Notebookcheck Logo

Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus

Ajuste fino. O grande modelo da série carro-chefe da Samsung não só oferece uma tela maior, mas também oferece uma câmera dupla e mais RAM. Esta análise revela se o preço mais alto é justificado e como o Galaxy S9+ se sai, em comparação com seus concorrentes.
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Galaxy S Serie)
Processador
Samsung Exynos 9810 8 x - 2.9 GHz, Exynos M3 / Cortex-A55
Placa gráfica
ARM Mali-G72 MP18
Memória
6 GB 
, LPDDR4x
Pantalha
6.20 polegadas 18.5:9, 2960 x 1440 pixel 531 PPI, Tela táctil capacitiva, multi-touch de 10 pontos, Super AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, Brilhante: sim
Disco rígido
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, 50.1 GB livre
Conexões
1 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Conexões Audio: Conector combinado para fones e microfone (3,5 mm), Card Reader: microSD de até 400 GB (SDHC, SDXC), 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensores: escaner de iris, digitais, acelerômeter, gyro, proximidade, bússola, barômetro, ritmo cardíaco, SpO2, MST, Ant+
Funcionamento em rede
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM/GPRS/Edge (850, 900, 1800 e 1900 MHz), UMTS/HSPA+ (Band 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 34, 39) LTE Cat. 18 (Band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 66), LTE, GPS
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 8.5 x 158.1 x 73.8
Bateria
13.48 Wh, 3500 mAh Lítio-Ion, 3.85 V
Sistema Operativo
Android 8.0 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix dual camera (f/1.5-2.4, 26mm, 1/2.55", 1.4 µm, Dual Pixel PDAF) + (f/2.4, 52mm, 1/3.6", 1 µm, AF)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/1.7, 25mm, 1/3.6", 1.22 µm
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Dois alto-falantes, Teclado: virtual, cabo USB, fonte de alimentação, ferramenta SIM, fones, 2 adaptadores USB, Guia de início rápido, Samsung UI 9.0, Microsoft Apps, Galaxy App Store, 24 Meses Garantia, IP67, USB Type-C 3.1 (Gen. 1), fanless
peso
189 g, Suprimento de energia: 62 g
Preço
949 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Size Comparison

159.5 mm 73.4 mm 8.1 mm 172 g158.5 mm 74.9 mm 8.5 mm 188 g158.1 mm 73.8 mm 8.5 mm 189 g157.9 mm 76.7 mm 7.9 mm 175 g156.1 mm 75 mm 7.3 mm 162 g154.2 mm 74.5 mm 7.9 mm 178 g155.8 mm 76 mm 5.99 mm 143 g151.7 mm 75.4 mm 7.3 mm 158 g143.6 mm 70.9 mm 7.7 mm 174 g148 mm 105 mm 1 mm 1.5 g
Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
Mali-G71 MP20, Exynos 8895, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
656 MBit/s +26%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
627 (490min - 666max) MBit/s +21%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
225 MBit/s -57%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
Adreno 540, SD 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
587 MBit/s +13%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Mali-G72 MP18, Exynos 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
519 MBit/s
Apple iPhone X
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash
456 MBit/s -12%
Google Pixel 2 XL
Adreno 540, SD 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
279 MBit/s -46%
iperf3 receive AX12
Apple iPhone X
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash
939 MBit/s +44%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Mali-G72 MP18, Exynos 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
652 MBit/s
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
Adreno 540, SD 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
573 MBit/s -12%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
Mali-G71 MP20, Exynos 8895, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
368 MBit/s -44%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
355 (105min - 550max) MBit/s -46%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
338 MBit/s -48%
Google Pixel 2 XL
Adreno 540, SD 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
239 MBit/s -63%
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus

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 1Scene 2Scene 3
orginal image
click to load images
Test chart: main lens (f/2.4)
Test chart: main lens (f/2.4)
Test chart: main lens (f/1.5)
Test chart: main lens (f/1.5)
Test chart: telephoto lens (f/2.4)
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
Distribuição do brilho
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 586 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 570.7 cd/m² Minimum: 1.56 cd/m²
iluminação: 96 %
iluminação com acumulador: 565 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.3 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 1.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
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"
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 dE 2000 *
2.3
1.7
26%
1.2
48%
1.7
26%
2.7
-17%
2.5
-9%
2.1
9%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
4.8
3.4
29%
3
37%
3.6
25%
4.3
10%
5.3
-10%
3.4
29%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
1.9
1.6
16%
1.6
16%
2.4
-26%
3.3
-74%
1.7
11%
2.5
-32%
Gamma
2.16 102%
2.13 103%
2.23 99%
2.15 102%
2.36 93%
2.21 100%
2.32 95%
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)

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 (worst case, e.g., 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 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

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

Display Response Times

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
↘ 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 15 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 17 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
222290 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
165382 Points -26%
Apple iPhone X
197851 Points -11%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
177341 Points -20%
Google Pixel 2 XL
166151 Points -25%
LG V30
173749 Points -22%
HTC U11 Plus
183057 Points -18%
OnePlus 5T
172124 Points -23%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
179595 Points -19%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (214090 - 222290, n=3)
218110 Points -2%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
250577 Points
Apple iPhone X
256297 Points +2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
212278 Points -15%
Google Pixel 2 XL
204654 Points -18%
HTC U11 Plus
217442 Points -13%
OnePlus 5T
214815 Points -14%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (236552 - 250577, n=3)
243663 Points -3%
PCMark for Android
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
5822 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
5830 Points 0%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
8439 Points +45%
Google Pixel 2 XL
8258 Points +42%
LG V30
6854 Points +18%
HTC U11 Plus
7964 Points +37%
OnePlus 5T
7739 Points +33%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
8553 Points +47%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (5736 - 6571, n=4)
6022 Points +3%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
5319 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
5195 Points -2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
6932 Points +30%
Google Pixel 2 XL
6994 Points +31%
LG V30
5603 Points +5%
HTC U11 Plus
6695 Points +26%
OnePlus 5T
6595 Points +24%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
6998 Points +32%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (5184 - 5851, n=4)
5411 Points +2%
BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3302 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3301 Points 0%
Apple iPhone X
3737 Points +13%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3147 Points -5%
Google Pixel 2 XL
3351 Points +1%
LG V30
2702 Points -18%
HTC U11 Plus
3447 Points +4%
OnePlus 5T
3678 Points +11%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
3625 Points +10%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3110 - 3393, n=4)
3273 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (1196 - 11976, n=151, last 2 years)
6297 Points +91%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
6413 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
5319 Points -17%
Apple iPhone X
10281 Points +60%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
5244 Points -18%
Google Pixel 2 XL
5914 Points -8%
LG V30
4238 Points -34%
HTC U11 Plus
5926 Points -8%
OnePlus 5T
5872 Points -8%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
5918 Points -8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (5707 - 6413, n=4)
6123 Points -5%
Average of class Smartphone (2368 - 16475, n=151, last 2 years)
10163 Points +58%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
2625 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3135 Points +19%
Apple iPhone X
1219 Points -54%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
4142 Points +58%
Google Pixel 2 XL
2927 Points +12%
LG V30
2091 Points -20%
HTC U11 Plus
3376 Points +29%
OnePlus 5T
3845 Points +46%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
3652 Points +39%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2068 - 2771, n=4)
2533 Points -4%
Average of class Smartphone (962 - 12716, n=151, last 2 years)
6767 Points +158%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
6370 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
6126 Points -4%
Apple iPhone X
9248 Points +45%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3657 Points -43%
Google Pixel 2 XL
6142 Points -4%
LG V30
5949 Points -7%
HTC U11 Plus
6086 Points -4%
OnePlus 5T
6100 Points -4%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
6144 Points -4%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (6370 - 6506, n=4)
6423 Points +1%
Average of class Smartphone (1017 - 58651, n=151, last 2 years)
16908 Points +165%
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
1109 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
1163 Points +5%
Apple iPhone X
1682 Points +52%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
1234 Points +11%
Google Pixel 2 XL
1186 Points +7%
LG V30
1009 Points -9%
HTC U11 Plus
1159 Points +5%
OnePlus 5T
1329 Points +20%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
1300 Points +17%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (1099 - 1300, n=4)
1160 Points +5%
Average of class Smartphone (841 - 2145, n=151, last 2 years)
1564 Points +41%
Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3776 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
2015 Points -47%
Apple iPhone X
4265 Points +13%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
1898 Points -50%
Google Pixel 2 XL
1916 Points -49%
LG V30
1900 Points -50%
HTC U11 Plus
1935 Points -49%
OnePlus 5T
1962 Points -48%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
1911 Points -49%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3688 - 3776, n=3)
3721 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (844 - 9574, n=82, last 2 years)
5486 Points +45%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
8963 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
6695 Points -25%
Apple iPhone X
10255 Points +14%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
6792 Points -24%
Google Pixel 2 XL
6253 Points -30%
LG V30
6078 Points -32%
HTC U11 Plus
6771 Points -24%
OnePlus 5T
6670 Points -26%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
6711 Points -25%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (8786 - 8963, n=3)
8874 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (2630 - 30323, n=82, last 2 years)
15064 Points +68%
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
6202 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
8295 Points +34%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
8572 Points +38%
Google Pixel 2 XL
7568 Points +22%
LG V30
8016 Points +29%
HTC U11 Plus
7946 Points +28%
OnePlus 5T
8000 Points +29%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (6202 - 9059, n=3)
7160 Points +15%
Average of class Smartphone (5192 - 18534, n=58, last 2 years)
11998 Points +93%
3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
39745 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
29282 Points -26%
Apple iPhone X
64169 Points +61%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
30590 Points -23%
Google Pixel 2 XL
39456 Points -1%
LG V30
34139 Points -14%
HTC U11 Plus
41644 Points +5%
OnePlus 5T
42022 Points +6%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
40848 Points +3%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (29994 - 41093, n=3)
36944 Points -7%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
46610 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
33077 Points -29%
Apple iPhone X
112489 Points +141%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
34008 Points -27%
Google Pixel 2 XL
54156 Points +16%
LG V30
55271 Points +19%
HTC U11 Plus
58307 Points +25%
OnePlus 5T
58097 Points +25%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
55485 Points +19%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (36190 - 48433, n=3)
43744 Points -6%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
26226 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
20892 Points -20%
Apple iPhone X
25633 Points -2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
22629 Points -14%
Google Pixel 2 XL
20233 Points -23%
LG V30
14601 Points -44%
HTC U11 Plus
20820 Points -21%
OnePlus 5T
21348 Points -19%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
21239 Points -19%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (18756 - 26851, n=3)
23944 Points -9%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3895 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3958 Points +2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3239 Points -17%
Google Pixel 2 XL
4831 Points +24%
LG V30
4738 Points +22%
HTC U11 Plus
4982 Points +28%
OnePlus 5T
4816 Points +24%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
4969 Points +28%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3895 - 4734, n=4)
4137 Points +6%
Average of class Smartphone (812 - 7285, n=26, last 2 years)
4204 Points +8%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
4637 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
4786 Points +3%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3353 Points -28%
Google Pixel 2 XL
5856 Points +26%
LG V30
5895 Points +27%
HTC U11 Plus
6060 Points +31%
OnePlus 5T
5791 Points +25%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
6035 Points +30%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (4569 - 5586, n=4)
4905 Points +6%
Average of class Smartphone (756 - 9451, n=26, last 2 years)
4740 Points +2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
2496 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
2465 Points -1%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2896 Points +16%
Google Pixel 2 XL
2995 Points +20%
LG V30
2808 Points +13%
HTC U11 Plus
3071 Points +23%
OnePlus 5T
3031 Points +21%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
3071 Points +23%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2496 - 3087, n=4)
2675 Points +7%
Average of class Smartphone (1093 - 4349, n=26, last 2 years)
3303 Points +32%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3256 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3188 Points -2%
Apple iPhone X
3138 Points -4%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2850 Points -12%
Google Pixel 2 XL
3646 Points +12%
LG V30
3635 Points +12%
HTC U11 Plus
3732 Points +15%
OnePlus 5T
3758 Points +15%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
3713 Points +14%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3244 - 4022, n=4)
3469 Points +7%
Average of class Smartphone (286 - 17553, n=73, last 2 years)
3084 Points -5%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3582 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3479 Points -3%
Apple iPhone X
3463 Points -3%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2844 Points -21%
Google Pixel 2 XL
3872 Points +8%
LG V30
3903 Points +9%
HTC U11 Plus
3987 Points +11%
OnePlus 5T
4016 Points +12%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
3991 Points +11%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (3553 - 4422, n=4)
3808 Points +6%
Average of class Smartphone (240 - 29890, n=73, last 2 years)
3263 Points -9%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
2469 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
2466 Points 0%
Apple iPhone X
2361 Points -4%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2871 Points +16%
Google Pixel 2 XL
3028 Points +23%
LG V30
2931 Points +19%
HTC U11 Plus
3049 Points +23%
OnePlus 5T
3068 Points +24%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
2986 Points +21%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2469 - 3056, n=4)
2645 Points +7%
Average of class Smartphone (858 - 7180, n=73, last 2 years)
3286 Points +33%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
60 fps
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
58 fps -3%
Apple iPhone X
59.4 fps -1%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
60 fps 0%
Google Pixel 2 XL
59 fps -2%
LG V30
60 fps 0%
HTC U11 Plus
60 fps 0%
OnePlus 5T
60 fps 0%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
60 fps 0%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (58 - 60, n=4)
59.5 fps -1%
Average of class Smartphone (23 - 165, n=169, last 2 years)
86.3 fps +44%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
147 fps
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
104 fps -29%
Apple iPhone X
177.4 fps +21%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
112 fps -24%
Google Pixel 2 XL
112 fps -24%
LG V30
113 fps -23%
HTC U11 Plus
113 fps -23%
OnePlus 5T
113 fps -23%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
105 fps -29%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (80 - 147, n=4)
129.3 fps -12%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 791, n=169, last 2 years)
280 fps +90%
GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
45 fps
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
38 fps -16%
Apple iPhone X
58.5 fps +30%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
56 fps +24%
Google Pixel 2 XL
35 fps -22%
LG V30
35 fps -22%
HTC U11 Plus
35 fps -22%
OnePlus 5T
53 fps +18%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
36 fps -20%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (45 - 57, n=4)
48.5 fps +8%
Average of class Smartphone (6.8 - 165, n=169, last 2 years)
75.5 fps +68%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
74 fps
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
50 fps -32%
Apple iPhone X
88.2 fps +19%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
54 fps -27%
Google Pixel 2 XL
59 fps -20%
LG V30
59 fps -20%
HTC U11 Plus
60 fps -19%
OnePlus 5T
60 fps -19%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
54 fps -27%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (73 - 76, n=4)
74 fps 0%
Average of class Smartphone (12 - 482, n=169, last 2 years)
165.3 fps +123%
GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
24 fps
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
23 fps -4%
Apple iPhone X
44.1 fps +84%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
38 fps +58%
Google Pixel 2 XL
20 fps -17%
LG V30
19 fps -21%
HTC U11 Plus
21 fps -12%
OnePlus 5T
37 fps +54%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
22 fps -8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (24 - 46, n=4)
29.8 fps +24%
Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 158, n=169, last 2 years)
65.7 fps +174%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
47 fps
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
42 fps -11%
Apple iPhone X
48.9 fps +4%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
37 fps -21%
Google Pixel 2 XL
41 fps -13%
LG V30
40 fps -15%
HTC U11 Plus
41 fps -13%
OnePlus 5T
41 fps -13%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
40 fps -15%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (24 - 47, n=4)
40.5 fps -14%
Average of class Smartphone (8.3 - 341, n=169, last 2 years)
117.2 fps +149%
GFXBench
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
14 fps
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
13 fps -7%
Apple iPhone X
27.7 fps +98%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
22 fps +57%
Google Pixel 2 XL
13 fps -7%
LG V30
13 fps -7%
HTC U11 Plus
13 fps -7%
OnePlus 5T
23 fps +64%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
15 fps +7%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (14 - 25, n=4)
17 fps +21%
Average of class Smartphone (5 - 119, n=170, last 2 years)
47.8 fps +241%
1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
28 fps
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
25 fps -11%
Apple iPhone X
31.8 fps +14%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
21 fps -25%
Google Pixel 2 XL
24 fps -14%
LG V30
24 fps -14%
HTC U11 Plus
25 fps -11%
OnePlus 5T
25 fps -11%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force
25 fps -11%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (28 - 29, n=4)
28.3 fps +1%
Average of class Smartphone (3.1 - 216, n=169, last 2 years)
70.6 fps +152%
Lightmark - 1920x1080 1080p (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
35.83 fps
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
25.06 fps -30%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
21.49 fps -40%
Google Pixel 2 XL
37.71 fps +5%
HTC U11 Plus
38.71 fps +8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (34 - 35.8, n=2)
34.9 fps -3%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
1481 Points
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
1280 Points -14%
Apple iPhone X
1702 Points +15%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
788 Points -47%
Google Pixel 2 XL
853 Points -42%
HTC U11 Plus
868 Points -41%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (1436 - 1481, n=3)
1466 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (205 - 7616, n=56, last 2 years)
2316 Points +56%

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
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone X (IOS 11.1.1)
224 Points +222%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
69.6 Points
Motorola Moto Z2 Force (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)
66.7 Points -4%
OnePlus 5T (Chrome 63)
66.5 Points -4%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (62.9 - 69.6, n=4)
65.8 Points -5%
HTC U11 Plus (Chrome 63)
64.9 Points -7%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)
64.7 Points -7%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)
62.2 Points -11%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
56.6 Points -19%
LG V30 (Chrome 62)
52.9 Points -24%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years)
37161 Points +152%
Apple iPhone X (IOS 11.1.2)
35255 Points +139%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
14760 Points
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (12933 - 15233, n=4)
14397 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)
14050 Points -5%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)
12929 Points -12%
OnePlus 5T (Chrome 63)
12509 Points -15%
HTC U11 Plus (Chrome 63)
11553 Points -22%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)
11308 Points -23%
LG V30 (Chrome 62)
10506 Points -29%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
10406 Points -29%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
LG V30 (Chrome 62)
3630 ms * -76%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
3591 ms * -74%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)
3434 ms * -67%
Motorola Moto Z2 Force (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)
3175 ms * -54%
HTC U11 Plus (Chrome 63)
3132 ms * -52%
OnePlus 5T (Chrome 63)
3096 ms * -50%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2060 - 3189, n=4)
2509 ms * -22%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)
2237 ms * -9%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
2060 ms *
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years)
1568 ms * +24%
Apple iPhone X (IOS 11.1.2)
718 ms * +65%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall
Apple iPhone X (Safari Mobile 11.0)
354 Points +116%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)
194 Points +18%
OnePlus 5T (Chrome 63)
181 Points +10%
HTC U11 Plus (Chrome 63)
179 Points +9%
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (163 - 202, n=3)
176.3 Points +8%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
164 Points
Motorola Moto Z2 Force (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)
161 Points -2%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
158 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)
154 Points -6%
LG V30 (Chrome 62)
138 Points -16%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung Galaxy S9 PlusSamsung Galaxy S8 PlusLG V30HTC U11 PlusMotorola Moto Z2 ForceHuawei P10 PlusAverage 64 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-12%
-28%
77%
38%
81%
40%
523%
Sequential Read 256KB
819
788
-4%
669
-18%
728
-11%
696
-15%
733
-11%
696 ?(392 - 895, n=52)
-15%
Sequential Write 256KB
204.9
194.2
-5%
193.2
-6%
207.9
1%
213.6
4%
182.6
-11%
Random Read 4KB
129.7
127.2
-2%
78.2
-40%
132.4
2%
148.8
15%
173.1
33%
Random Write 4KB
22.74
15.27
-33%
10.21
-55%
135.7
497%
78.6
246%
149.8
559%
84.7 ?(8.77 - 208, n=52)
272%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
79.2 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
71.1 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-10%
62.8
-21%
75.4 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-5%
77.4 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
54 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-32%
68.6 ?(18 - 87.1, n=33)
-13%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
67.2 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
57.2 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-15%
47.2
-30%
51.3 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-24%
54.7 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-19%
33.61 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-50%
52.2 ?(17.1 - 71.9, n=33)
-22%
Asphalt 8: Airborne
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 high30 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Dead Trigger 2
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 high30 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Battle Bay
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 full resolution60 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
World of Tanks Blitz
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 high, 0xAA, 0xAF59 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Arena of Valor
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 high HD60 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Shadow Fight 3
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 high60 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Carga Máxima
 35.8 °C35.7 °C35.4 °C 
 35 °C35.2 °C35.1 °C 
 35 °C34.1 °C34.6 °C 
Máximo: 35.8 °C
Médio: 35.1 °C
32.2 °C36.7 °C37.9 °C
32.4 °C34.4 °C35.1 °C
32.6 °C34.3 °C33.3 °C
Máximo: 37.9 °C
Médio: 34.3 °C
alimentação elétrica  29.2 °C | Temperatura do quarto 20 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35.1 °C / 95 F, compared to the average of 32.8 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.8 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.2 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 37.9 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 22.4 °C / 72 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2028.628.22524.928.43124.621.24026.419.35030.829.16323.624.68020.223.310019.927.212517.638.916019.150.620019.149.925017.454.331516.961.540016.860.950015.163.663016.567.980015.67010001570.6125015.572.1160015.371.7200015.773.5250015.573.2315015.576.7400015.476.1500015.873.763001677.4800015.872.91000016.169.81250016.164.81600017.357.2SPL27.985.6N164.4median 16median 69.8Delta0.77.935.246.432.941.937.237.731.736.839.640.528.330.327.330.326.928.126.732.2244520.952.120.957.119.558.518.562.617.570.917.574.715.778.515.876.916.676.215.873.415.473.615.575.51679.915.880.11676.516.37416.374.916.271.416.458.216.44228.688.41.176.2median 16.4median 73.62.210.239.638.233.633.131.232.130.832.130.734.3343530.939.428.736.426.247.92651.925.354.82557.223.359.622.362.521.164.820.167.719.568.120.166.219.669.318.8731874.817.877.317.67617.675.517.773.517.873.81871.417.765.417.853.517.848.531.285.31.661.7median 19.5median 66.22.38.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy S9 PlusGoogle Pixel 2 XLApple iPhone X
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 (17.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 9% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 85% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 29% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Google Pixel 2 XL audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 25% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 67% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 45% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

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 (19% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 20% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 71% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 41% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0 / 0.09 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 0.68 / 0.95 / 1.09 Watt
Carga midlight 4.58 / 5.16 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        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

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
22h 23min
WiFi Websurfing (Samsung Browser 7.0)
8h 41min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
11h 14min
Carga (máximo brilho)
3h 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%

Pro

+ Design elegante
+ Ótima tela
+ SoC veloz
+ Armazenamento expansível
+ LTE Cat. 18
+ Alto falantes estéreo
+ IP67
+ Bom equipamento de sensores
+ USB 3.1 com DP, HDMI, e OTG
+ carregamento sem fio
+ Ótima câmera dupla
+ Dual-SIM opcional (modelo Duos)

Contra

- Sem dual-VoLTE
- Durações de bateria piores do que o antecessor
- Longo tempo de carga
- Afogamento do SoC sob carga constante
- Tempos de duração da bateria piores do que o antecessor
The Samsung Galaxy S9+ (SM-G965F) in review, courtesy of Samsung Germany.
The Samsung Galaxy S9+ (SM-G965F) in review, courtesy of Samsung Germany.

Com o Galaxy S9 Plus, a Samsung conseguiu criar novamente um ótimo smartphone que recebeu muitas melhorias sensatas, mas sem inovações reais. Os dois níveis de abertura da câmera principal são ótimos para ter e funcionar bem na vida cotidiana. A Samsung também otimizou ainda mais a qualidade da imagem. O modo Super Slow Motion não é muito mais do que um artifício para boas condições de iluminação e as imagens resultantes são adequadas apenas para redes sociais. Os emojis AR também não funcionam bem. Qualquer semelhança com o usuário é baseada principalmente na sorte. 

Seja como for, a empresa coreana entregou um ótimo produto de qualquer maneira. Um processador rápido, uma ótima tela, uma melhor posição para o leitor de impressões digitais, armazenamento que pode ser mais facilmente expandido, bons alto-falantes estéreo e proteção contra poeira e água, certamente são pontos positivos. Até mesmo uma variante dual-SIM está disponível.

O Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus é um smartphone poderoso, mas ainda tem que lutar com alguns problemas iniciais.

O smartphone Samsung é menos convincente quando se trata de tempos de duração de bateria, que são notavelmente piores do que eram para o modelo anterior. O Quick Charge também não funcionou para o nosso dispositivo de teste, de modo que precisou de mais de quatro horas para carregar totalmente em nosso teste - tempo demais. A Samsung provavelmente resolverá esses problemas com uma atualização, mas isso ainda deixa um gosto ruim na boca dos usuários que compraram este smartphone pelo preço total no início.

Se você já possui um Galaxy S8+, não há motivo suficiente para mudar agora. As diferenças no uso diário são muito pequenas para justificar a disparidade de preços.

Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus - 03/26/2018 v6 (old)
Daniel Schmidt

Acabamento
92%
Teclado
70 / 75 → 94%
Mouse
98%
Conectividade
66 / 60 → 100%
Peso
89%
Bateria
92%
Pantalha
91%
Desempenho do jogos
66 / 63 → 100%
Desempenho da aplicação
68 / 70 → 97%
Temperatura
94%
Ruído
100%
Audio
75 / 91 → 82%
Camera
95%
Médio
84%
91%
Smartphone - Médio equilibrado

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Daniel Schmidt, 2018-04- 2 (Update: 2024-11- 4)