The Samsung Galaxy S9 and S9+ Review: Exynos and Snapdragon at 960fps
by Andrei Frumusanu on March 26, 2018 10:00 AM ESTCamera - Low Light Evaluation
We move onto low light shots. This is the part where we have large expectations of the S9 as the new wider aperture and multi-frame noise reduction processing promise great improvements in quality.
[ Galaxy S9 ] - [ Galaxy S8 ] - [ Galaxy S7 ]
[ Pixel 2 XL ] - [ Pixel XL ] - [ P10 ]
[ Mate 9 ] - [ Mate 10 ] - [ G6 ] - [ V30 ]
[ iPhone 7 ] - [ iPhone 8 ] - [ iPhone 8 Plus ] - [ iPhone X ]
In this scene again to give the best apples-to-apples comparison between the devices I shot the samples at different exposure modes, focusing on different parts of the pictures.
The scene was naturally very dark and the Galaxy S9 in auto mode did a good representation of this. However this is still too dark for actual picture usages on a monitor so focusing on a darker part of the scene brought up the exposure and details in the darkness. Against the S8 the S9 gains details in the shadows but otherwise the two phones post very similar processing with the S9 being in the lead.
In terms of the competition the Pixel phones are clearly the devices to beat here. Google is able to retain a lot more details in textures as the phones use far less heavy processing. This results in a noisier picture than the Galaxy S9 but I think it’s overall better because of the detail retention. The iPhone 8 as well uses less processing and sharpening, able to retain more of the natural textures of the scene, again, at the cost of higher noise.
Which phone is best will come down to preference as the different phones have different compromises. The S9 is sharp and bright with little noise, but loses on texture detail. The Pixels and iPhones are noisier but retain better the textures of the scene.
[ Galaxy S9 ] - [ Galaxy S8 ] - [ Galaxy S7 ] - [ Pixel 2 XL ]
[ Pixel XL ] - [ P10 ] - [ Mate 9 ] - [ Mate 10 ] - [ G6 ]
[ V30 ] - [ iPhone 7 ] - [ iPhone 8 ] - [ iPhone 8 Plus ] - [ iPhone X ]
In the second low-light scene we have another challenging scenario with a lot of dark area and a few highlights.
Here the Galaxy S9 dominates the competition as it produces by far the best results. The processing style is similar to the S8 however the S9 just produces more detail and less noise. Google’s Pixel devices did not do well at all in this shot and the result is a fuzzy noise picture even though light capture and dynamic range seems adequate. The Pixel phones did manage the best colour representation of the sodium lamps, although it doesn’t rescue the end result. The new iPhones do a good job, but it’s not enough against the Galaxy S9 or even S8.
The best contender against the S9 here is in my opinion the V30 as although it produces less light than the S9, it manages to retain a great amount of detail on the bridge, at least compared to all other phones. The V30 here also sees a comparison shot with the new “Bright Mode” that was introduced with a firmware update following the MWC announcement of the V30s. This allows for 2x2 pixel binning and increased light capture, but naturally with a resulting picture which has only 1/4th of the pixels and thus much less detail.
[ Galaxy S9 ] - [ Galaxy S8 ] - [ Galaxy S7 ] - [ Pixel 2 XL ]
[ Pixel XL ] - [ P10 ] - [ Mate 9 ]
[ Mate 10 ] - [ G6 ] - [ V30 ]
[ iPhone 7 ] - [ iPhone 8 ] - [ iPhone 8 Plus ] - [ iPhone X ]
The next scenic scene has a lot more lights scattered through the frame. The Galaxy S9 again noticeably improves the sharpness over the Galaxy S8 while retaining the same colour tones and overall processing. The Pixels didn’t do well in terms of colour balance and also have less detail than the S9 and iPhones. The new iPhones are indeed the contenders for second spot here as the iPhone 8’s and X beat the Galaxy S8 in terms of detail, but fall short of the S9’s capabilities. The V30 also did extremely well in preserving detail and noise, however like in the last scenario comes at the prices of darker shadows with less features.
[ Galaxy S9 ] - [ Galaxy S8 ] - [ Galaxy S7 ] - [ Pixel 2 XL ]
[ Pixel XL ] - [ P10 ] - [ Mate 9 ]
[ Mate 10 ] - [ G6 ] - [ V30 ]
[ iPhone 7 ] - [ iPhone 8 ] - [ iPhone 8 Plus ] - [ iPhone X ]
This scene with a lit statue even when looking close is hard to differentiate between the S9 and S8. The S9 does an ever so slightly brighter image and better detail retention, but the differences aren’t that big. The Pixel phones and the Pixel 2 in particular produce a much brighter image with the larger dynamic range, however this comes at a cost of lack of sharpness and more noise. The V30 follows the S9 in terms of overall exposure and in terms of details it seems a tie between the more processed S9 and the softer, but higher resolution of the V30. The S9 does better in the highlights. The iPhones do a brighter picture than the S9, but lose in terms of details and noise.
[ Galaxy S9 ] - [ Galaxy S8 ] - [ Galaxy S7 ] - [ Pixel 2 XL ]
[ Pixel XL ] - [ P10 ] - [ Mate 9 ]
[ Mate 10 ] - [ G6 ] - [ V30 ]
[ iPhone 7 ] - [ iPhone 8 ] - [ iPhone 8 Plus ] - [ iPhone X ]
The next scene follows the characteristics of the last one. The Galaxy S9 does ever so slightly better than the S8. The Pixels again retain more light but with a resulting fuzzy picture. The V30 and new iPhones are the real contenders to the Galaxy S9 with the V30 taking second place to the S9.
[ Galaxy S9 ] - [ Galaxy S8 ]
[ Pixel 2 XL ] - [ Pixel XL ] - [ P10 ] - [ Mate 9 ]
[ Mate 10 ] - [ G6 ] - [ V30 ]
[ iPhone 7 ] - [ iPhone 8 ] - [ iPhone 8 Plus ] - [ iPhone X ]
This scene is a lot brighter than the previous scenarios due to the street lighting, so the quality of the results should mostly fall onto the characteristics of the camera processing.
Between the Galaxy S9 and S8 we see the same overall picture exposure level. The S9 is able to achieve a higher dynamic range and less blown-out highlights of the street lamps thanks to its wider aperture and quicker exposure time, compared to the S8. While at first glance the pictures are similar, when looking at the details it seems as though the S9 regresses on the details compared to the S8. This is especially visible in the foreground objects such as the pavement or the shop front on the left. This loss of detail is less pronounced further in the middle of the image and down the street so I think what’s happening is that the S9’s shallower depth-of-field because of the wider aperture is working against its favour in this shot.
The Pixels again don’t retain enough detail so can’t compete against the S9 and S8. The iPhones showcase an extremely close exposure to Samsung’s phones. Apple’s devices are very close to the S9 in the foreground but lose out in detail further down when the S9 is in its optimal focal plane. The V30 produces an overall darker image, but this helps with preserving the highlights. In terms of detail it’s relatively even to the S9 but it depends on which parts of the picture are being compared as they have different exposures.
[ Galaxy S9 ] - [ Galaxy S8 ] - [ Galaxy S7 ]
[ Pixel 2 XL ] - [ Pixel XL ] - [ P10 ] - [ Mate 9 ]
[ Mate 10 ] - [ G6 ] - [ V30 ]
[ iPhone 7 ] - [ iPhone 8 ] - [ iPhone 8 Plus ] - [ iPhone X ]
The last scene is about sheer light capture and to see who resolves best the shadowy-details. In this scene the Galaxy S9 makes full use of its wider aperture and provides a lot more clarity and less noise than the S8. The Pixels do a gain a much better job at capturing the correct colour balance of the sodium lamps but, but again can’t compete in terms of detail. The V30 continues its trend of producing darker images which helps keep down noise and still retain a respectable amount of detail, however just can’t bring out features in the shadows. This leaves the new iPhones as the only contenders. Apple, similarly to Google, does a better job than Samsung in terms of colour temperature. When it comes to detail, the iPhone 8’s and X are more on the level of the Galaxy S8 and the S9 retains its lead.
Overall the Galaxy S9 provided the best low-light shots among the test smartphones through its ability to retain more detail. In dark scenes the S9 doesn’t have the same consistency issues that we saw in the day-light shots and I found the S9, similarly to its predecessors, to provide a good a repeatable experience. The advantages over the S8 will depend on lightning and scenery. In the worst low-light scenarios the S9 will hold a good lead over the S8, but in other scenarios when there’s a bit more light the differences are less pronounced. There’s some rare cases where the S9 could do worse than the S8 and that’s simply due to the nature of the optics and the shallower depth of field of the F/1.5 lens.
In terms of competition, I think Apple’s new iPhones are overall the most competitive against the S9 in low-light and showed the best balance across the shots. Google had the best low-light colour balance, but in some scenes just had too much noise resulting in fuzzy images. Huawei in general had a tough time competing and their monochrome sensor solution just didn’t work out. LG’s phones were very good as well however Samsung edged them in in detail.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
190 Comments
View All Comments
lopri - Monday, March 26, 2018 - link
Oh and there is no Fraps on Android or (gasp) iOS as far as I know. One that actually works.jjj - Tuesday, March 27, 2018 - link
Anything is better than synthetic.What happens in this review is a great example because judgements are made about how perf and power are balanced, without any testing in appropriate workloads. The SoC needs to be tuned for actual workloads, and aside from anecdotal evidence, there is no data. AT loves to say that it's data driven but if you don't have the relevant data.... You can't determine the color of the sky by licking a wall.
Synthetic benchmarks are a best effort from a developer but they can never match real world apps. PCMark for example, some phones with 8xA53 at 2GHz can score over 5k points so almost as much as the Exynos here.
It's been 10 years and nobody makes any effort to review phones. Even battery life, it's either synthetic or browsing with nothing else going on, utterly unrealistic.
ZolaIII - Tuesday, March 27, 2018 - link
You can profile individual apps & use them while doing so but the results will vary to much even if your usage is minor like for instance video player & same video. Simply Android platformom has to much back processes and noise for reliable measuring especially if those are lite tasks.techconc - Tuesday, April 17, 2018 - link
Do you understand the sub tests in something like Geekbench for example? Are you going to claim that they are not representative of real world functions that your phone uses on a regular basis? Screaming no synthetic benchmarks like a lunatic without offering a better and generally accepted alternative is not helpful.peevee - Friday, April 6, 2018 - link
Firefox. With an adblocker installed.name99 - Tuesday, March 27, 2018 - link
Oh FFS.Different benchmarks test DIFFERENT THINGS. What you call a synthetic benchmark is a great test of very specific parts of the CPU or memory system.
If you don't care about details, don't freaking look at the synthetic benchmarks and go straight to whatever whole system benchmark it is that floats your boat.
But don't throw a hissy fit because the guys who ARE interested in **CPU** performance don't want to see numbers that are fscked up by the OS behavior, the performance of the flash, or whatever other random nonsense gets it to confuse the issue.
lilmoe - Wednesday, March 28, 2018 - link
Of course, synthetics at constant max load have never reflected real world performance of mobile devices. We know this. What I like about these deep dives is the fact that you can evaluate the data yourself and make educated assumptions about what one might expect. Here's a rough summary of what I believe is applicable to both chips in the S9 with the current firmware:- Exynos is the faster chip. But it's handicapped for feature and performance parity with the SD. Optimizations in Oreo might have contributed to how such a conservative scheduler passed QC.
- Snapdragon will be snappier (no pun intended) in certain workloads and general app load times.
- Exynos will last longer in games, video playback and streaming.
- Snapdragon might last longer in web browsing.
- Snapdragon Will last longer in video and voice calls in unoptimized messaging apps.
These are examples I thought of quickly. It's funny, but I also watch some youtubers doing their "tests". Combine these tests with the data presented here and there you go.
eastcoast_pete - Monday, March 26, 2018 - link
For me, the winner is - the one that didn't compete here: the S8+ (with the 835 chipset). Seriously. With the S9/9+ now out, an S8 or S8+ can be had for hundreds of $ less than the corresponding S9 or S9+ , and that makes the S8 or S8+ right now the best value for money among higher-end Sammys. To boot, nobody will notice it's last year's model, as the S8 and S9 look almost identical. IMO, the main upside for an S9+ is the camera, especially the video capabilities, but, at what a price -ouch!Processors: Progress - What progress? The 845 did a bit better than the 835, mostly by being clocked higher (and eating a bit more power), while the new M3-based Exynos was really disappointing. I am also disappointed with Qualcomm's 845, and here is why: the 845 is manufactured in the (supposedly) more energy efficient 10 nm LPP (Samsung's newest and hottest), so - where are the power savings? I can't help but wonder how an 835 manufactured in 10 nm LPP would have fared? As is, the 835 mostly holds it's own where it counts (real life situations), and is far from being outclassed by the 845 (or the M3 Exynos, but that is kicking a chip when it's down).
Lastly, regarding Andrei's comment on Samsung's software: right on. Samsung has pretty consistently made the best or among the best Android smartphones out there - I have owned a few of them. But, while Samsung's hardware generally get's a A or A- , the software that Samsung loads (burdens) their phones with has ranged between annoying to debilitating; apparently, that carelessness on the software side extends all the way down to low-level programming this time - not good.
Several years ago and for a short time, one could buy a Samsung phone with stock Android from Google directly. While I realize that won't happen again any time soon, I would love to see an S8+ (835) with just plain-vanilla Android 8.1 (or 9?), no skin, no bloatware. I might even buy one, before they're gone.
BigDH01 - Monday, March 26, 2018 - link
The perf/W graph is confusing to me as it's measured in fps/W. This breaks down into (frames/sec)/(J/s). Why not just frames/joule?Andrei Frumusanu - Monday, March 26, 2018 - link
Because Watts are important to note as a thermal indicator. It gives more information than frames/J.