Samsung Galaxy C7 review: A Note for the masses

Synthetic benchmarks

The Samsung Galaxy C7 is not a powerhouse by any standards. It makes use of a Qualcomm Snapdragon 625 SoC with a total of eight Cortex-A53 cores, running at 2.0 GHz. But the real trick to the chip is that it is manufactured using a 14nm process. It is the same fabrication process Qualcomm uses for its top-tier chips like the Snapdragon 820 and is still quite uncommon in mid-range chips.

In fact, the only other similar mobile chip we have encountered was the Samsung-made Exynos 7870 inside the Galaxy J7 (2016). It is also based on a 14nm process and uses a total of eight Cortex-A53 cores, only clocked a little lower at 1.7 GHz. It allowed the J7 to shine regarding battery life, and it is a similar story with the C7.

Coming back to the benchmarks themselves, the Galaxy C7 can definitely hold its own against competitors. When we picked the competitions, we put the emphasis on display size at and above 5.7 inches, but we tried to stay as close as possible to starting price of the C7, which is around $430. Alternative phones like the Samsung Galaxy Note5 or the Galaxy s6 edge+ may be a bit over budget, but not by a lot. We also threw in the Galaxy C5 and the A5 (2016) and A7 (2016) for a clearer overall picture.

Looking at the all-round benchmarks first, we clearly see the Galaxy C7 holds its ground among mid-rangers. Of course, it is not exactly a fair performance fight when we pit it against flagships like the LeEco Le Max 2, the Nexus 6P or the Galaxy Note5. However, the advantage of a higher clock speed becomes evident when we consider how close the C7 has come in its AnTuTu score to the Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 or the Samsung Galaxy A9, both having the benefit of more powerful cores in their setup.

AnTuTu 6

Higher is better

• LeEco Le Max 2
  129461
• Huawei Mate 8
  91609
• Huawei Nexus 6P
  89345
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  83167
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  81615
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  76186
• Xiaomi Mi Max
  74488
• LG V10
  67547
• Samsung Galaxy A9 (S652)
  64591
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  62818
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  50109
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  44438
• Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)
  35689
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016)
  35134

The C7 also clearly outruns the smaller A5 (2016) and A7 (2016) - another testament to the abilities of the Snapdragon 625. Basemark OS II tells mostly the same story.

Basemark OS II

Higher is better

• LeEco Le Max 2
  2494
• Huawei Nexus 6P
  2063
• Huawei Mate 8
  2033
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  1914
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  1852
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  1833
• Xiaomi Mi Note
  1370
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  1368
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  1007
• Oppo R7 Plus
  913

And for even further proof of the superior nature of the 14nm SoC in the Galaxy C7, we can examine the purely CPU-geared GeekBench results. In the single core test, it is not hard to see how any Cortex-A72 or Kryo unit performs a lot better than an isolated Cortex-A53. But, when you put enough of them together on a multi-threaded load, the higher clock rate starts to add up.

GeekBench 3 (single-core)

Higher is better

• LeEco Le Max 2
  2118
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  1543
• Xiaomi Mi Max
  1536
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  1498
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  1490
• Samsung Galaxy A9 (S652)
  1466
• Huawei Nexus 6P
  1363
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  933
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  695

GeekBench 3 (multi-core)

Higher is better

• Huawei Mate 8
  6323
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  5158
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  5124
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  5103
• LeEco Le Max 2
  5026
• Samsung Galaxy A9 (S652)
  4759
• Huawei Nexus 6P
  4539
• Xiaomi Mi Max
  3861
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  3695
• LG V10
  3607
• Oppo R7 Plus
  3204
• Xiaomi Mi Note
  3094
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  3083
• Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)
  3061
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016)
  3039

Moving on to graphics, the Adreno 506 bundled with the Snapdragon 625 provides an adequate match to CPU performance. That said, we definitely can't expect it to stand up to something like the Adreno 530 in the Snapdragon 820, but it is still more than adequate for mostly every current Android game title in the Play Store.

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• LeEco Le Max 2
  44
• Huawei Nexus 6P
  25
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  25
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  21
• Huawei Mate 8
  18
• Xiaomi Mi Max
  15
• LG V10
  15
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  14
• Samsung Galaxy A9 (S652)
  13
• Xiaomi Mi Note
  11
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  9.8
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  7.2
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  6.4
• Oppo R7 Plus
  6
• Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)
  5.7
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016)
  5.7

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

• LeEco Le Max 2
  28
• Huawei Mate 8
  18
• Huawei Nexus 6P
  17
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  15
• Xiaomi Mi Max
  15
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  15
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  14
• Samsung Galaxy A9 (S652)
  13
• Xiaomi Mi Note
  11
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  9.6
• LG V10
  9.5
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  7.5
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  6.3
• Oppo R7 Plus
  6.3
• Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)
  5.7
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016)
  5.7

GFX 3.1 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• LeEco Le Max 2
  28
• Huawei Nexus 6P
  17
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  15
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  15
• Huawei Mate 8
  10
• LG V10
  10
• Xiaomi Mi Max
  9.4
• Samsung Galaxy A9 (S652)
  9.3
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  9
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  6.2
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  4.7
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  4.2

GFX 3.1 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

• LeEco Le Max 2
  15
• Huawei Mate 8
  11
• Huawei Nexus 6P
  11
• Xiaomi Mi Max
  9.4
• Samsung Galaxy A9 (S652)
  9.1
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  9
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  6.7
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  6.6
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  6.1
• LG V10
  5.7
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  5.1
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  4.1

GFX 3.1 Car scene (offscreen)

Higher is better

• LeEco Le Max 2
  16
• Xiaomi Mi Max
  5.5
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  5.3
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  3.4
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  2.6
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  2.5

GFX 3.1 Car scene (onscreen)

Higher is better

• LeEco Le Max 2
  8.8
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  5.5
• Xiaomi Mi Max
  5.4
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  3.4
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  2.7
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  2.6

Basemark X provides an even better overview of where the Galaxy C7 fits graphics-wise among its competitors.

Basemark X

Higher is better

• LeEco Le Max 2
  33874
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  26333
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  26281
• Huawei Nexus 6P
  22825
• Huawei Mate 8
  15593
• Xiaomi Mi Max
  15487
• Samsung Galaxy A9 (S652)
  15290
• LG V10
  15161
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  14717
• Xiaomi Mi Note
  13075
• Samsung Galaxy C7
  10445
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  6754
• Oppo R7 Plus
  5349
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016)
  5210
• Samsung Galaxy C5
  5039
• Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)
  4947

All things considered, the Samsung Galaxy C7 may not have the top-tier specs to impress, but it won't let down even power users. The eight 2.0 GHz cores are snappy, and the 4GB of RAM are still perfectly adequate for multitasking to your heart's content. The sole fact that Samsung feels confident enough to include its full-featured multi-window working environment on to the handset is plenty of proof that the C7 won't leave you hanging whatever the situation.