Notebookcheck

CAT S42 Smartphone Review – Robust, rubberised and washable smartphone

Work at a lower price. The predecessor model retailed for about 500 Euros ($590). However, the CAT S42 is twice as cheap. This is possible because CAT has cut production costs, especially when it comes to the display and the battery. Read our review to learn whether or not the robust, waterproof smartphone is worth it.
Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt, T. Hinum (translated by Stanislav Kokhanyuk),
CAT S42

Smartphones from CAT are not directly comparable to other conventional smartphones in the same price range: They are usually significantly bigger, offer an outdated design and have subpar cameras.

They can do this because they fill a gap in the smartphone market: These are the devices for people who need an especially robust, waterproof and durable smartphone that offers enough performance for day-to-day tasks.

The devices in the S40 series are midrange devices, which offer a bare minimum in terms of specifications. The CAT S42 is the latest instalment in the series and is much cheaper than the predecessor: It costs only 249 Euros ($294), but it still offers protection from the elements.

CAT S42 (S Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D 4 x 1.8 GHz, Cortex-A53
Graphics adapter
Memory
3072 MB 
Display
5.5 inch 18:9, 1440 x 720 pixel 293 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 25 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: combination headphone/microphone jack, Card Reader: microSD, dedicated, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: motion sensor, proximity sensor, compass
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B4/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B2/​B3/​B4/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B28) , Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 12.7 x 161.3 x 77.2 ( = 0.5 x 6.35 x 3.04 in)
Battery
4200 mAh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix f/​2.0, phase detection autofocus, Dual LED flash, video recording @1080p/​30fps
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: mono speaker on the bottom, Keyboard: virtual, charger USB cable, 24 Months Warranty, IP68-certified, MIL-STD-810G-certified, LED indicator (front/​multi-colour), fanless, ruggedized, waterproof
Weight
220 g ( = 7.76 oz / 0.49 pounds), Power Supply: 62 g ( = 2.19 oz / 0.14 pounds)
Price
249 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Competing Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
73 %
08/2020
CAT S42
Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300
220 g32 GB eMMC Flash5.5"1440x720
73 %
09/2018
CAT S41
Helio P20 MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2
218 g32 GB eMMC Flash5"1920x1080
76 %
11/2019
Gigaset GX290
Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2
279 g32 GB eMMC Flash6.1"1560x720
74 %
08/2019
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2
172 g32 GB eMMC Flash5"1280x720
74 %
12/2019
Blackview BV9100
Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320
408 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.3"2340x1080

Case - How robust is the CAT S42?

The case is one of the main features of the business device. Its value is supposed to extend to many real-world situations: The rubberised back and the sides provide a lot of grip even when you handle the device with wet hands. The horizontal convex strips on the back increase the grip even further. 

The edges are reinforced and the screen is recessed to protect it from fall damage. While we are on the topic of the screen: The display is protected with Gorilla Glass 5, which is not the latest version of the ultra-durable glass, but it is still going to be able to survive most accidents.

In terms of design, the smartphone stays true to its roots: Truncated edges and big buttons, which are easy to use with gloves on. There are no longer any hardware buttons for Home, Back, and App Overview. With the CAT S42, users will have to rely on software buttons for navigation through the OS.

The smartphone stands out in the times of the coronavirus because it can be washed not only with soap but also with bleach and alcohol. Thanks to its waterproof design, the CAT S42 can be submerged in water as long as all the flaps are closed. 

The CAT S42 is also dust-proof. Moreover, it has gone through a number of tests intended to test its resilience, such as drops on a steel plate.

Size Comparison

171.28 mm / 6.74 inch 80.2 mm / 3.16 inch 19.45 mm / 0.766 inch 408 g0.899 lbs162.4 mm / 6.39 inch 79 mm / 3.11 inch 15.3 mm / 0.602 inch 279 g0.615 lbs161.3 mm / 6.35 inch 77.2 mm / 3.04 inch 12.7 mm / 0.5 inch 220 g0.485 lbs152 mm / 5.98 inch 75 mm / 2.95 inch 12.9 mm / 0.508 inch 218 g0.4806 lbs146.2 mm / 5.76 inch 73.3 mm / 2.89 inch 9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs

Connectivity - Less memory, but NFC

32 GB of internal memory is not unusual for a rugged smartphone in this price rage. Nevertheless, this is still not a lot of storage space. However, you can insert a microSD card if you run out of storage space. You will not even have to sacrifice either of the SIM slots to do this. 3 GB of RAM is standard fare for a device like this.

The smartphone supports both Bluetooth 5.0 and NFC, which is why it can be used for contactless payments. Users can only stream video in SD because the device does not support Widevine L1 DRM.

Left: SIM card slot, remappable button
Left: SIM card slot, remappable button
Right: power button, volume buttons
Right: power button, volume buttons
Bottom: microphone, microUSB port, speaker
Bottom: microphone, microUSB port, speaker
Top: 3.5-mm jack, microphone
Top: 3.5-mm jack, microphone

Software – Outdated security patches

The CAT S42 runs Android 10. The security patches were last updated in May, 2020, which means that they are currently out of date. For a business device like this, the up-to-date security patches are especially important.

The smartphone also comes with a number of preinstalled social media applications, which bring no value to a business-oriented device like the CAT S42. However, these applications can be completely uninstalled.

Bullitt Group, the licensee and manufacturer of the CAT phones, has also preinstalled some of its own applications, which professional workers should find useful. There is an application dedicated to lone worker protection. This should be useful for those who work in hazardous environments. For instance, the application will send an alarm to individuals, who were selected beforehand, if the owner of the CAT S42 fails to confirm that everything is going well.

Users can download many professional applications in the ToolBox application. Zello is a push-to-talk app, which turns the CAT S42 into a walkie-talkie.

CAT S42 Software
CAT S42 Software
CAT S42 Software
CAT S42 Software

Communication and GPS – CAT S42 with fast Wi-Fi

The predecessor relied on really slow Wi-Fi 4, whereas the CAT S42 comes with more contemporary Wi-Fi 5. In the Wi-Fi test with our reference-grade router Netgear Nighthawk AX12, the smartphone achieves such high transfer rates that it takes a place near the top of our comparison chart.

There is also a boost in performance when it comes to the LTE speeds: The device can achieve download speeds of up to 300 Mb/s and upload speeds of up to 150 Mb/s. This is okay for a cheap smartphone. However, users are likely to run into connection issues when travelling aboard because the device only supports those LTE bands that are absolutely necessary.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Blackview BV9100
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P35 MT6765, 64 GB eMMC Flash
354 (341min - 364max) MBit/s ∼100% +9%
CAT S42
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A20 MT6761D, 32 GB eMMC Flash
324 (318min - 336max) MBit/s ∼92%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=610)
284 MBit/s ∼80% -12%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Mali-G71 MP2, Exynos 7884B, 32 GB eMMC Flash
274 (197min - 295max) MBit/s ∼77% -15%
Gigaset GX290
Mali-G71 MP2, Helio P23 MT6763V, 32 GB eMMC Flash
110 (95min - 119max) MBit/s ∼31% -66%
CAT S41
Mali-T880 MP2, Helio P20 MT6757, 32 GB eMMC Flash
38.1 MBit/s ∼11% -88%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
CAT S42
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A20 MT6761D, 32 GB eMMC Flash
329 (326min - 335max) MBit/s ∼100%
Blackview BV9100
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P35 MT6765, 64 GB eMMC Flash
292 (238min - 329max) MBit/s ∼89% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=610)
271 MBit/s ∼82% -18%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Mali-G71 MP2, Exynos 7884B, 32 GB eMMC Flash
263 (227min - 296max) MBit/s ∼80% -20%
Gigaset GX290
Mali-G71 MP2, Helio P23 MT6763V, 32 GB eMMC Flash
109 (87min - 114max) MBit/s ∼33% -67%
CAT S41
Mali-T880 MP2, Helio P20 MT6757, 32 GB eMMC Flash
38.7 MBit/s ∼12% -88%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø324 (318-336)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø329 (326-335)
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors
Available satellites
Available satellites

The CAT S42 relies on various global navigation satellite systems. For increased accuracy, the smartphone also supports SBAS. Outside, the user’s location is determined quickly with a margin of error of exactly one metre.

In order to determine how accurate our review device is when it comes to geolocation, we take it with us on a bike ride. During this ride, we are also accompanied by the professional navigator Garmin Edge 520. Here we use both the smartphone and the navigator to map the same route in parallel. The rugged smartphone does not deviate too much from the professional navigator. If the tolerances in your use case exceed one metre, then the CAT smartphone can be used for navigation. Those who need absolute accuracy will have to get a more expensive smartphone.

Geolocation: Garmin Edge 520 (overview)
Geolocation: Garmin Edge 520 (overview)
Geolocation: Garmin Edge 520 (turn)
Geolocation: Garmin Edge 520 (turn)
Geolocation: Garmin Edge 520 (bridge)
Geolocation: Garmin Edge 520 (bridge)
Geolocation: CAT S42 (overview)
Geolocation: CAT S42 (overview)
Geolocation: CAT S42 (turn)
Geolocation: CAT S42 (turn)
Geolocation: CAT S42 (bridge)
Geolocation: CAT S42 (bridge)

Telephony and Call Quality - Good microphones

As an Android smartphone, the CAT S42 comes with the standard Android Phone application. When you open the app, your favourite number will be displayed in the centre. You call up the dial pad by pressing a dedicated button. The smartphone supports both Wi-Fi calling and VoLTE.

The call quality of the CAT S42 is on a good level. However, the ear-speaker could have been a bit louder, because it is not loud enough for very noisy environments. Moreover, there is also background noise. Our call partner describes the quality of the microphone as good - voices are reproduced clearly, but the microphone does pick up a good amount of background noise. In loudspeaker mode, the call quality is on a similar level. 

Cameras - Single camera with mediocre quality

Shot taken with the front-facing camera
Shot taken with the front-facing camera

These days a single camera is unusual for a smartphone that costs more than 200 Euros ($235). However, the CAT S42 plays by its own rules and comes with one 13 MP camera on the back. The camera module is flush with the back, which is why it is well protected. The photographs can be taken with either a software button or a hardware button, which allows users to take photos under water.

At first glance it looks as though the camera would take good photographs. However, if you take a closer look you will see that the photos taken with the main camera have poor dynamic range and are somewhat blurry. A lot of detail is lost in the dark and very bright areas of the image. Other rugged smartphones do not take much better photographs. That being said, the CAT S42 still takes decent pictures under normal lighting conditions, but you do need to keep your expectations in check. All in all, the camera does not do that badly when taking low-light shots or images with high contrast. 

Software-wise, the camera offers an automatic HDR mode and filters. All in all, it does not offer many camera settings.

Video can be recorded at 1080p at 30 FPS. The image quality is average. In low-light conditions, there is a lot of noise, and the camera takes a while to adjust to sudden changes in brightness. 

The front-facing camera takes very washed-out and blurry photographs.

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.

Main lens - flowerMain lens - surroundingsMain lens - low light
click to load images

In dark environments, the camera picks up no details. However, the colour reproduction is surprisingly good under normal lighting conditions. 

ColorChecker
28.4 ∆E
51.7 ∆E
37.5 ∆E
36.9 ∆E
42.7 ∆E
60.4 ∆E
51.3 ∆E
33.1 ∆E
39.3 ∆E
25.8 ∆E
61.7 ∆E
61.9 ∆E
28.4 ∆E
47.2 ∆E
34.4 ∆E
72.2 ∆E
40.5 ∆E
42.3 ∆E
76.1 ∆E
67.8 ∆E
49.6 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
23.5 ∆E
13.2 ∆E
ColorChecker CAT S42: 44.25 ∆E min: 13.2 - max: 76.13 ∆E
ColorChecker
6.1 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
12.2 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
11.7 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
10.8 ∆E
9.7 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
6.1 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
7.7 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
0 ∆E
5 ∆E
8 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
ColorChecker CAT S42: 7.23 ∆E min: 0 - max: 12.19 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty - Not a lot in the box

Besides the smartphone, the box contains a charger and a USB cable. The SIM card/microSD card slot can be opened with a fingernail.

The CAT S42 comes with a 24-month warranty in Europe. In other parts of the world, the smartphone might have a shorter warranty period.

Input Devices & Handling – No biometric authentication

The CAT S42 comes with Google’s GBoard. Those who do not like this keyboard can install other applications. However, users should pay attention to the trustworthiness of the developers. 

The smartphone is controlled via on-screen buttons. There are no dead zones at the edges. Thanks to a special mode, the CAT S42 can be controlled with gloves on. On the left side, there is a remappable orange button that, by default, serves as a push-to-talk button, which is going to be quite useful if you intend to use the smartphone as a walkie-talkie.

The rest of the hardware buttons are located on the right side. These include the power button and the volume buttons. The push-to-talk button and the power button are ribbed to make them easier to identify. The buttons work without any issues and are large enough to be usable with gloves on. 

The CAT S42 does not support any biometric authentication technologies such as face recognition or fingerprint scanning. However, these features are not that usable if you have a face mask or a pair of work gloves on. Nevertheless, these are standard features in this day and age, and the manufacturer could have at least offered face recognition in the form of a software solution.

Keyboard: portrait mode
Keyboard: portrait mode
Keyboard: landscape mode
Keyboard: landscape mode

Display – Bright enough

Pixel arrangement
Pixel arrangement

The CAT S42 has a 720p screen, which is okay for a device in this price range. The predecessor had a Full HD screen. With the BV9100, Blackview proves that you can have a high-resolution screen even in this price range. However, the resolution is good enough for day-to-day use, especially given the relatively small 5.5-inch screen.

When compared to the rest of the competition, the screen brightness of 532 cd/m² is on a good level. However, the Gigaset GX290 offers an even brighter screen, which is going to make it even more useful in very bright environments. 

528
cd/m²
541
cd/m²
541
cd/m²
537
cd/m²
541
cd/m²
536
cd/m²
515
cd/m²
528
cd/m²
517
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 541 cd/m² Average: 531.6 cd/m² Minimum: 11.05 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 541 cd/m²
Contrast: 1040:1 (Black: 0.52 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.89 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8
ΔE Greyscale 5.6 | 0.64-98 Ø6
91.1% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.272
CAT S42
IPS, 1440x720, 5.5
CAT S41
IPS, 1920x1080, 5
Gigaset GX290
IPS, 1560x720, 6.1
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
IPS (PLS), 1280x720, 5
Blackview BV9100
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.3
Screen
-10%
-17%
-7%
-8%
Brightness middle
541
537
-1%
635
17%
525
-3%
448
-17%
Brightness
532
506
-5%
615
16%
513
-4%
432
-19%
Brightness Distribution
95
86
-9%
91
-4%
90
-5%
92
-3%
Black Level *
0.52
0.9
-73%
0.39
25%
0.52
-0%
0.34
35%
Contrast
1040
597
-43%
1628
57%
1010
-3%
1318
27%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.89
5.02
15%
10.5
-78%
6
-2%
6.7
-14%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
11.35
7.98
30%
17.9
-58%
10.9
4%
12.9
-14%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.6
5.3
5%
11.8
-111%
7.8
-39%
8.7
-55%
Gamma
2.272 97%
2.154 102%
1.86 118%
2.53 87%
2.15 102%
CCT
7884 82%
7226 90%
9570 68%
8605 76%
8026 81%

* ... 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 not detected

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9600 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The IPS panel of the CAT S42 has a rather mediocre black value of 0.52 cd/m². This is why the blacks in the dark scenes appear greyish. However, thanks to the high screen brightness, the contrast ratio (1040:1) is quite good.

Our CalMAN test reveals that the screen suffers from a bluish cast. The deep black hues are not very faithfully reproduced, but other than that the colour reproduction is on a normal level for such a device.

The screen does not suffer from PWM flickering, which is good news for those who are susceptible to it. The response times are too slow for demanding users.

CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Colour accuracy
CalMAN: Colour accuracy
CalMAN: Saturation
CalMAN: Saturation
CalMAN: Colour-space coverage (sRGB)
CalMAN: Colour-space coverage (sRGB)
CalMAN: Colour-space coverage (AdobeRGB)
CalMAN: Colour-space coverage (AdobeRGB)
CalMAN: Colour-space coverage (DCI P3)
CalMAN: Colour-space coverage (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
28 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 11 ms rise
↘ 17 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 60 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (24.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
58 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 27 ms rise
↘ 31 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 93 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (38.7 ms).

We observed minimal reductions in brightness when viewing the display at acute angles. The screen content is legible even at very unusual angles. 

The CAT S42 is usable outside as long as it is not being used in direct sunlight. However, even in such situations the display is readable, but reading it is apt to cause eyestrain.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Outdoor use
Outdoor use

Performance - How much power does the CAT S42 offer?

The CAT S42 comes with the MediaTek Helio A20, which is an entry-level quad-core SoC. Here, similarly priced competing devices from Blackview or Samsung offer a significantly higher level of performance. In day-to-day use, the smartphone feels responsive. However, if you are running any demanding applications, then simply changing the volume can be a painfully laggy experience.

You should not hope for a lot when it comes to GPU performance, especially after you take a look at our benchmarks.

Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
421 Points ∼21%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
834 Points ∼42% +98%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
421 Points ∼21% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 4160, n=132)
1985 Points ∼100% +371%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
134 Points ∼23%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
156 Points ∼27% +16%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
134 Points ∼23% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1604, n=132)
576 Points ∼100% +330%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
4889 Points ∼82%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
Points ∼0% -100%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
5133 Points ∼86% +5%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
5309 Points ∼89% +9%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
5290 Points ∼88% +8%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
4889 Points ∼82% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=531)
5993 Points ∼100% +23%
Work performance score (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
6771 Points ∼100%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
4778 Points ∼71% -29%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
6316 Points ∼93% -7%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
6771 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=688)
6581 Points ∼97% -3%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
874 Points ∼39%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
1340 Points ∼60% +53%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1536 Points ∼68% +76%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1554 Points ∼69% +78%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1202 Points ∼54% +38%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
874 Points ∼39% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=536)
2246 Points ∼100% +157%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
219 Points ∼10%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
633 Points ∼29% +189%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
430 Points ∼19% +96%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
498 Points ∼23% +127%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
464 Points ∼21% +112%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
219 Points ∼10% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 12146, n=536)
2208 Points ∼100% +908%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
263 Points ∼13%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
717 Points ∼35% +173%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
512 Points ∼25% +95%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
588 Points ∼29% +124%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
537 Points ∼26% +104%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
263 Points ∼13% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 9643, n=537)
2052 Points ∼100% +680%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
865 Points ∼40%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
1338 Points ∼62% +55%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1571 Points ∼73% +82%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1768 Points ∼82% +104%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1201 Points ∼56% +39%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
865 Points ∼40% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=568)
2162 Points ∼100% +150%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
408 Points ∼14%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
889 Points ∼30% +118%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
636 Points ∼21% +56%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
826 Points ∼28% +102%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
759 Points ∼25% +86%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
408 Points ∼14% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20511, n=568)
2987 Points ∼100% +632%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
462 Points ∼19%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
961 Points ∼39% +108%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
733 Points ∼29% +59%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
937 Points ∼38% +103%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
827 Points ∼33% +79%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
462 Points ∼19% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 11895, n=568)
2489 Points ∼100% +439%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
850 Points ∼40%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
1529 Points ∼72% +80%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1489 Points ∼70% +75%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1747 Points ∼82% +106%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1117 Points ∼53% +31%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
850 Points ∼40% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5262, n=618)
2124 Points ∼100% +150%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
201 Points ∼11%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
613 Points ∼33% +205%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
445 Points ∼24% +121%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
555 Points ∼30% +176%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
410 Points ∼22% +104%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
201 Points ∼11% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 11573, n=618)
1866 Points ∼100% +828%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
242 Points ∼14%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
707 Points ∼40% +192%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
527 Points ∼30% +118%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
654 Points ∼37% +170%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
477 Points ∼27% +97%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
242 Points ∼14% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 9138, n=619)
1768 Points ∼100% +631%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
838 Points ∼42%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
1261 Points ∼63% +50%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1483 Points ∼74% +77%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1756 Points ∼88% +110%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1118 Points ∼56% +33%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
838 Points ∼42% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=659)
1992 Points ∼100% +138%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
384 Points ∼16%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
909 Points ∼37% +137%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
633 Points ∼26% +65%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
766 Points ∼31% +99%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
654 Points ∼27% +70%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
384 Points ∼16% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 16670, n=658)
2454 Points ∼100% +539%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
437 Points ∼21%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
969 Points ∼46% +122%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
725 Points ∼35% +66%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
876 Points ∼42% +100%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
720 Points ∼34% +65%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
437 Points ∼21% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 11256, n=661)
2100 Points ∼100% +381%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
14322 Points ∼84%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
12063 Points ∼70% -16%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
12304 Points ∼72% -14%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
13610 Points ∼79% -5%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
17147 Points ∼100% +20%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
14322 Points ∼84% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 59268, n=804)
15713 Points ∼92% +10%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
7435 Points ∼27%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
13844 Points ∼50% +86%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
10913 Points ∼39% +47%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
13711 Points ∼49% +84%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
11243 Points ∼40% +51%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
7435 Points ∼27% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 221179, n=802)
27850 Points ∼100% +275%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
8325 Points ∼39%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
13404 Points ∼62% +61%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
11194 Points ∼52% +34%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
13688 Points ∼64% +64%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
12175 Points ∼57% +46%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
8325 Points ∼39% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 117606, n=802)
21534 Points ∼100% +159%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
13 fps ∼28%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
23 fps ∼49% +77%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
21 fps ∼45% +62%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
25 fps ∼53% +92%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
19 fps ∼41% +46%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
13 fps ∼28% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=804)
46.8 fps ∼100% +260%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
18 fps ∼44%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
23 fps ∼56% +28%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
32 fps ∼78% +78%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
41 fps ∼100% +128%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
18 fps ∼44% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
18 fps ∼44% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 138, n=813)
31.7 fps ∼77% +76%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
5.9 fps ∼21%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
10 fps ∼36% +69%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
11 fps ∼40% +86%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
13 fps ∼47% +120%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
9.8 fps ∼35% +66%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
5.9 fps ∼21% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 180, n=709)
27.8 fps ∼100% +371%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
11 fps ∼41%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
10 fps ∼37% -9%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
20 fps ∼74% +82%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
27 fps ∼100% +145%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
9.1 fps ∼34% -17%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
11 fps ∼41% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=717)
23 fps ∼85% +109%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
4 fps ∼18%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
6.8 fps ∼30% +70%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
6.6 fps ∼30% +65%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
8.1 fps ∼36% +103%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
6.3 fps ∼28% +58%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
4 fps ∼18% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=572)
22.3 fps ∼100% +458%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
8.1 fps ∼41%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
6.8 fps ∼34% -16%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
14 fps ∼70% +73%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
19 fps ∼95% +135%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
6 fps ∼30% -26%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
8.1 fps ∼41% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=574)
20 fps ∼100% +147%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
2.5 fps ∼21%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
3.8 fps ∼32% +52%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
6.4 fps ∼55% +156%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
2.2 fps ∼19% -12%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
2.5 fps ∼21% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=329)
11.7 fps ∼100% +368%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
0.73 fps ∼9%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1.4 fps ∼17% +92%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1.8 fps ∼22% +147%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1.4 fps ∼17% +92%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
0.73 fps ∼9% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=327)
8.24 fps ∼100% +1029%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
4 fps ∼23%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
6.5 fps ∼37% +63%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
10 fps ∼57% +150%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
3.5 fps ∼20% -12%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
4 fps ∼23% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=333)
17.4 fps ∼100% +335%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
2 fps ∼10%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
3.9 fps ∼20% +95%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
5 fps ∼25% +150%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
3.8 fps ∼19% +90%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
2 fps ∼10% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=332)
20 fps ∼100% +900%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
1.8 fps ∼12%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
4 fps ∼27% +122%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
4 fps ∼27% +122%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
4.3 fps ∼29% +139%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
2.6 fps ∼17% +44%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
1.8 fps ∼12% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 75, n=497)
14.9 fps ∼100% +728%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
3.3 fps ∼25%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
4 fps ∼30% +21%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
8 fps ∼61% +142%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
12 fps ∼91% +264%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
2.8 fps ∼21% -15%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
3.3 fps ∼25% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=501)
13.2 fps ∼100% +300%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
77514 Points ∼24%
Gigaset GX290
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
95354 Points ∼29% +23%
Blackview BV9100
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
101535 Points ∼31% +31%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
77514 Points ∼24% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 622888, n=127)
327585 Points ∼100% +323%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
854 Points ∼87%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
731 Points ∼75% -14%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
977 Points ∼100% +14%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
854 Points ∼87% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=741)
829 Points ∼85% -3%
Graphics (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
478 Points ∼19%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
1126 Points ∼44% +136%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1113 Points ∼43% +133%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
478 Points ∼19% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=741)
2561 Points ∼100% +436%
Memory (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
1018 Points ∼51%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
1269 Points ∼64% +25%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1985 Points ∼100% +95%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
1018 Points ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8874, n=741)
1919 Points ∼97% +89%
System (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
1542 Points ∼44%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
2372 Points ∼67% +54%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
3507 Points ∼100% +127%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
1542 Points ∼44% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=741)
3516 Points ∼100% +128%
Overall (sort by value)
CAT S42
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 3072
895 Points ∼50%
CAT S41
Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, Mali-T880 MP2, 3072
1255 Points ∼70% +40%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1658 Points ∼92% +85%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
895 Points ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6273, n=741)
1801 Points ∼100% +101%

The smartphone is also very slow when browsing the web. In everyday use, you will have to wait for a while for images to load and scrolling is also very slow.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 161, n=201)
41.9 Points ∼100% +193%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s (Chrome 75)
22.457 Points ∼54% +57%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
14.3 Points ∼34% 0%
CAT S42 (Chrome 80)
14.282 Points ∼34%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 343, n=632)
48.5 Points ∼100% +115%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s (Chrome 75)
37.945 Points ∼78% +68%
CAT S41 (Chrome 67)
26.675 Points ∼55% +18%
CAT S42 (Chrome 80)
22.543 Points ∼46%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
22.5 Points ∼46% 0%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 196, n=182)
44.2 runs/min ∼100% +245%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
22.15 runs/min ∼50% +73%
CAT S42 (Chome 80)
12.8 runs/min ∼29%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
12.8 runs/min ∼29% 0%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 193, n=269)
70.7 Points ∼100% +172%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
48 Points ∼68% +85%
CAT S42 (Chrome 80)
26 Points ∼37%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
26 Points ∼37% 0%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 58488, n=801)
8098 Points ∼100% +104%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s (Chrome 75)
7065 Points ∼87% +78%
CAT S41 (Chrome 67)
5024 Points ∼62% +27%
CAT S42 (Chrome 80)
3971 Points ∼49%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
3971 Points ∼49% 0%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
CAT S42 (Chrome 80)
11842.1 ms * ∼100%
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
11842 ms * ∼100% -0%
CAT S41 (Chrome 67)
10444.4 ms * ∼88% +12%
Average of class Smartphone (460 - 59466, n=827)
9651 ms * ∼81% +19%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s (Chrome 75)
5826.7 ms * ∼49% +51%

* ... smaller is better

The internal memory of the CAT S42 is actually slightly faster than those of comparable smartphones, which is why it is able to scores some major points in this discipline. However, in day-to-day use, the advantage in speed is nigh imperceivable.

The microSD card reader works well with our reference-grade microSD Toshiba Exceria Pro M501. Here, the CAT S42 is able to achieve good read and write speeds. 

CAT S42CAT S41Gigaset GX290Samsung Galaxy XCover 4sBlackview BV9100Average 32 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-27%
-20%
-7%
-8%
-10%
28%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
62.5 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
5
-92%
74.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
19%
64.25 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
3%
60.66 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-3%
52.4 (3.4 - 87.1, n=170)
-16%
51.3 (1.7 - 87.1, n=543)
-18%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
23.87
-71%
81.05 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
79.55 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-4%
81.92 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
71.3 (8.2 - 96.5, n=170)
-14%
69.3 (8.1 - 96.5, n=543)
-17%
Random Write 4KB
14.8
12.99
-12%
10.95
-26%
10.38
-30%
14.61
-1%
19.3 (0.75 - 89.5, n=212)
30%
37.7 (0.14 - 319, n=901)
155%
Random Read 4KB
51.6
65.47
27%
33.33
-35%
59.56
15%
37.23
-28%
41.2 (3.59 - 117, n=212)
-20%
60.9 (1.59 - 325, n=901)
18%
Sequential Write 256KB
121.1
117.16
-3%
33.77
-72%
85.4
-29%
106.23
-12%
97.1 (14.8 - 189, n=212)
-20%
133 (2.99 - 1321, n=901)
10%
Sequential Read 256KB
287.9
253.02
-12%
275.59
-4%
298.6
4%
279.67
-3%
239 (25.8 - 452, n=212)
-17%
351 (12.1 - 2037, n=901)
22%

Gaming – Not much to expect

PUBG Mobile is not available in the Google Play Store for this smartphone. The CAT S42 would not be able to run it anyway. We were able to launch Asphalt 9, but the high-octane racing game was not all that fun to play on the CAT S42, because it can only handle it on the lowest settings.

Arena of Valor can potentially run at 60 FPS. However, there are constant frame drops. We use GameBench to measure frame rates.

The CAT S42 is suited for non-demanding games. Both the motion sensor and the touchscreen work without any problems.

Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Asphalt 9
Asphalt 9
010203040506070Tooltip
; Arena of Valor; min; 1.35.1.12: Ø57.7 (1-61)
; Arena of Valor; high HD; 1.35.1.12: Ø51.3 (25-61)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; High Quality; 2.3.4a: Ø15 (3-28)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; Standard / low; 2.3.4a: Ø26 (4-31)

Emissions – No noticeable heat output

Temperature

GFXBench battery test
GFXBench battery test

Whether it is under load or idle, the CAT S42 does not heat up at all. This is what our battery test with GFXBench reveals. 

The CAT phone scores some major points for staying so cool.

Max. Load
 35.9 °C
97 F
32.5 °C
91 F
33.3 °C
92 F
 
 34.9 °C
95 F
32.7 °C
91 F
33.6 °C
92 F
 
 34.9 °C
95 F
32.8 °C
91 F
32.9 °C
91 F
 
Maximum: 35.9 °C = 97 F
Average: 33.7 °C = 93 F
30.3 °C
87 F
31.8 °C
89 F
35.6 °C
96 F
30.9 °C
88 F
32.3 °C
90 F
34.4 °C
94 F
30.9 °C
88 F
32.1 °C
90 F
33.3 °C
92 F
Maximum: 35.6 °C = 96 F
Average: 32.4 °C = 90 F
Power Supply (max.)  39.6 °C = 103 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.7 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.9 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 35.6 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.2 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
Heat distribution (front)
Heat distribution (front)
Heat distribution (back)
Heat distribution (back)

Speakers

Speaker test: Pink noise
Speaker test: Pink noise

The small speaker on the bottom is relatively loud (80.4 dB(A)). However, the highs are significantly overrepresented. The mids and the lows are missing. If you turn down the volume the sound will become more pleasant, but the highs will still remain severely overrepresented.

We recommend you use a set of headphones or a loudspeaker, which can be connected via the 3.5-mm headphone jack or via Bluetooth. The aptX codec, which is supposed to improve audio quality for Bluetooth headphones and speakers, is not supported.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2036.8432539.941.13131.934.34038.934.65043.7386329.829.78025.926.210026.326.112524.925.116021.630.12001935.225018.942.531518.149.240016.655.350016.25963014.960.98001561.9100015.668.4125014.969160014.966200015.668.4250014.666.4315014.268.2400014.168.3500014.464.4630014.669800014.973.91000015.274.21250015.464.71600015.756SPL68.559.568.76666.36470.627.580.4N22.312.922.418.319.715.825.3146.5median 15.4median 64.4Delta2.111.332.334.125.630.125.733.227.429.73738.823.327.921.422.921.72519.932.417.434.51741.116.445.414.548.914.25714.159.212.662.312.565.61265.311.864.911.66911.472.511.371.711.470.911.169.411.261.711.357.211.263.211.365.311.353.311.345.865.824.180.117.80.643.4median 11.8median 61.71.78.6hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseCAT S42CAT S41
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
CAT S42 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 37% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 61% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 32% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

CAT S41 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 23% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 50% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 41% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery Life – Can last for up to two days

Energy Consumption

When idle, the CAT S42 draws as much power as its predecessor. However, under load, the CAT S42 consumes considerably less energy, but then again it has less energy at its disposal. When compared to other competing devices, the maximum power draw when idle stands out, but the power consumption under load is on a normal level.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.1 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.5 / 2 / 3 Watt
Load midlight 3.6 / 4.9 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
CAT S42
4200 mAh
CAT S41
5000 mAh
Gigaset GX290
6200 mAh
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
2800 mAh
Blackview BV9100
13000 mAh
Average Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-8%
4%
30%
18%
0%
9%
Idle Minimum *
1.5
1.4
7%
0.89
41%
0.65
57%
1.01
33%
1.5
-0%
0.891 (0.2 - 3.4, n=903)
41%
Idle Average *
2
2.2
-10%
2.09
-5%
1.62
19%
2
-0%
2
-0%
1.755 (0.6 - 6.2, n=902)
12%
Idle Maximum *
3
2.8
7%
2.15
28%
1.66
45%
2.01
33%
3
-0%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=903)
32%
Load Average *
3.6
4.1
-14%
4.49
-25%
3.03
16%
2.9
19%
3.6
-0%
4.12 (0.8 - 10.8, n=897)
-14%
Load Maximum *
4.9
6.4
-31%
5.78
-18%
4.34
11%
4.74
3%
4.9
-0%
6.11 (1.2 - 14.2, n=897)
-25%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The CAT S42 comes with only a 4200-mAh battery. In and of itself, it is an okay battery capacity. However, in recent years, manufacturers of rugged smartphones have put much of their focus on increasing battery capacity, which is why the CAT S42’s battery runtime of about 14 hours in our Wi-Fi test is not an outstanding result. Having said that, the CAT S42 should last for about two days in many cases.

The charger disappoints with its 10-watt nominal output. All in all, the smartphone takes a little over two hours to fully charge.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
20h 43min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
13h 56min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
15h 02min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 13min
CAT S42
4200 mAh
CAT S41
5000 mAh
Gigaset GX290
6200 mAh
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
2800 mAh
Blackview BV9100
13000 mAh
Battery Runtime
14%
57%
-21%
139%
Reader / Idle
1243
1199
-4%
H.264
902
598
-34%
WiFi v1.3
836
953
14%
1316
57%
619
-26%
2000
139%
Load
253
200
-21%

Pros

+ robust, washable case
+ water- and dustproof
+ fast Wi-Fi
+ no overheating
+ okay battery life
+ no PWM

Cons

- mediocre camera
- relatively poor performance
- no biometric authentication
- out-of-date security patches
- bloatware
- sound quality with the overrepresented highs
- no aptX, no Widevine L1

Verdict - Rugged smartphone with bright and dark spots

In review: CAT S42. Test device provided courtesy of: CAT Phones Germany.
In review: CAT S42. Test device provided courtesy of: CAT Phones Germany.

It is a smart move that CAT has made the S42 cheaper. Over the past few years, the competition in the realm of rugged smartphones has increased and low-priced smartphones have become more powerful. However, in turn, users will have to make do with an HD screen and a smaller battery. 

To those who think that the CAT S41 is a better choice, we have this to say: The CAT S42 is significantly cheaper even though the predecessor model is almost two years old now. Moreover, it offers faster Wi-Fi and modern software. However, we think that it is a pity that the hardware navigation buttons had to go. 

Thick bezels in 2020 are not a pretty sight. However, the weight is not too high for a rugged smartphone in this price range. We like the temperature management and the very usable battery runtimes.

A robust, cheap smartphone with good battery life, fast Wi-Fi and a low level of performance and a mediocre camera: The CAT S42 is a mixed bag.

The CAT S42 is worth it for those who are looking for a cheap smartphone that is able to handle tough environments. However, prospective buyers should be aware of the mediocre camera performance, poor sound quality and poor system performance.

The manufacturer should pay more attention to the security patches because they are out of date at the time of writing. This is very problematic for a business device like the CAT S42.

CAT S42 - 08/11/2020 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
80%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
89%
Connectivity
43 / 70 → 62%
Weight
88%
Battery
90%
Display
83%
Games Performance
3 / 64 → 5%
Application Performance
42 / 86 → 49%
Temperature
92%
Noise
100%
Audio
64 / 90 → 71%
Camera
39%
Average
68%
73%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > CAT S42 Smartphone Review – Robust, rubberised and washable smartphone
Florian Schmitt, 2020-08-13 (Update: 2020-08-16)
Florian Schmitt
Editor of the original article: Florian Schmitt - Managing Editor Mobile
When I was 12, the first computer came into the house and immediately I started tinkering around, taking it apart, getting new parts and replacing them - after all, there always had to be enough power for the current games. When I came to Notebookcheck in 2009, I was passionate about testing gaming notebooks. Since 2012, my attention has been focused on smartphones, tablets and future technologies.