Notebookcheck

Samsung Galaxy A10 Smartphone Review: Power in plastic

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Alex Alderson), 08/17/2019

60 FPS gaming at an affordable price. Unsurprisingly, Samsung has made some compromises for the cheapest model in its Galaxy A series. However, the Galaxy A10 is no slouch and performs well for a sub-US$200 smartphone. Read on to find out in what areas Samsung has done well and where the Galaxy A10 falls short of its pricier Galaxy A-series siblings.

Samsung Galaxy A10

The entry into the Galaxy A series begins with the Galaxy A10, which currently retails for 150 Euros (~US$166). Alternatively, you could save yourself some money by buying the device from third-party retailers online. The Galaxy A10 has a surprisingly current design for a budget smartphone, with its narrow bezels and notched display. Samsung includes 32 GB of storage too, along with 2 GB of RAM, its Exynos 7884B SoC and LTE support. The South Korean company does omit some features found on other comparably priced devices to keep costs down though, which is worth bearing in mind if you are considering the Galaxy A10 as your next smartphone. The Galaxy A10 costs just 30 Euros (~US$33) less than the Galaxy A20e, with the latter seemingly much more lavishly equipped than the former.

In addition to its bigger sibling, we shall compare the Galaxy A10 against the Honor 8A, Huawei Y6 (2019), Nokia 3.2 and Xiaomi Redmi 7. Samsung has already announced the Galaxy A10s too, which has a fingerprint scanner, larger battery and dual rear-facing cameras. However, it is not yet known in which countries the South Korean company plans to sell the device.

Samsung Galaxy A10 (Galaxy A Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
2048 MB 
Display
6.2 inch 19:9, 1520 x 720 pixel 271 PPI, Capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 23 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm jack, Card Reader: Up to 512 GB microSD cards, Sensors: Accelerometer, proximity sensor, micro USB
Networking
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G: 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900. 3G: B1, B2, B5, B8. 4G: B1, B2, B3, B5, B7, B8, B20, B38, B40, B41., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.9 x 155.6 x 75.6 ( = 0.31 x 6.13 x 2.98 in)
Battery
3400 mAh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix , f/1.9, 28 mm, Contrast AF, LED flash, videos at 1080p/30 FPS
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix , f/2.0
Additional features
Speakers: Mono speaker on the back of the device, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, Charger, USB cable, headphones, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, SAR values: Body – 1.09 W/kg, Head - 0.321 W/kg. LTE: 150 Mbps downloads, 50 Mbps uploads. FM radio, fanless
Weight
168 g ( = 5.93 oz / 0.37 pounds), Power Supply: 44 g ( = 1.55 oz / 0.1 pounds)
Price
150 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Case

The Galaxy A10 looks chic and robust for its price, at least initially. Samsung has opted for a glossy plastic back that comes in blue, dark grey or black. Our blue review unit shimmers in the light, which looks good, but it is also a fingerprint magnet.

The plastic back tapers into the edge, mimicking glass-backed smartphones somewhat. The transitions between materials are smooth and even, which makes the Galaxy A10 look well made. Compounding this is the display, with its narrow bezels and small waterdrop notch.

At 168 grams, the Galaxy A10 is not a light smartphone, but it is also rather large, making its heft appropriate at least. The Galaxy A20e will be a better choice if you prefer something more compact, with the Galaxy A10 and its 6.2-inch display being more suitable for larger hands. Our review unit fits well in ours though, which are not especially big. Its rounded corners make it easier to hold than a more angular phone too.

Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Galaxy A10

Size Comparison

159.4 mm / 6.28 inch 76.2 mm / 3 inch 8.6 mm / 0.3386 inch 181 g0.399 lbs158.7 mm / 6.25 inch 75.6 mm / 2.98 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 180 g0.3968 lbs156.28 mm / 6.15 inch 73.5 mm / 2.89 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 150 g0.3307 lbs156.28 mm / 6.15 inch 73.5 mm / 2.89 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 150 g0.3307 lbs155.6 mm / 6.13 inch 75.6 mm / 2.98 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 168 g0.3704 lbs147.4 mm / 5.8 inch 69.7 mm / 2.74 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 141 g0.3109 lbs

Connectivity

You cannot get 32 ​​GB of storage anywhere else at this price level, although the 2 GB of RAM that Samsung includes is standard on sub-US$200 devices. Only the Xiaomi Redmi 7 and Galaxy A20e can offer more RAM of our comparison devices, with them both having 3 GB.

Our test device is also in good company with its Wi-Fi 4 support. The Galaxy A10 also supports Bluetooth 5.0, which remains unusual for smartphones at this price.

The Galaxy A10 has a microSD card reader and two SIM card slots, which is impressive. Unfortunately, the device has no brightness sensor, with Samsung considering this superfluous for some reason. We and most other OEMs disagree. Samsung has saved on a notification LED, which is more of a minor gripe.

Top: microphone
Top: microphone
Underside: 3.5 mm jack, micro USB port, microphone
Underside: 3.5 mm jack, micro USB port, microphone
Right-hand side: power button, volume rocker
Right-hand side: power button, volume rocker
Left-hand side: card slot
Left-hand side: card slot

Software

Conversely, it is good to see Samsung include an up-to-date operating system, namely One UI. The in-house custom version of Android 9 Pie can be found on other Samsung smartphones too, with our review unit having the July set of security patches installed during testing. These were relatively recent, for reference.

One UI incorporates a special feature that allows apps to be copied for use on two user accounts, which can be quite handy for messaging apps, among others. The Galaxy A10 has Widevine Level 1 DRM certification, meaning that it can stream content from the likes of Amazon Prime Video and Netflix in HD.

Samsung preinstalls some in-house apps and a few advertising apps, most of which can be easily uninstalled. There is the standard set of Google apps too.

Device Information
Device Information
Preinstalled Samsung apps
Preinstalled Samsung apps
Default home screen
Default home screen

Communication & GPS

As mentioned earlier, the Galaxy A10 supports Wi-Fi 4, with it averaging around 50 Mb/s in our iperf3 Client Wi-Fi tests with our Linksys EA8500 reference router. Our review unit finished in the midfield of our comparison tables but is well below the class average.

The built-in modem supports 10 LTE bands, which is not enough coverage to consider the Galaxy A10 an intercontinental device. Hence, we would recommend checking whether the Galaxy A10 will work in the country to which you are travelling before you do so. Otherwise, you may find yourself struggling to connect to an LTE network. Incidentally, our review unit maintained decent network reception on the German D2 network with around 3/4 signal strength in urban areas.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=434)
226 MBit/s ∼100% +322%
Huawei Y6 2019
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
69 (min: 61, max: 66) MBit/s ∼31% +29%
Honor 8A
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P35 MT6765, 32 GB eMMC Flash
66 (min: 58, max: 65) MBit/s ∼29% +23%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Mali-G71 MP2, 7884B, 32 GB eMMC Flash
60 (min: 47, max: 67) MBit/s ∼27% +12%
Samsung Galaxy A10
Mali-G71 MP2, 7884B, 32 GB eMMC Flash
53.6 (min: 39, max: 60) MBit/s ∼24%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Adreno 506, 632, 32 GB eMMC Flash
51.4 (min: 49, max: 54) MBit/s ∼23% -4%
Nokia 3.2
Adreno 504, 429, 16 GB eMMC Flash
44.7 (min: 32, max: 51) MBit/s ∼20% -17%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=434)
216 MBit/s ∼100% +327%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Adreno 506, 632, 32 GB eMMC Flash
55.4 (min: 52, max: 61) MBit/s ∼26% +9%
Nokia 3.2
Adreno 504, 429, 16 GB eMMC Flash
51.1 (min: 46, max: 55) MBit/s ∼24% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A10
Mali-G71 MP2, 7884B, 32 GB eMMC Flash
50.6 (min: 27, max: 58) MBit/s ∼23%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Mali-G71 MP2, 7884B, 32 GB eMMC Flash
39.7 (min: 23, max: 50) MBit/s ∼18% -22%
Huawei Y6 2019
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
37.8 (min: 29, max: 46) MBit/s ∼18% -25%
Honor 8A
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P35 MT6765, 32 GB eMMC Flash
36.9 (min: 22, max: 52) MBit/s ∼17% -27%
0102030405060Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø53.2 (39-60)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø49.7 (27-58)
GPS Test: Inside
GPS Test: Inside
GPS Test: Outdoors
GPS Test: Outdoors

Our review unit could not locate us indoors, with it taking about 30 seconds to do so outdoors. However, it maintained an accuracy of three metres when it did, which is impressive for a sub-US$200 smartphone. Google Maps worked well outdoors too, but the device lacks a compass, so we could not see the direction in which we were pointing our review unit; another disappointing omission.

We also took the Galaxy A10 on a bike ride to compare its location data with a Garmin Edge 520, our trusty bike computer. Our review unit performed well, but it deviated in tight and tricky sections, as shown in the screenshots below. In short, you can rely on the Galaxy A10 as a navigation tool but not for when you need precise location data.

Please note: Runtastic discontinued from its web services during our testing, which explains the differences between screenshots for this review.

GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 – Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 – Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 – Corners
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 – Corners
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy A10 - Overview
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy A10 - Overview
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy A10 – Bridge
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy A10 – Bridge
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy A10 - Corners
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy A10 - Corners

Telephone Features & Call Quality

Samsung preinstalls its in-house phone app, which puts the focus on the keypad. The app operates much like the standard Google one with its tabs for contacts, call history and favourites. Samsung has included a places tab too, should you need help finding a local restaurant, coffee shop or attraction.

The call quality of our review unit over its small earpiece is okay but a bit underwhelming. The person on the other end of the call sounds loud but also dulled and accompanied by a significant amount of background noise. The microphone picks up our voice quite well though, even if we speak a little more quietly. The built-in speaker and hands-free functionality have comparable sound quality to that of the earpiece, with background noise and dulled voices also being the norm.

Cameras

Taking a selfie with the Galaxy A10
Taking a selfie with the Galaxy A10

We did not expect more than single front- and rear-facing cameras for a sub-US$200 smartphone and Samsung did not disappoint. The South Korean company equips the Galaxy A10 with a 13 MP rear-facing sensor and a 5 MP front-facing sensor. While the market has moved onto cramming as many lenses as possible into smartphones of all prices, one good lens can often produce better results than multiple lenses, as is the case with the Google Pixel series of smartphones.

The rear-facing camera takes decent photos overall, although they fall short on detail. Sharpness levels could be higher too, while scenes often look overexposed, which is doubly worse considering that the sensor lacks dynamic range. Large areas of homogenous colours contain artefacts upon looking closely, which is a shame. However, the Galaxy A10 takes good pictures for a smartphone in its price range, but we would recommend you look elsewhere if you are an ambitious photographer. In short, the 13 MP rear-facing camera is best suited for the occasional photographer.

The rear-facing camera can also shoot videos in up to 1080p at 30 FPS, with the sensor adjusting exposure levels well in changing lighting conditions. Our review unit did this so well that we hardly noticed it doing so during our test recordings. Colour transitions sometimes look dirty though, which suggests that the device highly compresses video footage. Again, ambitious photographers will quickly get frustrated with its image quality, but it should be good enough for most people who shoot the occasional short video.

The front-facing camera also takes decent pictures, but the sensor often underexposes scenes. Moreover, we noticed image noise dominating many areas, even without looking closely.

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. The rear-facing sensor reproduces colours too palely compared to the ColorChecker Passport reference colour but not horribly so. It did a surprisingly good job of reproducing our test chart, although contrast levels drop off in the corners of the image. Fine structures are disrupted by image noise too.

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

Accessories & Warranty

Samsung includes a charger, USB cable and headphones in the box, along with the usual set of warranty and legal documents. The South Korean company does not currently sell any Galaxy A10 specific accessories on its website, for reference.

The Galaxy A10 comes with a 24-month manufacturer’s limited warranty. Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies & Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices & Operation

Samsung preinstalls its in-house keyboard app as the default, but you can replace this with others from the Galaxy or Google Play Stores if you prefer. The app works well in our opinion though, so we would recommend trying it before just switching it for Google Gboard.

The hardware buttons feel a bit cheap when pressed, but they sit firmly in their housings. Disappointingly, the Galaxy A10 lacks any form of biometric authentication, with Samsung omitting a fingerprint scanner. You can use 2D face unlock, but this only captures an image of your face using the front-facing camera, which is not as secure as something like Apple Face ID. It cannot be used for high-level security like banking apps or password managers, so it is not a biometric security feature. Instead, you must secure these apps with a password, pattern or PIN.

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

Display

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

The Galaxy A10 has a 6.2-inch IPS panel that operates natively at 1520x720. It achieved an average maximum brightness of 430 cd/m² according to X-Rite i1Pro 2 and has a 90% evenly lit backlight. While the former is a little dim compared to the maximum luminosities of the displays in our comparison devices, the omission of a brightness sensor is more unforgivable. Even most budget smartphones support automatic brightness now, so we cannot understand why Samsung has cost-cut here.

407
cd/m²
440
cd/m²
426
cd/m²
414
cd/m²
451
cd/m²
435
cd/m²
435
cd/m²
445
cd/m²
419
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 451 cd/m² Average: 430.2 cd/m² Minimum: 3.9 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 451 cd/m²
Contrast: 2050:1 (Black: 0.22 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.44 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 7.8 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
90% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.206
Samsung Galaxy A10
IPS, 1520x720, 6.2
Samsung Galaxy A20e
IPS, 1560x720, 5.8
Honor 8A
IPS, 1520x720, 6.09
Xiaomi Redmi 7
IPS, 1520x720, 6.26
Huawei Y6 2019
IPS LCD, 1560x720, 6.09
Nokia 3.2
IPS, 1520x720, 6.26
Screen
-16%
-7%
-6%
2%
-22%
Brightness middle
451
475
5%
522
16%
444
-2%
487
8%
415
-8%
Brightness
430
473
10%
542
26%
441
3%
485
13%
391
-9%
Brightness Distribution
90
93
3%
94
4%
90
0%
89
-1%
86
-4%
Black Level *
0.22
0.35
-59%
0.47
-114%
0.45
-105%
0.35
-59%
0.55
-150%
Contrast
2050
1357
-34%
1111
-46%
987
-52%
1391
-32%
755
-63%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.44
6.8
-25%
4
26%
3.94
28%
4.3
21%
4.8
12%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
11.94
13.4
-12%
9.5
20%
6.72
44%
10.1
15%
9.51
20%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
7.8
8.7
-12%
6.6
15%
4.8
38%
4.1
47%
5.7
27%
Gamma
2.206 100%
2.33 94%
2.28 96%
2.294 96%
2.09 105%
2.255 98%
CCT
9149 71%
9385 69%
7258 90%
7445 87%
7312 89%
7824 83%

* ... 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 77 Hz ≤ 10 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 77 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 10 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 77 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9370 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The display has a comparatively low black value though, which we measured at 0.22 cd/m². This helps the panel achieve an outstanding 2,050:1 contrast ratio, with colours looking as vibrant as they can be on an IPS screen.

Unfortunately, the Galaxy A10 uses pulse-width modulation (PWM) to regulate display brightness at and below 10% brightness. This can cause health issues like headaches and eye strain for some people, with its 77 Hz PWM frequency being low enough to affect those who are PWM sensitive.

Incidentally, the display has decent reaction times for a device at this price. Gamers will not be satisfied though.

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

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
16 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5 ms rise
↘ 11 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 17 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
38 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 19 ms rise
↘ 19 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 37 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.7 ms).

We give the Galaxy A10 an acceptable pass for outdoors use, as its contrast-rich display somewhat accounts for its low maximum brightness and lack of a brightness sensor. We still do not like having to adjust the display brightness manually though. However, the display will look washed-out and is difficult to read under bright sunlight, as the photo below demonstrates.

Thankfully, the Galaxy A10 has stable viewing angles thanks to the IPS technology used. In short, our test picture looks perfect even at acute viewing angles.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Using the Galaxy A10 outdoors
Using the Galaxy A10 outdoors

Performance

Samsung equips the Galaxy A10 with an Exynos 7884B, the same in-house SoC as found in the more expensive Galaxy A20e. The octa-core chipset proved to be fast in our Galaxy A20e review, although the Galaxy A10 generally scored less in synthetic benchmarks than its more expensive sibling. The additional 1 GB of RAM that the Galaxy A20e has will make a difference in benchmarks, but not necessarily by 7% as in AnTuTu.

Overall, the Galaxy A10 scores well in synthetic benchmarks, but it also falls short of the Xiaomi Redmi 7 and its Qualcomm Snapdragon 632 SoC. Other smartphones like the Nokia 3.2 and Huawei Y6 (2019) are not a match for the Galaxy A10 though. The latter has a comparatively powerful GPU for its price range too.

Geekbench 4.4
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
2832 Points ∼60%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
3271 Points ∼70% +16%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2893 Points ∼62% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
3850 Points ∼82% +36%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1607 Points ∼34% -43%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
1904 Points ∼41% -33%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (2832 - 3569, n=3)
3224 Points ∼69% +14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=320)
4684 Points ∼100% +65%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
3590 Points ∼76%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
3714 Points ∼79% +3%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
3834 Points ∼82% +7%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
4301 Points ∼92% +20%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2354 Points ∼50% -34%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
2485 Points ∼53% -31%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (3590 - 4082, n=3)
3795 Points ∼81% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 11598, n=379)
4700 Points ∼100% +31%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
1168 Points ∼82%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1212 Points ∼85% +4%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
855 Points ∼60% -27%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1227 Points ∼86% +5%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
832 Points ∼59% -29%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
860 Points ∼61% -26%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (1168 - 1216, n=3)
1199 Points ∼84% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4824, n=379)
1419 Points ∼100% +21%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
5136 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
5305 Points ∼90% +3%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
4886 Points ∼83% -5%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
5912 Points ∼100% +15%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
5511 Points ∼93% +7%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
4631 Points ∼78% -10%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (5136 - 5309, n=3)
5250 Points ∼89% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11440, n=371)
5249 Points ∼89% +2%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
6823 Points ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
6902 Points ∼97% +1%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
4045 Points ∼57% -41%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7117 Points ∼100% +4%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
4229 Points ∼59% -38%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
6227 Points ∼87% -9%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (6316 - 6902, n=3)
6680 Points ∼94% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 14439, n=542)
5678 Points ∼80% -17%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
2051 Points ∼13%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
2018 Points ∼13% -2%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2079 Points ∼13% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
15735 Points ∼100% +667%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1740 Points ∼11% -15%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
1849 Points ∼12% -10%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (2018 - 2105, n=3)
2058 Points ∼13% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=57)
2697 Points ∼17% +31%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
480 Points ∼3%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
498 Points ∼3% +4%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
355 Points ∼2% -26%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14536 Points ∼100% +2928%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
203 Points ∼1% -58%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
209 Points ∼1% -56%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (477 - 498, n=3)
485 Points ∼3% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=57)
2792 Points ∼19% +482%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
578 Points ∼4%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
598 Points ∼4% +3%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
435 Points ∼3% -25%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14786 Points ∼100% +2458%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
253 Points ∼2% -56%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
260 Points ∼2% -55%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (576 - 598, n=3)
584 Points ∼4% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=57)
2534 Points ∼17% +338%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
1615 Points ∼76%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1628 Points ∼76% +1%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1021 Points ∼48% -37%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2133 Points ∼100% +32%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
876 Points ∼41% -46%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
1233 Points ∼58% -24%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (1554 - 1628, n=3)
1599 Points ∼75% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 4635, n=379)
1957 Points ∼92% +21%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
439 Points ∼25%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
440 Points ∼25% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
432 Points ∼25% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
469 Points ∼27% +7%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
197 Points ∼11% -55%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
210 Points ∼12% -52%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (439 - 498, n=3)
459 Points ∼26% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=379)
1761 Points ∼100% +301%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
524 Points ∼32%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
525 Points ∼32% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
496 Points ∼30% -5%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
567 Points ∼35% +8%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
238 Points ∼15% -55%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
257 Points ∼16% -51%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (524 - 588, n=3)
546 Points ∼33% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6875, n=380)
1634 Points ∼100% +212%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
1629 Points ∼76%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1624 Points ∼76% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
961 Points ∼45% -41%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2147 Points ∼100% +32%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
889 Points ∼41% -45%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
1195 Points ∼56% -27%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (1624 - 1768, n=3)
1674 Points ∼78% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4703, n=408)
1866 Points ∼87% +15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
646 Points ∼28%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
659 Points ∼28% +2%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
695 Points ∼30% +8%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
813 Points ∼35% +26%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
450 Points ∼19% -30%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
393 Points ∼17% -39%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (646 - 826, n=3)
710 Points ∼30% +10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=408)
2340 Points ∼100% +262%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
746 Points ∼38%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
759 Points ∼39% +2%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
741 Points ∼38% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
943 Points ∼48% +26%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
505 Points ∼26% -32%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
462 Points ∼23% -38%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (746 - 937, n=3)
814 Points ∼41% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=408)
1966 Points ∼100% +164%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
1682 Points ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1630 Points ∼77% -3%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
998 Points ∼47% -41%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2119 Points ∼100% +26%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
898 Points ∼42% -47%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
1207 Points ∼57% -28%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (1630 - 1747, n=3)
1686 Points ∼80% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4492, n=459)
1864 Points ∼88% +11%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
444 Points ∼31%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
443 Points ∼31% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
223 Points ∼15% -50%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
424 Points ∼29% -5%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
250 Points ∼17% -44%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
152 Points ∼10% -66%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (443 - 555, n=3)
481 Points ∼33% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=459)
1452 Points ∼100% +227%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
531 Points ∼38%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
526 Points ∼38% -1%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
270 Points ∼19% -49%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
516 Points ∼37% -3%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
298 Points ∼21% -44%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
189 Points ∼14% -64%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (526 - 654, n=3)
570 Points ∼41% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=460)
1398 Points ∼100% +163%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
1674 Points ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1646 Points ∼77% -2%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
997 Points ∼47% -40%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2132 Points ∼100% +27%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
869 Points ∼41% -48%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
1235 Points ∼58% -26%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (1646 - 1756, n=3)
1692 Points ∼79% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4454, n=500)
1727 Points ∼81% +3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
582 Points ∼31%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
637 Points ∼34% +9%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
429 Points ∼23% -26%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
807 Points ∼43% +39%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
357 Points ∼19% -39%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
399 Points ∼21% -31%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (582 - 766, n=3)
662 Points ∼35% +14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=499)
1891 Points ∼100% +225%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
681 Points ∼42%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
737 Points ∼45% +8%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
491 Points ∼30% -28%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
936 Points ∼57% +37%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
411 Points ∼25% -40%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
470 Points ∼29% -31%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (681 - 876, n=3)
765 Points ∼47% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8136, n=502)
1636 Points ∼100% +140%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
11287 Points ∼68%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
12075 Points ∼73% +7%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
10689 Points ∼65% -5%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
15735 Points ∼95% +39%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
14037 Points ∼85% +24%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
16518 Points ∼100% +46%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (11287 - 13610, n=3)
12324 Points ∼75% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=661)
14062 Points ∼85% +25%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
11335 Points ∼52%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
11427 Points ∼53% +1%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
7061 Points ∼33% -38%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14536 Points ∼67% +28%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
7567 Points ∼35% -33%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
6895 Points ∼32% -39%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (11335 - 13711, n=3)
12158 Points ∼56% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=659)
21674 Points ∼100% +91%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
11324 Points ∼64%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
11565 Points ∼66% +2%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
7637 Points ∼43% -33%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14786 Points ∼84% +31%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
8431 Points ∼48% -26%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
7920 Points ∼45% -30%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (11324 - 13688, n=3)
12192 Points ∼69% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=659)
17596 Points ∼100% +55%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
20 fps ∼53%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
20 fps ∼53% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
19 fps ∼51% -5%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
25 fps ∼67% +25%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
14 fps ∼37% -30%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
11 fps ∼29% -45%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (20 - 25, n=3)
21.7 fps ∼58% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=682)
37.5 fps ∼100% +88%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
31 fps ∼84%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
31 fps ∼84% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
26 fps ∼70% -16%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
37 fps ∼100% +19%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
20 fps ∼54% -35%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
17 fps ∼46% -45%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (31 - 41, n=3)
34.3 fps ∼93% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=691)
27.8 fps ∼75% -10%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
10 fps ∼46%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
11 fps ∼51% +10%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
9.8 fps ∼45% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
11 fps ∼51% +10%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
6.5 fps ∼30% -35%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
4.7 fps ∼22% -53%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (10 - 13, n=3)
11.3 fps ∼52% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=588)
21.6 fps ∼100% +116%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
20 fps ∼90%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
20 fps ∼90% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
16 fps ∼72% -20%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
19 fps ∼85% -5%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
11 fps ∼49% -45%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
8.9 fps ∼40% -55%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (20 - 27, n=3)
22.3 fps ∼100% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=597)
19.2 fps ∼86% -4%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
6.5 fps ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
6.5 fps ∼37% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
5.8 fps ∼33% -11%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7 fps ∼40% +8%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
4.2 fps ∼24% -35%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
3.1 fps ∼18% -52%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (6.5 - 8.1, n=3)
7.03 fps ∼40% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=454)
17.7 fps ∼100% +172%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
14 fps ∼84%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
14 fps ∼84% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
9.6 fps ∼58% -31%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14 fps ∼84% 0%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
7.6 fps ∼46% -46%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
6.7 fps ∼40% -52%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (14 - 19, n=3)
15.7 fps ∼95% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=456)
16.6 fps ∼100% +19%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
4.8 fps ∼47%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
4.8 fps ∼47% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
0 fps ∼0% -100%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
4.2 fps ∼41% -12%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2.7 fps ∼26% -44%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (4.8 - 6.4, n=3)
5.33 fps ∼52% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=172)
10.2 fps ∼100% +113%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
1.4 fps ∼20%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1.4 fps ∼20% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
0 fps ∼0% -100%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1.3 fps ∼18% -7%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
0.8 fps ∼11% -43%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (1.4 - 1.8, n=3)
1.533 fps ∼22% +10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 33, n=171)
7.05 fps ∼100% +404%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
7.9 fps ∼53%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
7.8 fps ∼52% -1%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
6.8 fps ∼46% -14%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7 fps ∼47% -11%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2.3 fps ∼15% -71%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
2 fps ∼13% -75%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (7.8 - 10, n=3)
8.57 fps ∼58% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=176)
14.9 fps ∼100% +89%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
4 fps ∼24%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
4 fps ∼24% 0%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
3.8 fps ∼23% -5%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
3.9 fps ∼23% -2%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
4.2 fps ∼25% +5%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
1.8 fps ∼11% -55%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (4 - 5, n=3)
4.33 fps ∼26% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 87, n=176)
16.6 fps ∼100% +315%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
4.1 fps ∼34%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
4.2 fps ∼35% +2%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2.6 fps ∼21% -37%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
3.9 fps ∼32% -5%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2 fps ∼17% -51%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
1.8 fps ∼15% -56%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (4.1 - 4.3, n=3)
4.2 fps ∼35% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=379)
12.1 fps ∼100% +195%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
8.7 fps ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
8.6 fps ∼80% -1%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
3.8 fps ∼35% -56%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7.8 fps ∼72% -10%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
3.1 fps ∼29% -64%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
3.6 fps ∼33% -59%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (8.6 - 12, n=3)
9.77 fps ∼90% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=383)
10.8 fps ∼100% +24%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
89089 Points ∼63%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
95464 Points ∼67% +7%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
Points ∼0% -100%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
102781 Points ∼73% +15%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
64157 Points ∼45% -28%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
63459 Points ∼45% -29%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (89089 - 102121, n=3)
95558 Points ∼67% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (17073 - 462516, n=290)
141701 Points ∼100% +59%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
1113 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1106 Points ∼99% -1%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
816 Points ∼73% -27%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1071 Points ∼96% -4%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
785 Points ∼71% -29%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
790 Points ∼71% -29%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (977 - 1113, n=3)
1065 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=626)
754 Points ∼68% -32%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
879 Points ∼43%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
893 Points ∼44% +2%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
792 Points ∼39% -10%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1072 Points ∼53% +22%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
470 Points ∼23% -47%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
481 Points ∼24% -45%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (879 - 1113, n=3)
962 Points ∼47% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=626)
2035 Points ∼100% +132%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
1991 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
2008 Points ∼100% +1%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1366 Points ∼68% -31%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1758 Points ∼88% -12%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1458 Points ∼73% -27%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
1285 Points ∼64% -35%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (1985 - 2008, n=3)
1995 Points ∼99% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=626)
1503 Points ∼75% -25%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
3164 Points ∼77%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
3372 Points ∼82% +7%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2533 Points ∼62% -20%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
4090 Points ∼100% +29%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1755 Points ∼43% -45%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
2020 Points ∼49% -36%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (3164 - 3507, n=3)
3348 Points ∼82% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=626)
2951 Points ∼72% -7%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A10
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 2048
1576 Points ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1608 Points ∼95% +2%
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1223 Points ∼72% -22%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1695 Points ∼100% +8%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
986 Points ∼58% -37%
Nokia 3.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 429, Adreno 504, 2048
997 Points ∼59% -37%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
  (1576 - 1658, n=3)
1614 Points ∼95% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=626)
1478 Points ∼87% -6%

The Galaxy A10 also sits in the midfield of our browser benchmark comparison tables, with the Galaxy A20e and Xiaomi Redmi 7 being out in front.

Webpages load quickly with the preinstalled Chrome browser. However, you cannot expect the performance of a high-end smartphone, although media content loads quickly for a budget handset.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 133, n=100)
35.5 Points ∼100% +52%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
26.9 Points ∼76% +15%
Samsung Galaxy A10 (Chrome 76)
23.4 Points ∼66%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (21.5 - 23.4, n=3)
22.4 Points ∼63% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
21.488 Points ∼61% -8%
Huawei Y6 2019
15.326 Points ∼43% -35%
Nokia 3.2 (Chrome 75)
14.566 Points ∼41% -38%
Honor 8A
13.6 Points ∼38% -42%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 157, n=89)
39.6 runs/min ∼100% +91%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chome 73)
27.44 runs/min ∼69% +33%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
21.63 runs/min ∼55% +4%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (20.7 - 22.2, n=3)
21.5 runs/min ∼54% +4%
Samsung Galaxy A10 (Chome 76)
20.7 runs/min ∼52%
Huawei Y6 2019 (Chrome)
15.69 runs/min ∼40% -24%
Nokia 3.2 (Chome 75)
15.57 runs/min ∼39% -25%
Honor 8A (Chrome)
14.8 runs/min ∼37% -29%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=157)
66.9 Points ∼100% +49%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
58 Points ∼87% +29%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
48 Points ∼72% +7%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (45 - 48, n=3)
47 Points ∼70% +4%
Samsung Galaxy A10 (Chrome 76)
45 Points ∼67%
Nokia 3.2 (Chrome 75)
36 Points ∼54% -20%
Huawei Y6 2019
35 Points ∼52% -22%
Honor 8A (Chrome)
29 Points ∼43% -36%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
8258 Points ∼100% +19%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
7470 Points ∼90% +8%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (6921 - 7470, n=3)
7152 Points ∼87% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A10 (Chrome 76)
6921 Points ∼84%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=684)
6701 Points ∼81% -3%
Huawei Y6 2019 (Chrome)
4437 Points ∼54% -36%
Nokia 3.2 (Chrome 75)
4392 Points ∼53% -37%
Honor 8A (Chrome)
4347 Points ∼53% -37%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Honor 8A (Chrome)
11323 ms * ∼100% -91%
Average of class Smartphone (571 - 59466, n=709)
10602 ms * ∼94% -79%
Nokia 3.2 (Chrome 75)
10433 ms * ∼92% -76%
Huawei Y6 2019
10198 ms * ∼90% -72%
Samsung Galaxy A10 (Chrome 76)
5917.3 ms * ∼52%
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (5546 - 5917, n=3)
5763 ms * ∼51% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
5546.4 ms * ∼49% +6%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
4856.4 ms * ∼43% +18%

* ... smaller is better

Games

Samsung Galaxy A10Samsung Galaxy A20eHonor 8AXiaomi Redmi 7Huawei Y6 2019Nokia 3.2Average 32 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
2%
-2%
-0%
2%
-1%
-12%
-5%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
65.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
64.28 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
61.83
-5%
63.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-3%
64.45 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
65.65 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
50.2 (3.4 - 87.1, n=140)
-23%
49.1 (1.7 - 87.1, n=417)
-25%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
78.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
79.23 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
81.92
4%
85.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
9%
83.16 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
6%
87.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
11%
68.9 (8.2 - 96.5, n=140)
-13%
67.3 (8.1 - 96.5, n=417)
-15%
Random Write 4KB
13.3
13.18
-1%
15
13%
14.4
8%
15
13%
17.5
32%
18.3 (0.75 - 77.3, n=181)
38%
21.5 (0.14 - 250, n=734)
62%
Random Read 4KB
73.4
79.76
9%
61
-17%
73.6
0%
69
-6%
35
-52%
38.9 (3.59 - 117, n=181)
-47%
46.5 (1.59 - 196, n=734)
-37%
Sequential Write 256KB
101.7
103.57
2%
104
2%
84.7
-17%
107.78
6%
106.3
5%
94.6 (14.8 - 189, n=181)
-7%
95.4 (2.99 - 590, n=734)
-6%
Sequential Read 256KB
296.4
300.36
1%
265
-11%
298
1%
279.26
-6%
282.4
-5%
236 (25.8 - 452, n=181)
-20%
269 (12.1 - 1504, n=734)
-9%

Games

The Galaxy A10 performed well in our gaming tests too, with it averaging 60 FPS in Arena of Valor even on high graphics. More elaborate games like Asphalt 9: Legends, on the other hand, occasionally drop as low as 17 FPS on high graphics. Lowering the graphics to standard results in more stable gameplay though.

The accelerometer and touchscreen worked perfectly during our gaming tests, for reference.

Asphalt 9: Legends
Asphalt 9: Legends
Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
0102030405060Tooltip
; Arena of Valor; min; 1.30.2.4: Ø59.8 (54-60)
; Arena of Valor; high HD; 1.30.2.4: Ø59.4 (53-60)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; High Quality; 1.6.3a: Ø23.4 (17-30)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; Standard / low; 1.6.3a: Ø29 (25-31)

Emissions

Temperature

GFXBench battery test
GFXBench battery test

Surface temperatures peaked at 38.7 °C under load, which will feel warm to the touch but not unpleasantly so. However, most of the device does not reach 35 °C, while all areas remain below 30 °C at idle.

There are also no thermal throttling problems. We subjected our review unit to GFXBench battery tests, with the system consistently achieving the same frame rates regardless of how long we ran the benchmarks.

Max. Load
 38.7 °C
102 F
34.6 °C
94 F
32.4 °C
90 F
 
 37.6 °C
100 F
33.8 °C
93 F
32.5 °C
91 F
 
 36.4 °C
98 F
33.8 °C
93 F
32.5 °C
91 F
 
Maximum: 38.7 °C = 102 F
Average: 34.7 °C = 94 F
30.3 °C
87 F
33.4 °C
92 F
38.7 °C
102 F
30.9 °C
88 F
33.6 °C
92 F
38.7 °C
102 F
30.9 °C
88 F
33.6 °C
92 F
37 °C
99 F
Maximum: 38.7 °C = 102 F
Average: 34.1 °C = 93 F
Power Supply (max.)  40.2 °C = 104 F | Room Temperature 21.8 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34.7 °C / 94 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 38.7 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 35.5 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 38.7 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.7 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.

Speakers

Pink Noise speaker test
Pink Noise speaker test

Samsung equips the Galaxy A10 with a mono speaker, which it has placed on the back of the device. While the speaker gets loud, reaching a maximum of 86.1 dB(A) during our tests, its positioning is not ideal. Placing the device on any surface, especially soft ones like clothing or soft furnishings, muffles the sound that the speaker produces. Moreover, the speaker overemphasises high-frequencies at high volumes. Lowering the volume slightly creates a more balanced listening experience though. The mono speaker struggles to reproduce bass tones too, but that is the case even with speakers in flagship smartphones.

We would recommend using external audio equipment where possible, which you can connect either via Bluetooth or the 3.5 mm jack. Both methods performed perfectly during our tests.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2045.347.52540.340.13135.640.24040.339.25042.740.56334.333.68027.226.610028.529.912526.332.516024.440.120023.441.625021.446.731520.554.2400206050019.864.963018.771.180018.474.4100023.573.7125017.474.1160017.471200017.570.7250017.569315016.962.1400016.968500016.973.263001779.980001781.11000017.272.11250017.161.21600017.154.3SPL66.430.686.1N20.51.564.6median 17.5median 68Delta2.910.136.742.733.637.834.335.133.830.63933.534.831.43130.530.232.123.228.122.835.322.636.919.844.220.150.316.951.916.856.915.259.415.864.915.869.314.569.31570.914.17015.369.814.971.614.969.614.770.114.769.614.970.814.873.215.361.615.45227.881.6149.8median 15.3median 64.92.110.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy A10Samsung Galaxy A20e
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy A10 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (10.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 36% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 60% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy A20e audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.8% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 48% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 63% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 29% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management

Power Consumption

The Galaxy A10 is less economical than the Galaxy A20e, which is probably because of the former’s much larger screen. Our review unit consumes slightly more than the Galaxy A20e at idle, but the gap widens exponentially under load, with the Galaxy A10 consuming more than all our other comparison devices too. Samsung includes a 5 W charger in the box, but the Galaxy A10 consumed up to 6 W during our tests. Hence, do not expect the device to remain charging if you are pushing it hard.

Overall, the Galaxy A10 finishes in the midfield of our comparison table. While it consumes more than all of our comparison devices under load, it is more efficient at idle, giving it the edge over the Honor 8ANokia 3.2 and Xiaomi Redmi 7.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.1 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.7 / 1.6 / 2 Watt
Load midlight 5.4 / 6 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy A10
3400 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A20e
3000 mAh
Honor 8A
3020 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 7
4000 mAh
Huawei Y6 2019
3020 mAh
Nokia 3.2
4000 mAh
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
22%
-4%
-2%
17%
-15%
13%
-1%
Idle Minimum *
0.7
0.66
6%
0.73
-4%
1
-43%
0.59
16%
1
-43%
0.67 (0.65 - 0.7, n=3)
4%
0.877 (0.2 - 3.4, n=769)
-25%
Idle Average *
1.6
1.63
-2%
2.07
-29%
1.7
-6%
1.94
-21%
1.9
-19%
1.617 (1.6 - 1.63, n=3)
-1%
1.734 (0.6 - 6.2, n=768)
-8%
Idle Maximum *
2
1.67
16%
2.14
-7%
2.1
-5%
1.96
2%
2.8
-40%
1.777 (1.66 - 2, n=3)
11%
2.02 (0.74 - 6.6, n=769)
-1%
Load Average *
5.4
2.77
49%
4.3
20%
3.3
39%
2.82
48%
4
26%
3.73 (2.77 - 5.4, n=3)
31%
4.07 (0.8 - 10.8, n=763)
25%
Load Maximum *
6
3.66
39%
5.96
1%
5.6
7%
3.57
40%
5.8
3%
4.67 (3.66 - 6, n=3)
22%
5.9 (1.2 - 14.2, n=763)
2%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Samsung equips the Galaxy A10 with a 3,400 mAh battery, which helped it deliver solid runtimes during our tests. Our review unit lasted longer between charges than the Galaxy A20e, and Huawei Y6 (2019) overall, with the Xiaomi Redmi 7 only able to average a 6% advantage over the Galaxy A20. The Honor 8A lasted slightly longer, especially during our looped H.264 video battery life test, while the Nokia 3.2 managed a 27% longer runtime than our review unit in our Wi-Fi test.

The Galaxy A10 finished in the midfield in our Wi-Fi battery life comparison table, but that should not take anything away from its impressive 12:33-hours runtime. In short, you should expect around two days of regular use between charges, although you may find yourself reaching for the 5 W power brick sooner if you are often taxing the system.

Our review unit takes over two hours to fully recharge with its measly 5 W charger. However, the device supports fast charging like the Galaxy A20e, so you could probably reduce that time if you were to buy a higher wattage charger.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
24h 49min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
12h 33min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
13h 22min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 36min
Samsung Galaxy A10
3400 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A20e
3000 mAh
Honor 8A
3020 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 7
4000 mAh
Huawei Y6 2019
3020 mAh
Nokia 3.2
4000 mAh
Battery Runtime
-6%
11%
6%
-4%
27%
Reader / Idle
1489
1432
-4%
1489
0%
H.264
802
753
-6%
917
14%
902
12%
805
0%
WiFi v1.3
753
715
-5%
828.8
10%
848
13%
732.1
-3%
958
27%
Load
276
250
-9%
301
9%
268
-3%
249
-10%

Pros

+ comparatively high performance
+ dedicated microSD card slot
+ current software
+ accurate GPS
+ high-contrast display
+ low surface temperatures even under load
+ decent mono speaker

Cons

- strong PWM flicker at low brightness
- no brightness sensor
- no fingerprint sensor
- no notification LED
- no compass
- average call quality

Verdict

The Samsung Galaxy A10 smartphone review.
The Samsung Galaxy A10 smartphone review.

Samsung has made strange decisions in the past when it comes to which features it excludes from its cheap smartphones. The Galaxy A10 is an example of this, with it missing a brightness sensor, compass, notification LED and fingerprint scanner. Other sub-US$200 smartphones have at least some of these features, which makes the Galaxy A10 an even trickier device to recommend to people.

These omissions are unfortunate, as they hamper what is otherwise a decent budget smartphone. Samsung has packed in plenty of power for the money, with the Galaxy A10 even able to play some modern games at 60 FPS. Our review unit manages its surface temperatures well too, while its single rear-facing camera also takes decent-looking pictures. Likewise, it has a reasonably accurate GPS module and a contrast-rich display. Moreover, it is rare to see a budget smartphone ship with Android 9.0 Pie.

The Galaxy A10 offers plenty of power for the money, but Samsung has compromised in too many areas for us to recommend it.

Ultimately, the Galaxy A10 is a solid budget smartphone if you can look past Samsung’s strange decision making. However, the lack of basic features like automatic brightness and a fingerprint sensor may have many people looking elsewhere.

Samsung Galaxy A10 - 08/15/2019 v6(old)
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
72%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
94%
Connectivity
36 / 60 → 60%
Weight
91%
Battery
95%
Display
83%
Games Performance
28 / 63 → 44%
Application Performance
57 / 70 → 81%
Temperature
91%
Noise
100%
Audio
64 / 91 → 70%
Camera
63%
Average
72%
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 > Samsung Galaxy A10 Smartphone Review: Power in plastic
Florian Schmitt, 2019-08-17 (Update: 2019-08-17)
Alex Alderson
Alex Alderson - News Editor - @aldersonaj
Prior to writing and translating for Notebookcheck, I worked for various companies including Apple and Neowin. I have a BA in International History and Politics from the University of Leeds, which I have since converted to a Law Degree. Happy to chat on Twitter or Notebookchat.