Samsung Galaxy S8+ review: Infinity and beyond

Benchmarks

Samsung really pulled out all the stops in the S8 and S8+ specs department. Nothing but the best, which in this case is the current pair of flagship offers from both Qualcomm and Samsung's own silicon divisions. Of course, we are talking about the Exynos 8895 and the Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 - both built on a cutting-edge 10nm manufacturing process.

In fact, word on the street is that the Korean giant might have been so enveloped in its quest for ultimate mobile performance that it actually hoarded all the initial Snapdragon 835 stock. This, allegedly, caused LG to resort to a Snapdragon 821 for the G6 and might have also forced Xiaomi to postpone the Mi 6. But at this point these are just speculations, of course.

Samsung claims there is virtually no performance variance between the pair. Both chips have a total of eight cores - a pretty standard setup. Qualcomm has its custom Kryo 280 cores working at 2.35 GHz. These do have a bit more wiggle room in terms of maximum frequency (2.45 GHz, as rated by Qualcomm), but this is what Samsung decided to go for. As for the Exynos 8895, it has four of redesigned M1 "Mongoose" V2 custom cores, clocked at 2.3 GHz and a less power-intensive cluster of four Cortex-A53 units, at 1.7 GHz.

There are some differences in the graphics department as well: an Adreno 540 on the Snapdragon 835 and a Mali-G71 MP20 on the Exynos 8895.

Based on these numbers alone, we reserve our right to remain skeptical about this performance parity claim. Again, we would love to test the Snapdragon 835 as well and we hope to get our hands on the US version pretty soon. Until then, however, we only have our Exynos review unit. It is the standard international one, so along with the Exynos chipset we also get 4GB of RAM and 64GB of storage.

Update: We have a Snapdragon 835 at hand and the benchmark results are in. Just as we expected, there is an observable performance difference between the pair. And it's not an insignificant one either.

Well, actually, that depends on how much you want to look into it. Our GeekBench CPU runs tend to favor the Exynos 8895, although performance deltas are small. Then again, the older GeekBench 3 seems to favor the 2.35 GHz Kryo 280 core in the Snapdragon over a 2nd-gen Mongoose 2.3 GHz one in single-threaded loads. This seems to be one of the readjusted things between the two iteration of the benchmark.

The same can be said about AnTuTu. While the older version seems to give the Snapdragon 835 a very slight edge, Samsung's own Exynos reigns supreme in AnTuTu 6. Since AnTuTu is a compound benchmark that includes GPU tests as well, the newer version could be seeing a boost based on tests for newer graphics API's and procedures.

And in the graphics department, the performance difference between the Exynos 8895 and the Snapdragon 835 is quite a bit more noticeable. On-screen GFXBench tests, the ones that arguably matter more to end users, show anywhere from 1 frame to 6 frames advantage in favor of the Mali-G71 GPU. Basemark X and Basemark ES 3.1 present the Exynos graphical superiority in an even clearer and easily quantifiable fashion.

As far as some other interesting comparisons go, we lined up some of the company's older flagships, like the S7 edge and the Note5. We also included the Note7, regardless of its demise and the S6 edge+, for their Exynos 7420 chips. To make things even more interesting, we threw in some of the new upper mid-rangers, like the Galaxy A7 (2017) and the C9 Pro.

As for the rest of the competitor lineup, it is a veritable who's who of today's smartphone elite. That being said, however, besides the mentioned Xperia XZ Premium, there is little variety in these ranks in terms of chipset choice. Most have a Snapdragon 821 (LG G6, HTC U Ultra, Pixel XL, Xiaomi Mi Note 2, Mi Mix, Mi 5s Plus), Huawei's own Kirin 960 is also a major presence (Mate 9, P10 Plus, Honor 8 Pro) and we even have a few Snapdragon 820 participants (LG V20, Sony XZs, ZTE Axon 7). On the other hand, the variance in display size and resolution, as well as pricing is huge.

So, let's dive in and kick things off with GeekBench 4. We can see the refreshed M1 "Mongoose" V2 cores do pretty well on their own - on par with the Cortex-A73 units in the Kirin 960 and only dwarfed by Apple's custom solution. However, it is multi-core where the Exynos 8895 really shines, taking smack from nobody and leading the pack with a good 200 or so points.

GeekBench 4 (multi-core)

Higher is better

• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  6338
• Huawei Mate 9
  6112
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  6106
• Honor 8 Pro
  6036
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  5845
• Huawei P10 Plus
  5821
• Apple iPhone 7 Plus
  5664
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  5645
• OnePlus 3T
  4364
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  4333
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  4288
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  4278
• HTC U Ultra
  4201
• Google Pixel XL
  4152
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  4128
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  4102
• ZTE Axon 7
  3990
• Sony Xperia XZs
  3979
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  3976
• LG V20
  3824
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  3754
• LG G6 (US)
  3648

GeekBench 4 (single-core)

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7 Plus
  3473
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  1939
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  1938
• Huawei P10 Plus
  1937
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  1915
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  1911
• Huawei Mate 9
  1898
• OnePlus 3T
  1890
• Honor 8 Pro
  1853
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  1824
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  1815
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  1815
• LG G6 (US)
  1792
• Sony Xperia XZs
  1724
• ZTE Axon 7
  1702
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  1696
• HTC U Ultra
  1647
• LG V20
  1576
• Google Pixel XL
  1507
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  1440
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  1332
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  776

GeekBench 3 (multi-core)

Higher is better

• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  7375
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  7202

GeekBench 3 (single-core)

Higher is better

• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  2161
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  2072

Anticipating some possible confusion with Galaxy S8+ results from various sources over the next few days, we would like to offer some insight on the current GeekBench situation. At the end of last month, the popular benchmark suite was updated to version 4.1. It changed quite a few things and as per the developer's own accounts, users can expect increases of up to 2% in single-core and 5% in multi-core scores. That means that results between GeekBench 4.0 and 4.1 are no longer directly comparable. We did run the newer version on the Galaxy S8+ and got 6754 and 1986 points, respectively. Thus, we have decided to do the fair thing and publish the older and comparable GeekBench 4.0 scores instead.

Moving on to more compound benchmarks, Basemark OS II and the newer OS 2.0 both tell a pretty identical story. We find the S8+ pretty much at the top of the food chain, only really contested by the iPhone 7 Plus.

Basemark OS II

Higher is better

• Huawei P10 Plus
  3447
• Honor 8 Pro
  3429
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  3401
• OnePlus 3T
  3328
• Huawei Mate 9
  3280
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  2843
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  2814
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  2677
• Sony Xperia XZs
  2606
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  2503
• LG V20
  2473
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Snapdragon)
  2436
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  2364
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  2045
• ZTE Axon 7
  1889
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  1852
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  1833
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  1619

Basemark OS 2.0

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7 Plus
  3796
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  3406
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  3298
• Huawei P10 Plus
  2940
• Honor 8 Pro
  2865
• OnePlus 3T
  2678
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Exynos)
  2676
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  2670
• Huawei Mate 9
  2637
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  2496
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  2434
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Snapdragon)
  2432
• Sony Xperia XZs
  2386
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  2381
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  2364
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  2352
• ZTE Axon 7
  2346
• Google Pixel XL
  2281
• HTC U Ultra
  2222
• LG V20
  2159
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  1880
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  1789
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  1770
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  497

AnTuTu 6 even has the tides changed in favor of the Galaxy S8+. It takes a slight edge over the iPhone 7 Plus. However, this seems like as good a time as any to remind you of the synthetic nature of these tests. The splendid real-life performance of the S8+ does shine through in the results, but they definitely shouldn't be interpreted literally.

AnTuTu 6

Higher is better

• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  174070
• Apple iPhone 7 Plus
  173110
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  168133
• OnePlus 3T
  165097
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  155185
• LG V20
  141945
• LG G6 (US)
  141895
• Google Pixel XL
  141186
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  140324
• HTC U Ultra
  139750
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Exynos)
  134660
• Sony Xperia XZs
  133574
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  133242
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  132849
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Snapdragon)
  130111
• ZTE Axon 7
  129926
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  129629
• Honor 8 Pro
  128755
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  128719
• Huawei P10 Plus
  126252
• Huawei Mate 9
  122826
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  85181
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  83167
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  81615
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  60767

AnTuTu 5

Higher is better

• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  81688
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  80923

Things aren't quite so clear-cut on the graphics side of things. The Mali-G71 MP20 is a true mobile graphics powerhouse, no question about it. It brings about the sort of power that will probably make console-grade gaming experiences possible on mobile down the line.

There are a few things to consider when analyzing the Mali-G71 MP20, as implemented inside the S8 and S8+. The main one, of course, being resolution. The new ultra-wide aspect ratio means about 576,000 extra pixels on top of QHD the GPU has to render on.

There is also the matter of proper support from game developers. Currently, Samsung is forced to play the middle-man between game engines and its new screen aspect ratio, offering both straight-forward support for the resolution, as well as resizing, fitting and cropping assistance. The latter is an imperfect solution and can sometimes lead to graphical errors and glitches - yet another batch of hurdles that early-adopters will have to endure.

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7 Plus
  60
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  50
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  49
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Snapdragon)
  49
• OnePlus 3T
  49
• Google Pixel XL
  47
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  44
• Sony Xperia XZs
  42
• HTC U Ultra
  41
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Exynos)
  40
• LG V20
  40
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  40
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  38
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  38
• Honor 8 Pro
  33
• Huawei Mate 9
  30
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  28
• Huawei P10 Plus
  28
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  25
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  21
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  17
• ZTE Axon 7
  15
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  14

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7 Plus
  56
• OnePlus 3T
  48
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  47
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  41
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  41
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  40
• Sony Xperia XZs
  40
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  34
• Honor 8 Pro
  30
• Google Pixel XL
  30
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  29
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Snapdragon)
  29
• Huawei Mate 9
  28
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  27
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Exynos)
  27
• LG V20
  25
• HTC U Ultra
  24
• Huawei P10 Plus
  19
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  18
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  17
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  15
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  15
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  15
• ZTE Axon 7
  12

However, it's not all that bad. Even today, many titles already support the wider aspect natively. Others scale and crop without any issue. We are happy to report that we couldn't really induce a crash in any game we tried but on the other hand we didn't try that many. The worst problems we managed to end up with are slightly cropped out controls around the very edges of the game interface and a few extra screen flashes while loading. All were pretty isolated and we can only expect improvements going forward.

As for actual on-screen performance, it quite understandably suffers a hit due to the lavish new resolution. Again, we will remind you that these are synthetic tests and any self-respecting game nowadays has the ability to scale back in quality or detail gracefully to ensure proper performance.

GFX 3.1 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  42
• Apple iPhone 7 Plus
  39
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  39
• OnePlus 3T
  33
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  32
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Snapdragon)
  32
• Google Pixel XL
  32
• Sony Xperia XZs
  32
• ZTE Axon 7
  31
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  30
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  30
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  29
• LG V20
  29
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Exynos)
  28
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  28
• HTC U Ultra
  27
• LG G6 (US)
  25
• Huawei Mate 9
  22
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  22
• Honor 8 Pro
  21
• Huawei P10 Plus
  19
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  15
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  15
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  11
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  9.1

GFX 3.1 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7 Plus
  42
• Sony Xperia XZs
  34
• OnePlus 3T
  33
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  32
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  30
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  27
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  23
• Huawei Mate 9
  23
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  18
• LG V20
  17
• Google Pixel XL
  17
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  16
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Snapdragon)
  16
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  15
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Exynos)
  15
• Honor 8 Pro
  15
• ZTE Axon 7
  15
• HTC U Ultra
  13
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  12
• Huawei P10 Plus
  12
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  11
• LG G6 (US)
  11
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  9
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  6.7
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  6.6

The Galaxy S8+ is a truly amazing gaming device and a pretty future-proof one as well. These Open GL ES 3.1 scores definitely speak for themselves.

GFX 3.1 Car scene (offscreen)

Higher is better

• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  25
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  23
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Snapdragon)
  20
• LG V20
  20
• Sony Xperia XZs
  20
• OnePlus 3T
  20
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  20
• Google Pixel XL
  19
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  18
• HTC U Ultra
  18
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  18
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  18
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  16
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Exynos)
  16
• LG G6 (US)
  15
• ZTE Axon 7
  15
• Huawei Mate 9
  13
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  12
• Huawei P10 Plus
  12
• Honor 8 Pro
  11
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  5.8
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  5.2

GFX 3.1 Car scene (onscreen)

Higher is better

• Sony Xperia XZs
  21
• OnePlus 3T
  20
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  20
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  19
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  17
• ZTE Axon 7
  16
• Huawei Mate 9
  14
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  13
• LG V20
  12
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  12
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Snapdragon)
  11
• Google Pixel XL
  11
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  10
• HTC U Ultra
  10
• Huawei P10 Plus
  9
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  8.3
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  8.2
• LG G6 (US)
  8.1
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Exynos)
  8
• Honor 8 Pro
  7.9
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  5.8
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  5.2

Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7 Plus
  1517
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  1111
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  817
• Huawei Mate 9
  794
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Exynos)
  727
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  680
• Honor 8 Pro
  653
• LG G6 (US)
  647
• OnePlus 3T
  641
• Samsung Galaxy Note7 (Snapdragon)
  629
• Google Pixel XL
  626
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (S820)
  624
• Sony Xperia XZs
  623
• Huawei Mate 9 Pro
  616
• ZTE Axon 7
  606
• HTC U Ultra
  582
• Xiaomi Mi Mix
  558
• Xiaomi Mi Note 2
  556
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  538
• LG V20
  526
• Samsung Galaxy S6 edge+
  348
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  316
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  261
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  229

All things considered, the only problem we really had with the S8+, while using it as a gaming platform had to do with ergonomics, rather than performance. In its quest to abolish bezels, Samsung has left a pretty limited area for you to rest your fingers on when holding the phone horizontally. To mitigate this, the OS offers a special edge touch rejection while in game. It works pretty well and only leaves the user with the task to overcome any residual tendency to shy away from gripping the screen.

Once you get used to relying on that, and potentially master a shuffling vertical grip that is comfortable enough, you should have all it takes to fully leverage the powerhouse performance of the S8+ for any and all tasks. And for the non-gamers out there, it only takes a few stabs at spanning two split-screen apps over the screen to never want to go back.