Notebookcheck

LG G7 Fit Smartphone Review

Stefan Schomberg, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Alex Alderson), 03/26/2019

A bright display, but not a dazzler of a device. For years, LG has been releasing its flagship smartphones under its G-series branding. The South Korean company is now filling out the series with midrange devices like the G7 Fit, which is the focus of our review. The device is not aimed at fitness fanatics either but rather at buyers who want a stylish smartphone with some of the features from flagship devices without having to spend so much money. Read on to find out how well this approach works and how the G7 Fit fares against its competitors.

LG G7 Fit
LG G7 Fit

800 Euros (~$902) and more for a flagship smartphone is a lot of money by anyone’s account and does not offer good value for money. Midrange devices are quickly closing the gap to their flagship counterparts, but LG has sought to bridge the gap by introducing the G7 Fit, which blends some of the features that current flagships have with older flagship hardware. The G7 Fit looks like a modern flagship with its stylish design and bright display, but it only retails for 399 Euros (~$450). The compromises that LG has made to achieve this low price point are abundant though, not least of which that the South Korean company has equipped the device with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 SoC, which was first used in devices like the Google Pixel XL, the LG G6 and the OnePlus 3T back in 2016.

We have chosen to compare the G7 Fit against more recent smartphones, including the Honor 10 Lite, Moto G7 Plus and the Samsung Galaxy A7 (2018). Please keep in mind when reading this review that our three main comparison devices are between 49 Euros (~$55) and 149 Euros (~$167) cheaper than the G7 Fit.

LG G7 Fit (G7 Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
6.1 inch 19.5:9, 3120 x 1440 pixel 563 PPI, Capacitive, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 32GB, 18.9 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm, Card Reader: Up to 2 TB microSD cards, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, Compass, Gyro, Proximity sensor, USB 3.1 Type-C
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM, UMTS, LTE, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.9 x 153.2 x 71.9 ( = 0.31 x 6.03 x 2.83 in)
Battery
11.4 Wh, 3000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 8.1 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 16 MPix f/2.2, 28 mm
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/1.9, 26 mm
Additional features
Keyboard: Virtual, Keyboard Light: yes, 24 Months Warranty, SAR value: 0.327 W/kg. LTE Cat 11/5 (600 Mbps/75 Mbps), DRM Widevine L3, ExFAT support
Weight
156 g ( = 5.5 oz / 0.34 pounds), Power Supply: 64 g ( = 2.26 oz / 0.14 pounds)
Price
399 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

Firstly, the G7 Fit looks chic and stylish. The G7 Fit has a metal frame that is sandwiched between two pieces of glass, the combination of which is uncommon for smartphones at this price as OEMs tend to opt for a plastic frame or back to save on material costs. Additionally, LG has kept the bezels pleasingly narrow, which makes our review unit look more like an 800-Euro (~$902) smartphone than a 400-Euro (~$451) one. Gaps between materials are tight and even too, which only adds to the G7 Fit’s premium feel. Our review unit measures 153.2 x 71.9 x 7.9 mm and weighs 156 g, making it more compact than all our comparison devices. The small footprint allows our review unit to sit comfortably in our hands, and there is no camera bump either so the G7 Fit will lie flat on a table without wobbling about like many flagships do.

The glass back is a nice touch, but it comes with its drawbacks. On the one hand, our review unit becomes greasy too quickly for our liking and is prone to slipping not only from our hands but also from a desk or table that is not completely flat. Fortunately, LG certifies the G7 Fit as MIL-STD-810G1 compliant, which means that the device has successfully passed 14 environmental and climatic tests. However, no independent organisation or agency certifies MIL-STD-810 compliance, so take the certification with a pinch of salt.

The G7 Fit is IP68 compliant too, the first digit of which means that the device has passed an eight-hour test to determine that it is dustproof. Moreover, the G7 Fit is water-resistant for at least 30 minutes having been fully submerged in between 1 m and 3 m of water.

LG sells the G7 Fit only in black in Europe at the time of writing, which it markets as New Aurora Black. The device will also come in New Platinum Grey in other regions.

Size Comparison

159.8 mm / 6.29 inch 76.8 mm / 3.02 inch 7.5 mm / 0.2953 inch 168 g0.3704 lbs157 mm / 6.18 inch 75.3 mm / 2.96 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 176 g0.388 lbs154.8 mm / 6.09 inch 73.6 mm / 2.9 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 162 g0.3571 lbs153.2 mm / 6.03 inch 71.9 mm / 2.83 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 156 g0.3439 lbs

Connectivity

The choice of processor is rather surprising. LG has equipped the G7 Fit with a Snapdragon 821 SoC as we mentioned earlier, which turns three years old at the end of this year. The SoC should still be as powerful as newer midrange chips, but we suspect that it will be less economical too. LG complements the Snapdragon 821 with 4 GB of RAM, a decent amount by midrange smartphone standards and the same amount with which the company equipped the G7 ThinQ.

However, the G7 Fit has eMMC flash storage, which is much slower than the UFS 2.1 equivalent that OEMs are using in almost all their modern flagships. Our review unit has 32 GB of storage, but LG sells a 64 GB model in some markets too. The device supports up to 2 TB microSD cards should you fill up the internal storage and has dual-SIM functionality. You must choose between the two though because the G7 Fit has space for one or the other, but not both. Moreover, LG has equipped the device with a 3.5 mm jack and an NFC, the former of which has become almost extinct on flagship smartphones.

Software

While the G7 Fit earns points for its hardware, it ships with outdated software. Our review unit arrived with Android 8.1 Oreo, which is comparatively up to date by LG's standards. Worse still, LG has only released security patches up to October 2018, which were over five months old at the time of our tests. In our opinion, no midrange smartphone released in 2019 should be so hopelessly outdated out of the box.

LG has applied its UI atop of Android 8.1 Oreo, but the company only makes minor visual adjustments compared to stock Android, so it should not take too long to acclimatise to if you have used Android before.

Positively, our review unit has minimal bloatware. LG includes its Smart Doctor service and a few of its other apps along with the usual suite of Google apps. The G7 Fit has four navigation buttons by default though, with LG adding a button to quickly switch between SIM cards rather than having to dive into Settings.

Frustratingly, LG has opted to make the G7 Fit only Widevine DRM Level 3-certified, which prevents it from being able to stream content in HD from services like Amazon Prime Video or Netflix. You can still stream in standard definition, but LG would need to start shipping devices with Level 1 certification to enable HD streaming. We have no idea why the company chose to do this as it is free to have a device Level 1-certified and OEMs are unable to upgrade devices from Level 3 to Level 1 via a software update.

Default home screen
Default home screen
The optional app drawer
The optional app drawer
Software information
Software information

Communication & GPS

The G7 Fit has poor Wi-Fi performance even by midrange standards too. We tested our review unit with our Linksys EA8500 reference router and ran iperf3 Client Wi-Fi tests as we do with all the devices that we review. The G7 Fit averaged 155 Mb/s in the download test and 40.9 Mb/s in the upload test, which is both well below average and considerably slower than the Moto G7 Plus along with the Galaxy A7 (2018). Our review unit generally maintained below average Wi-Fi reception throughout our tests too, which is doubly disappointing.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Adreno 509, 636, 64 GB eMMC Flash
332 (min: 314, max: 341) MBit/s ∼100% +189%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Mali-G71 MP2, 7885, 64 GB eMMC Flash
279 (min: 265, max: 284) MBit/s ∼84% +143%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=367)
219 MBit/s ∼66% +90%
LG G7 Fit
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash
115 (min: 53, max: 151) MBit/s ∼35%
Honor 10 Lite
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash
48.4 (min: 42, max: 52) MBit/s ∼15% -58%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Mali-G71 MP2, 7885, 64 GB eMMC Flash
320 (min: 164, max: 362) MBit/s ∼100% +682%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Adreno 509, 636, 64 GB eMMC Flash
288 (min: 138, max: 294) MBit/s ∼90% +604%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=367)
210 MBit/s ∼66% +413%
Honor 10 Lite
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash
41.3 (min: 29, max: 56) MBit/s ∼13% +1%
LG G7 Fit
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash
40.9 (min: 19, max: 45) MBit/s ∼13%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370Tooltip
LG G7 Fit Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø102 (53-151)
Honor 10 Lite HiSilicon Kirin 710, ARM Mali-G51 MP4; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø48.3 (42-52)
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 Samsung Exynos 7885, ARM Mali-G71 MP2; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø278 (265-284)
Motorola Moto G7 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Qualcomm Adreno 509; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø331 (314-341)
LG G7 Fit Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø40.3 (19-45)
Honor 10 Lite HiSilicon Kirin 710, ARM Mali-G51 MP4; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø41.4 (29-56)
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 Samsung Exynos 7885, ARM Mali-G71 MP2; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø320 (164-362)
Motorola Moto G7 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Qualcomm Adreno 509; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø288 (268-294)
GPS Test: Inside
GPS Test: Inside
GPS Test: Outside
GPS Test: Outside

By contrast, we had no issues with LTE reception nor did we with GPS either. Our review unit could even find a satellite fix indoors, which is not always the case with midrange smartphones. GPS accuracy improved from 11 metres to 3 metres when we tested it outdoors, which is also excellent even by modern flagship standards.

We also subjected our review unit to a bike ride to compare its GPS data against a professional navigation device, the Garmin Edge 520. The G7 Fit performed well overall but exhibited the same inaccuracies through tight corners that most smartphones do. In daily use, these should not be a problem though, and the G7 Fit is accurate enough for all general navigation tasks.

GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 - Overview
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 - Overview
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 - Loop
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 - Loop
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge
GPS Test: LG G7 Fit - Overview
GPS Test: LG G7 Fit - Overview
GPS Test: LG G7 Fit - Loop
GPS Test: LG G7 Fit - Loop
GPS Test: LG G7 Fit - Bridge
GPS Test: LG G7 Fit - Bridge

Telephone Features & Call Quality

LG also includes its suite of telephony apps, which are laid out clearly and are intuitive to use. We have only minor complaints about call quality too. The earpiece in our review unit can get loud and reproduced our call partner’s voice well. Moreover, the microphone picked out our voice clearly throughout our test calls, which is also the case when making hands-free calls.

LG has equipped the G7 Fit with its Boombox speaker technology, which resonates onto surfaces like tabletops and desks to deliver higher volumes and better low-frequency reproduction than traditional speakers would. Placing the G7 Fit on a hollow object like an acoustic guitar, for example, creates a surprisingly full-bodied sound with almost something that sounds like real bass.

Cameras

Taking a selfie with the LG G7 Fit
Taking a selfie with the LG G7 Fit

Cameras are one area in which LG has compromised to keep costs down. The G7 Fit has single front-facing and rear-facing cameras compared to the dual or triple sensors with which it has equipped the G7 ThinQ and V40 ThinQ.

The G7 Fit has a 16 MP rear-facing camera that has an f/2.2 aperture, which is comparatively narrow by modern smartphone standards. Hence, don't expect great things from the camera in low light. LG has also equipped the device with an 8 MP front-facing sensor that confusingly has an f/1.9 aperture, which should let in more light than the rear-facing one and thus perform better in low light.

The main camera takes passable photos in daily use, which look reasonably sharp with decent dynamic range. However, we noticed image noise in certain areas of most photos, such as in parts of the sky in scene 2. Our review unit’s low-light performance surprised us though, as demonstrated in scene 3. Although photos lack sharpness, the sensor and software compensate well against image noise to deliver a better than expected photo. Overall, scene 3 looks a bit warmer than in the photos taken by the Apple iPhone XS Max and OnePlus 6T, but this is acceptable considering how much more expensive those two devices are than the G7 Fit.

Interestingly, the front-facing camera produces considerably more image noise in darker areas than the rear-facing sensor, but it is still good enough for taking selfies. Both cameras take decent-looking videos too, but you will need a steady hand to prevent camera shake as neither sensor is optically stabilised.

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.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images

We also subjected our review unit to further camera tests under controlled lighting conditions, which confirmed our initial observations. The G7 Fit captures our test chart sharply, but colours are oversaturated compared to ColorChecker reference colours. This is often the case with most smartphones though. Contrast levels gradually reduce towards the edges of our test chart picture too, but this is not overly concerning for a midrange smartphone.

A photo of our test chart
A photo of our test chart
Our test chart in detail
Our test chart in detail
ColorChecker Passport: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour
ColorChecker Passport: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour

Accessories & Warranty

The G7 Fit comes with the standard set of accessories for a midrange smartphone. Our review unit arrived with a pair of headphones that have a braided cable like those included with the LG V40 ThinQ, a charger and a corresponding USB Type-C cable. LG has thrown in a cleaning cloth too as it has done with most of its recent flagship smartphones dating back to at least the V20.

The G7 Fit comes with 24 months manufacturer’s warranty. Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies and Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices & Operation

The G7 Fit has a 10-point capacitive touchscreen as almost all modern smartphones do. The touchscreen reproduced our inputs quickly and accurately even into the edges of the display throughout our tests. Likewise, the accelerometer promptly adjusted the screen orientation if we rotated our review unit, while the fingerprint sensor consistently unlocked the device without delay.

The power button and volume rocker have decent pressure points too with crisp keystrokes. The buttons are on par with those that LG uses in its flagship devices in our opinion.

Using the default keyboard in portrait mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode
Using the default keyboard in landscape mode
Using the default keyboard in landscape mode

Display

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

One of the highlights of the G7 Fit is its display. LG has equipped the device with a 6.1-inch IPS panel that operates natively at 3120x1440, which equates to a pixel density of 563 PPI. However, the screen is not as sharp out of the box as LG reduces the resolution to 2340x1080 by default to extend battery life. You can further reduce the resolution to 1560x720 should you wish to minimise the power that the display draws. Please keep in mind that you must restart the device every time you change the resolution.

The star of the show is the display’s maximum brightness, which X-Rite i1Pro 2 recorded at 993 cd/m² across the entire panel and 1014 cd/m² at its centre. This is brighter than almost any smartphone and even brighter than the G7 ThinQ. However, The G7 Fit can only maintain its peak brightness for three minutes before dropping back to around 800 cd/m², which is still impressively bright.

Our review unit has a 0.46 cd/m² black value, which is higher than many IPS panels that we have tested. However, the black value is lower than our comparison devices that also have IPS panels, and it does not prevent the display from achieving an excellent contrast ratio, which we measure at 2,204:1. Only the colour accuracy is disappointing, which is well beaten by the Honor 10 Lite and Samsung Galaxy A7 (2018).

The 19.5:9 aspect ratio largely feels immersive too, although the G7 Fit’s broad notch may put off some people. Moreover, the device will show black bars with letterbox content shot in 16:9, but you should be able to zoom to fill the screen in apps like YouTube should you wish to view full-screen videos.

979
cd/m²
980
cd/m²
944
cd/m²
1023
cd/m²
1014
cd/m²
1003
cd/m²
981
cd/m²
1021
cd/m²
989
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 1023 cd/m² Average: 992.7 cd/m² Minimum: 4.76 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 530 cd/m²
Contrast: 2204:1 (Black: 0.46 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.54 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.1
ΔE Greyscale 7.3 | 0.64-98 Ø6.4
99.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.242
LG G7 Fit
IPS, 3120x1440, 6.1
Honor 10 Lite
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.21
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Super AMOLED, 2220x1080, 6
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
IPS, 2270x1080, 6.2
Screen
1%
24%
-21%
Brightness middle
1014
467
-54%
570
-44%
537
-47%
Brightness
993
446
-55%
565
-43%
525
-47%
Brightness Distribution
92
89
-3%
93
1%
85
-8%
Black Level *
0.46
0.58
-26%
0.58
-26%
Contrast
2204
805
-63%
926
-58%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.54
1.5
77%
1.5
77%
6.41
2%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
11.76
4.5
62%
3.6
69%
10.86
8%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
7.3
2.4
67%
1.2
84%
6.7
8%
Gamma
2.242 98%
2.22 99%
2.07 106%
2.099 105%
CCT
8749 74%
6387 102%
6504 100%
8310 78%

* ... 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 detected 2358 Hz ≤ 15 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2358 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 15 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2358 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9705 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The G7 Fit uses pulse-width modulation (PWM) to regulate its screen brightness, which can cause eye strain and headaches for some people. Thankfully, the frequency, which we measure at 2,300 Hz when the screen is at 15% or below, should be high enough not to cause issues for most people.

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
26 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 13 ms rise
↘ 13 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. » 45 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (25.5 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
28 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5 ms rise
↘ 23 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 13 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (40.7 ms).

We also subjected the G7 Fit to further display tests with a photo spectrometer and CalMAN software to scrutinise its colour accuracy. Our additional tests confirmed our initial impressions and demonstrated that the display has only a slight blue tint to it, which is better than many midrange smartphones.

CalMAN: Colour Space
CalMAN: Colour Space
CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Colour Accuracy
CalMAN: Colour Accuracy
CalMAN: Colour Saturation
CalMAN: Colour Saturation

The G7 Fit is easy to use outdoors thanks to its impressively bright display. Even the brightest of summer suns should not prevent you from being able to read the display. Moreover, our review unit has stable viewing angles as many IPS panels do. We noticed no brightness, colour or image distortions even at acute viewing angles.

Using the LG G7 Fit outdoors
Using the LG G7 Fit outdoors
Using the LG G7 Fit outdoors with reflections onscreen
Using the LG G7 Fit outdoors with reflections onscreen
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance

The Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 SoC is still a powerful chip, but it shows its age on closer inspection. Our review unit, for example, outscored our comparison devices in single-core benchmarks like Geekbench 4.3, but it finished dead last in the corresponding multi-core benchmark. It is also a mixed bag for the integrated Qualcomm Adreno 530 GPU. The GPU generally blew the chips in our comparison devices away in benchmarks like 3DMark, but it sometimes scored up to 20% less than the ARM Mali-G51 MP4 in the Honor 10 Lite. We doubt that most people would notice the difference in daily use though, with the G7 Fit handling anything that we threw at it with ease, just as our comparison devices do.

Geekbench 4.3
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
3327 Points ∼63%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
5266 Points ∼100% +58%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4429 Points ∼84% +33%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
4992 Points ∼95% +50%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (3327 - 4369, n=4)
4102 Points ∼78% +23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1174 - 11598, n=305)
4464 Points ∼85% +34%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
1838 Points ∼100%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1523 Points ∼83% -17%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1525 Points ∼83% -17%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1337 Points ∼73% -27%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (1746 - 1891, n=4)
1827 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (437 - 4824, n=306)
1313 Points ∼71% -29%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
5437 Points ∼87%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
5803 Points ∼92% +7%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5387 Points ∼86% -1%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6277 Points ∼100% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (5152 - 6461, n=5)
5648 Points ∼90% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2828 - 9868, n=315)
4816 Points ∼77% -11%
Work performance score (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
6431 Points ∼84%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
7160 Points ∼94% +11%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5625 Points ∼74% -13%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
7618 Points ∼100% +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (4739 - 7659, n=10)
5697 Points ∼75% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2695 - 13531, n=484)
5243 Points ∼69% -18%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
1861 Points ∼80%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2326 Points ∼100% +25%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1821 Points ∼78% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (1728 - 2046, n=10)
1890 Points ∼81% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4216, n=406)
1715 Points ∼74% -8%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
3005 Points ∼100%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
683 Points ∼23% -77%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
634 Points ∼21% -79%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (2291 - 3005, n=10)
2743 Points ∼91% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (65 - 6355, n=408)
1257 Points ∼42% -58%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
2644 Points ∼100%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
810 Points ∼31% -69%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
741 Points ∼28% -72%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (2207 - 2682, n=10)
2489 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (80 - 5509, n=416)
1202 Points ∼45% -55%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
15027 Points ∼71%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
11211 Points ∼53% -25%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
13914 Points ∼66% -7%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
15766 Points ∼74% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (15027 - 22860, n=10)
21197 Points ∼100% +41%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0 - 37475, n=600)
13331 Points ∼63% -11%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
37211 Points ∼100%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
19546 Points ∼53% -47%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
15567 Points ∼42% -58%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
20953 Points ∼56% -44%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (32128 - 40761, n=10)
34779 Points ∼93% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0 - 162695, n=600)
19126 Points ∼51% -49%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
28019 Points ∼93%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
16775 Points ∼55% -40%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
15167 Points ∼50% -46%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
19525 Points ∼64% -30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (27766 - 34290, n=10)
30287 Points ∼100% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0 - 77599, n=601)
16023 Points ∼53% -43%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
65 fps ∼77%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
39 fps ∼46% -40%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
36 fps ∼42% -45%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (65 - 96, n=10)
84.9 fps ∼100% +31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.4 - 251, n=623)
33.3 fps ∼39% -49%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
55 fps ∼100%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
36 fps ∼65% -35%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
35 fps ∼63% -36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (46 - 61, n=10)
55.2 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (11 - 120, n=626)
26.1 fps ∼47% -53%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
34 fps ∼79%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
21 fps ∼49% -38%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
16 fps ∼37% -53%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (26 - 49, n=10)
43 fps ∼100% +26%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 132, n=542)
18.1 fps ∼42% -47%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
29 fps ∼78%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
19 fps ∼51% -34%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
15 fps ∼40% -48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (23 - 48, n=10)
37.2 fps ∼100% +28%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6.2 - 115, n=547)
17 fps ∼46% -41%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
22 fps ∼82%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
14 fps ∼52% -36%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
10 fps ∼37% -55%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (12 - 32, n=10)
26.9 fps ∼100% +22%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.3 - 88, n=404)
15.2 fps ∼57% -31%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
19 fps ∼80%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
13 fps ∼55% -32%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
9.8 fps ∼41% -48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (12 - 32, n=10)
23.8 fps ∼100% +25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.8 - 110, n=407)
14.6 fps ∼61% -23%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
6.9 fps ∼74%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
4 fps ∼43% -42%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2 fps ∼21% -71%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (6.9 - 7, n=2)
6.95 fps ∼74% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.7 - 59, n=108)
9.38 fps ∼100% +36%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
11 fps ∼100%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2.6 fps ∼24% -76%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2.3 fps ∼21% -79%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (7.2 - 11, n=2)
9.1 fps ∼83% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.5 - 31, n=108)
6.5 fps ∼59% -41%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
15 fps ∼100%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
6.4 fps ∼43% -57%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
5.6 fps ∼37% -63%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (12 - 15, n=2)
13.5 fps ∼90% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.5 - 59, n=109)
13.8 fps ∼92% -8%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
15 fps ∼88%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
7 fps ∼41% -53%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
5.4 fps ∼32% -64%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (15 - 19, n=2)
17 fps ∼100% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.75 - 63, n=108)
15.4 fps ∼91% +3%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
14 fps ∼77%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
7.6 fps ∼42% -46%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6.3 fps ∼34% -55%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (14 - 20, n=10)
18.3 fps ∼100% +31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.6 - 54, n=333)
10.4 fps ∼57% -26%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
13 fps ∼86%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
6.8 fps ∼45% -48%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6 fps ∼39% -54%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (8.4 - 20, n=10)
15.2 fps ∼100% +17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.8 - 58, n=337)
9.33 fps ∼61% -28%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
156176 Points ∼100%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
129928 Points ∼83% -17%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
122826 Points ∼79% -21%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
117557 Points ∼75% -25%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (142395 - 158926, n=3)
152499 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (41483 - 374820, n=227)
125682 Points ∼80% -20%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
142452 Points ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
87728 Points ∼60% -38%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
92015 Points ∼62% -35%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (138072 - 159866, n=10)
147293 Points ∼100% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (23275 - 274007, n=437)
81300 Points ∼55% -43%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
1028 Points ∼94%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1004 Points ∼92% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1090 Points ∼100% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (891 - 1136, n=10)
1016 Points ∼93% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1731, n=557)
722 Points ∼66% -30%
Graphics (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
4820 Points ∼100%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1470 Points ∼30% -70%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1356 Points ∼28% -72%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (3415 - 5138, n=10)
4659 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 15969, n=557)
1851 Points ∼38% -62%
Memory (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
1531 Points ∼52%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2969 Points ∼100% +94%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2445 Points ∼82% +60%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (1531 - 2586, n=10)
1875 Points ∼63% +22%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 6283, n=557)
1357 Points ∼46% -11%
System (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
3765 Points ∼75%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
5026 Points ∼100% +33%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4506 Points ∼90% +20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (2834 - 3939, n=10)
3497 Points ∼70% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 12202, n=557)
2718 Points ∼54% -28%
Overall (sort by value)
LG G7 Fit
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530, 4096
2312 Points ∼98%
Honor 10 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2167 Points ∼92% -6%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2009 Points ∼85% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
  (2078 - 2746, n=10)
2353 Points ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (150 - 6097, n=561)
1349 Points ∼57% -42%

Browser benchmark results only compound our initial impressions about the Snapdragon 821 and the Adreno 530. While our review unit achieved a significantly better score in Mozilla Kraken 1.1, it finished last in our JetStream 1.1 and Octane V2 benchmarks.

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro (45.1 - 59.8, n=10)
54.8 Points ∼100% +6%
LG G7 Fit
51.691 Points ∼94%
Honor 10 Lite (Chrome 71)
49.221 Points ∼90% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70)
47.986 Points ∼88% -7%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
45.778 Points ∼84% -11%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 273, n=470)
37.8 Points ∼69% -27%
Octane V2 - Total Score
LG G7 Fit
10506 Points ∼100%
Honor 10 Lite (Chrome 71)
9423 Points ∼90% -10%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70)
9165 Points ∼87% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro (5511 - 10506, n=10)
9098 Points ∼87% -13%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
8368 Points ∼80% -20%
Average of class Smartphone (4865 - 43280, n=617)
5935 Points ∼56% -44%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=637)
11078 ms * ∼100% -221%
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
4776 ms * ∼43% -38%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70)
4122.8 ms * ∼37% -20%
Honor 10 Lite (Chrome 71)
4119.7 ms * ∼37% -19%
LG G7 Fit
3449 ms * ∼31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro (2400 - 4141, n=10)
2832 ms * ∼26% +18%

* ... smaller is better

The G7 Fit has eMMC flash storage like our comparison devices do, but our review unit achieved significantly slower write speeds than the Honor 10 Lite and Moto G7 Plus. Conversely, the G7 Fit averaged approximately 35% faster sequential read 256 KB speeds than our comparison devices, while it managed slightly faster random read 4 KB speeds than the Galaxy A7 (2018) too.

We also tested our review unit’s microSD card reader with our Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 reference microSD card, as we did with all our comparison devices. In short, LG has equipped the G7 Fit with a reader that is just as fast as its competitors.

LG G7 FitHonor 10 LiteSamsung Galaxy A7 2018 Motorola Moto G7 PlusAverage 32 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
40%
-10%
55%
-27%
-27%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
63.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
66.99 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
6%
64.39 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
62.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
48.4 (3.4 - 87.1, n=122)
-23%
47.4 (9.5 - 87.1, n=370)
-25%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
82.5 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
75.78 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-8%
78.15 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-5%
82.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
67 (8.2 - 96.5, n=122)
-19%
65.5 (8.1 - 96.5, n=370)
-21%
Random Write 4KB
19.8
66.06
234%
15.45
-22%
73.1
269%
18.9 (0.75 - 77.3, n=164)
-5%
18.5 (0.14 - 250, n=667)
-7%
Random Read 4KB
89.2
45.15
-49%
83.98
-6%
76.6
-14%
37.4 (3.59 - 117, n=164)
-58%
42.1 (1.59 - 174, n=667)
-53%
Sequential Write 256KB
99.1
190.55
92%
104.87
6%
208.7
111%
94.6 (14.8 - 189, n=164)
-5%
87.6 (2.99 - 388, n=667)
-12%
Sequential Read 256KB
451.5
288.55
-36%
295.76
-34%
283.6
-37%
232 (25.8 - 452, n=164)
-49%
246 (12.1 - 912, n=667)
-46%

Games

The overall positive image produced during benchmarks and everyday life use continues with games. There are some occasional frame-rate stutters while starting games like Shadow Fight 3, but all the games that we tested played smoothly.

Moreover, the accelerometer worked well throughout our gaming tests. The touchscreen also worked flawlessly while playing fast-paced games like Temple Run 2.

Shadow Fight 3
Shadow Fight 3
Temple Run 2
Temple Run 2

Emissions

Temperature

The older chipset started to show its weaknesses in our temperature tests though. Surface temperatures average around 30 °C at idle but rise to closer to 40 °C under sustained load, which is much hotter than most of the Snapdragon 636-powered devices that we have tested.

The additional waste heat may cause the SoC to throttle during long gaming sessions too, although you should be at no risk of getting burned. In short, the G7 Fit will typically feel slightly warmer to the touch than most modern midrange smartphones and will feel hot in your hands if you push the device hard.

Max. Load
 40.3 °C
105 F
40.6 °C
105 F
38.5 °C
101 F
 
 39.9 °C
104 F
39.4 °C
103 F
37.9 °C
100 F
 
 39 °C
102 F
38.5 °C
101 F
38 °C
100 F
 
Maximum: 40.6 °C = 105 F
Average: 39.1 °C = 102 F
34.5 °C
94 F
39.2 °C
103 F
37.7 °C
100 F
36.7 °C
98 F
38.5 °C
101 F
37.7 °C
100 F
37.2 °C
99 F
38 °C
100 F
37.7 °C
100 F
Maximum: 39.2 °C = 103 F
Average: 37.5 °C = 100 F
Power Supply (max.)  45.1 °C = 113 F | Room Temperature 21.8 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 39.1 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 33.1 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.6 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 35.6 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.2 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.4 °C / 89 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load

Speakers

Pink Noise speaker test
Pink Noise speaker test

As we mentioned earlier, LG’s Boombox speakers can sometimes get louder and generate more bass than traditional smartphone speakers. As the frequency diagram below demonstrates, our review unit generally reproduces bass tones more loudly than the Moto G7 Plus can, but super high tones sound comparatively quiet. This is no bad thing though as it means that the speakers do not sound shrill at maximum volume, which should please most people.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2042.341.92547.147.53129.630.7403232.55031.731.36325.426.78024.227.310023.530.912524.639.616022.743.720021.847.725021.753.531523.459.940019.761.850025.164.563025.769.380021.670.3100018.170.5125014.970.4160016.872.7200015.977.4250016.281.7315017.375.2400015.667.3500018.967.3630017.274.3800017.675.9100001763.21250015.660.11600015.857.6SPL56.867.431.286.7N10.520.71.564.3median 18.1median 67.3Delta2.97.534.434.730.432.32732.333.12934.631.529.126.92423.923.621.721.231.421.140.618.841.118.747.217.650.116.657.115.861.715.864.515.369.616.370.814.771.31668.61570.714.768.714.769.414.372.914.868.915.16215.257.914.456.814.462.714.462.86063.75527.580.912.915.59.30.947median 15.3median 62.71.39.9hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseLG G7 FitMotorola Moto G7 Plus
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
LG G7 Fit audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 39% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Motorola Moto G7 Plus audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 20% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 49% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 43% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Life

Power Consumption

As expected, our review unit consumes considerably more than our comparison devices and their more-efficient SoCs. The G7 Fit also consumes more at idle than the average of Snapdragon 821-powered comparison devices that we have tested, so the device is inefficient by old flagship standards too.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.2 / 0.3 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.5 / 2.2 / 4 Watt
Load midlight 7.8 / 9.8 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
LG G7 Fit
3000 mAh
Honor 10 Lite
3400 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
3300 mAh
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
3000 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
28%
41%
30%
26%
40%
Idle Minimum *
1.5
1
33%
0.71
53%
1.1
27%
0.799 (0.4 - 1.5, n=10)
47%
0.884 (0.2 - 3.4, n=700)
41%
Idle Average *
2.2
2.19
-0%
1.36
38%
1.7
23%
1.658 (1.07 - 2.41, n=10)
25%
1.737 (0.6 - 6.2, n=699)
21%
Idle Maximum *
4
2.2
45%
1.47
63%
2.1
47%
1.893 (1.12 - 4, n=10)
53%
2.02 (0.74 - 6.6, n=700)
49%
Load Average *
7.8
4.64
41%
5.13
34%
5.1
35%
7.08 (5.52 - 9.21, n=10)
9%
4.06 (0.8 - 10.8, n=694)
48%
Load Maximum *
9.8
7.7
21%
7.89
19%
7.9
19%
9.99 (6.26 - 14.2, n=10)
-2%
5.84 (1.2 - 14.2, n=694)
40%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The G7 Fit has a 3,000 mAh battery, which is the same size as the one in the Moto G7 Plus but 400 mAh and 300 mAh smaller than the ones in the Honor 10 Lite and Galaxy A7 (2018), respectively. Predictably, our review unit achieved a comparatively poor runtime in our Wi-Fi battery life test. The G7 Fit lasted just 6:25 hours in this test and needed recharging between 26% and 86% sooner than our comparison devices. In short, we would recommend considering another device if you are looking for a smartphone with good battery life.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
6h 25min
LG G7 Fit
3000 mAh
Honor 10 Lite
3400 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
3300 mAh
Motorola Moto G7 Plus
3000 mAh
Battery Runtime
26%
57%
86%
Reader / Idle
1533
1467
WiFi v1.3
385
484
26%
605
57%
715
86%
Load
178
273
196
H.264
502
836
809

Pros

+ extremely bright display
+ impressive colour accuracy
+ stylish
+ great build quality
+ shock, dust and water-resistant

Cons

- outdated SoC
- high power consumption
- poor battery life
- Android 8.1 Oreo
- outdated security patches

Verdict

LG G7 Fit smartphone review. Test device courtesy of LG Germany.
LG G7 Fit smartphone review. Test device courtesy of LG Germany.

The LG G7 Fit is a stylish midrange smartphone with an excellent display. Our review unit is also well built, and its narrow display bezels make it compacter than our comparison devices. However, LG has compromised on too many areas for our liking.

The device has few real negatives, but LG’s decision to equip the device with an old flagship SoC causes it to run warmer and consume more power than its contemporaries. LG has not compensated for the high power consumption with a larger battery either, which results in comparatively poor battery life.

The LG G7 Fit is a confusing midrange smartphone. On the one hand, its incredibly bright display and contemporary design make the device attractive, but LG has made numerous compromises and odd decisions that detract from what could have been an excellent smartphone.

The main reason for buying the LG G7 Fit remains its display. If you can live with a few drawbacks like poor battery life and high temperatures, then you will get an experience that few other midrange smartphones offer. Ultimately, even though the G7 Fit already costs considerably less online than its retail price, we are still unsure for whom the device is suited.

LG G7 Fit - 03/20/2019 v6
Stefan Schomberg

Chassis
82%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
81%
Connectivity
44 / 60 → 73%
Weight
92%
Battery
80%
Display
85%
Games Performance
58 / 63 → 92%
Application Performance
60 / 70 → 85%
Temperature
88%
Noise
100%
Audio
73 / 91 → 80%
Camera
69%
Average
75%
82%
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 > LG G7 Fit Smartphone Review
Stefan Schomberg, 2019-03-26 (Update: 2019-03-27)
Alex Alderson
Alex Alderson - News Editor
I got my first smartphone aged 11, my first PC aged 12 and I have been tinkering with electronics ever since. I like to keep abreast of the latest news and technology, which inevitably leads me to switch my laptop and phone every few months. When I'm not writing for Notebookcheck, you will find me seeking out new coffee shops, bars and trying to find some hidden gems in record stores.