 2% | -33% | -11% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1565 | 1663 6% | 1568 0% | 1333 -15% | 1789 14% | 1538 -2% | 1125 -28% | 1371 -12% |
| H.264 | 742 | 914 23% | 605 -18% | 505 -32% | 779 5% | 947 28% | 502 -32% | 724 -2% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 736 | 732 -1% | 546 -26% | 505 -31% | 692 -6% | 758 3% | 438 -40% | 407 -45% |
| Load | 275 | 392 43% | 214 -22% | 230 -16% | 252 -8% | 219 -20% | 187 -32% | 320 16% |
Pro
Contra
O Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus é um excelente smartphone, que não revela falhas muito sérias. O novo design quase sem bordas tem um belo visual nas fotos, mas é ainda mais impressionante nas nossas mãos. O painel infinity convence em todos os aspectos: precisão de cores, luminância e refletividade. No entanto, o desempenho do novo Samsung Exynos 8895 também é excelente e inclusive pode competir com o chip A10 da Apple.
A conectividade do Galaxy S8 Plus também não merece crítica alguma. A qualidade da voz é boa, e você recebe o muito veloz Wi-Fi, bem como o Gigabit LTE. No entanto, este último poderia cobrir mais frequências, e você pode ter problemas se viaja muito para os EUA ou Asia. As restrições locais do fabricante são irritantes, e também não existe um modelo dual-SIM na Europa,.
O Samsung Galaxy S8+ oferece muitos recursos de gama alta, uma câmera realmente boa, e ótimas durações da bateria. Não há muito reclamos sobre o smartphone depois de nossa análise.
Gostaríamos de ver mais opções para clientes, no geral. A versão de 128 GB não estará disponível na Europa, o qual também acontece com algumas cores.
A Samsung também implementa muitos recursos de segurança. No entanto, você pode enganar facilmente o reconhecimento facial, portanto, recomendamos que não o utilize. O leitor de digitais na parte traseira também é difícil de encontrar.
Em resumo, a Samsung desenvolveu um ótimo smartphone, que convence com o seu ótimo design, ainda possui uma câmera excepcional, muito boas durações da bateria e uma magnífica tela sem bordas. Somente o alto preço sobre o menor modelo S8 é bastante alto.
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
- 04/13/2017 v6 (old)
Daniel Schmidt
Price comparison
