As usual, there are two variants of the S9 and S9+, each using different processors. The US and China get Qualcomm's Snapdragon 845 processor, while everyone else gets Samsung's own Exynos 9810.
Like the 845, the Exynos 9810 is a 10nm 64-bit octa-core processor running on a 4x4 big.LITTLE configuration. It uses four high-power Mongoose M3 cores clocked at 2.7GHz, and four high-efficieny Cortex-A55One cores, clocked at 1.8GHz. The 9810 uses a Mali-G72 MP18 GPU. The S9 has 4GB RAM, while the S9+ has 6GB RAM.
Samsung Galaxy S9 | Samsung Galaxy S9+ (256GB) | Samsung Galaxy S8 | Samsung Galaxy S8+ | Samsung Galaxy Note8 | LG V30+ | Apple iPhone X (256GB) | |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Launch SRP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Operating system |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Processor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Built-in Memory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Display |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Camera |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Connectivity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Storage Type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Battery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dimensions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weight |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SunSpider JavaScript measures the browsing performance of a device when processing JavaScript. It not only takes into consideration the underlying hardware performance, but also assesses how optimized a particular platform is for delivering a high-speed web browsing experience.
The S9 and S9+ were marginally faster than their predecessors in this benchmark, but the difference is so negligible you won't notice. In actual browsing performance, the S9 is just as snappy as any other smartphone (iPhone X included).
Basemark OS II is an all-in-one benchmarking tool that measures overall performance through a comprehensive suite of tests including system, internal and external memory, graphics, web browsing, and CPU consumption.
Surprisingly, the S9 and S9+ also showed only small gains on this benchmark, and still trail quite far behind Apple's iPhone X.
3DMark Sling Shot is an advanced 3D graphics benchmark that tests the full range of OpenGL ES 3.1 and ES 3.0 API features including multiple render targets, instanced rendering, uniform buffers and transform feedback. The test also includes impressive volumetric lighting and post-processing effects. We're running this benchmark in Unlimited mode, which ignores screen resolutions.
Again, we only saw marginal performance gains on this benchmark, and Samsung's Exynos processors still trail far behind not just the iPhone X, but also the Qualcomm Snapdragon 835.
Our standard battery test for mobile phones has the following parameters:
Like last year, the S9 uses a 3,000mAh battery, while the A9+ has a 3,500mAh battery. Battery life on both models remains excellent, although we didn't see much improvement from last year. In fact, the S9+ was a little worse than last year's S8+.
Yes, but only if you're not already using an S8, S8+ or Note8.
Last year's S8 and S8+ were huge jumps forward for Samsung. Those phones introduced us to an exciting new design, and new features like the Infinity Display and Bixby.
This year, it's hard to feel the same level of enthusiasm for the S9 and S9+. These phones feel more like refinements to an already stellar package than anything genuinely new and exciting. The stereo speakers are great, but they're a feature that's been long overdue for Samsung. New software features like AR Emoji and Intelligent Scan work well too, but it's hard to get too excited about them when they just feel like Samsung's versions of Apple's Animoji and Face ID. Creating your own personalized AR emoji is great, but it's not exactly new either - the Bitmoji app offers something similar and has been around forever. The one difference could be that AR emoji does it faster from mapping your face. The new Bixby features are also nice, but they don't do anything you can't already do with Google Translate and Google Assistant, and unlike Google, you need an Internet connection for them to work.
The best new feature in the S9 and S9+ is its dual aperture rear camera. But does it fundamentally change what you can do with your smartphone camera? Not really, but it does let you take better low light pictures, which many users will appreciate.
The same is true with benchmark performance, the S9 and S9+ score better in every test, but not by much, and it's worth noting that they're still trailing Apple's A11 Bionic chip in every test.
Ultimately, that's the story of the S9 and S9+: slightly better, but not a lot better. The S9 and S9+ don't re-invent anything, they're evolutionary, not revolutionary, and they mainly build upon the foundation laid last year.
Finally, it's worth noting that the price of Samsung's S range is slowly creeping up. Last year, the S8 retailed for S$1,148, while the S8+ was S$1,298. This year, the S9 is S$1,198, and the S9+ starts at $1,348 for the 64GB model, and goes up to S$1,498 for the 256GB model. That's S$100 more than last year's Note8 (albeit it was only made available with 64GB internal storage).
These are still the best phones Samsung has ever made, and by far the best Android phones available right now, but they're getting really pricey.
![]() |
|
![]() |