Notebookcheck

Samsung Galaxy A40 Smartphone Review

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Mark Riege), 05/09/2019

Compact with appeal. The Galaxy A40 is an affordable mid-range smartphone that can be easily operated even with smaller hands. Thanks to numerous updates, it is very competitive in terms of price and performance. Find out more in our test. Update: Changed SoC label.

Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Galaxy A40

With its new Galaxy-A series, Samsung aims to go with the times: more affordable devices are in demand, but the performance must also be right. This has already worked out in the Galaxy A50, and now we have the more compact and significantly more affordable Galaxy A40 in our test lab. It will be interesting to see whether Samsung has also succeeded in updating its series here.

Samsung is charging 249 Euros (~$279) for the smartphone, and for this you get decent equipment with a fingerprint sensor on the back, a dual-camera system, and 64 GB of storage.

However, other manufacturers also offer pretty smartphones in this price range, such as Xiaomi with its Redmi Note 7 or Gigaset with its GS280.

We also want to know what the real differences are to the Samsung Galaxy M20, which uses the same SoC as the Galaxy A40 and whose price only differs by 30 Euros (~$34). In addition, we compare our test unit with last year's Samsung Galaxy A6, in order to see the exact progress compared to the previous generation.

Samsung Galaxy A40 (Galaxy A Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
5.9 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 437 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, Super AMOLED, Waterdrop notch, glossy: yes
Storage
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB 
, 49.4 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm audio port, Card Reader: microSD up to 512 GB, dedicated, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: acceleration sensor, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, FM radio
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B3/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B38/​B40/​B41), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.9 x 144.4 x 69.2 ( = 0.31 x 5.69 x 2.72 in)
Battery
3100 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 16 MPix f/​1.7, phase-comparison AF, LED flash, videos @1080p/​30fps (camera 1); 5.0 MP, f/​2.2, wide-angle lens (camera 2)
Secondary Camera: 25 MPix f/​2.0
Additional features
Speakers: mono speaker at the bottom edge, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, charger, USB cable, headset, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, SAR value: 0.49 W/​kg (head), 1.34 W/​kg (body); LTE Cat. 12/13 (600 Mbps download, 150 Mbps upload), fanless
Weight
140 g ( = 4.94 oz / 0.31 pounds), Power Supply: 59 g ( = 2.08 oz / 0.13 pounds)
Price
250 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! Indian citizens welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Case – A high-quality and robust Galaxy phone

The case already shows the differences to the Samsung M series: The Galaxy A40 offers more visual appeal and also a better quality. The glass back shows various effects depending on the color. For example, when you move the white model, it shimmers in all rainbow colors like a pearl. While the blue, black, and coral models also offer some light reflections, they are not quite as spectacular.

The case is quite stable and impervious to pressure, and the workmanship is also on a very high level. Thus the Galaxy A40 greets the buyer without any noticeable edges or gaps between material transitions. In terms of the weight, the Galaxy A40 is also able to convince with a very light 140 grams (~4.9 oz).

There is a so-called Infinity-U display in front, which is able to make do with very small bezels on three sides and a waterdrop notch. The bezel is only slightly wider at the bottom, but compared to the Galaxy A6 (2018), the bezels have become noticeably smaller.

Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Galaxy A40

Size Comparison

159.21 mm / 6.27 inch 75.21 mm / 2.96 inch 8.1 mm / 0.3189 inch 186 g0.4101 lbs156.4 mm / 6.16 inch 74.5 mm / 2.93 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 186 g0.4101 lbs152.6 mm / 6.01 inch 73.7 mm / 2.9 inch 9.2 mm / 0.3622 inch 174.5 g0.3847 lbs149.9 mm / 5.9 inch 70.9 mm / 2.79 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 162 g0.3571 lbs144.4 mm / 5.69 inch 69.2 mm / 2.72 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 140 g0.3086 lbs

Equipment – A Samsung smartphone with a lot of storage

While at this point, 64 GB of storage and 4 GB of working memory are the usual equipment in this price range, compared to last year, the storage was doubled and there is also 1 GB extra RAM.

We like that you can use two SIM cards and a microSD card at the same time in the Galaxy A40. There is an option to receive FM radio, and NFC as well as the current Bluetooth 5.0 are also on board.

The USB connection transfers data at only USB-2.0 speed, but at least it has the current USB-C format.

Top: microphone
Top: microphone
Bottom: speaker, USB-C port, 3.5 mm audio port
Bottom: speaker, USB-C port, 3.5 mm audio port
Left: SIM tray
Left: SIM tray
Right: volume rocker, Standby key
Right: volume rocker, Standby key

Software – The modern One UI including dark mode

Samsung's One UI is also a welcome update, since the operating system now appears fresh and clean. It is based on Android 9, and at the time of our testing, the level of the security patches is March 1, 2019, so they are still fairly current.

You have to live with several preinstalled advertising apps by companies such as Microsoft or Facebook, which unfortunately you cannot delete but only deactivate them. Although they will then not be visible anymore, they still take up storage space.

On the other hand, you can uninstall most of Samsung's own apps that you do not need, such as Samsung Health, Samsung Wearable, or the email app from Samsung.

Samsung Galaxy A40 software
Samsung Galaxy A40 software
Samsung Galaxy A40 software
Samsung Galaxy A40 software
Samsung Galaxy A40 software
Samsung Galaxy A40 software
Samsung Galaxy A40 software
Samsung Galaxy A40 software

Communication and GPS – There could have been more LTE bands

The Samsung Galaxy A40 offers the modern 802.11-ac WLAN and also otherwise the most current standards in terms of wireless Internet. With this, it is one of the fastest devices in our comparison field. However, the send and receive rates vary slightly in our test with the Linksys EA8500 reference router.

Our test unit offers the most necessary LTE bands, allowing you to also travel abroad with the smartphone at some point. However, when traveling to far-away countries, you should find out whether the necessary LTE bands are supported by the Galaxy A40, since you will be unable to use LTE there if not.

Around the city, the mobile reception is good indoors. 

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
350 (min: 327, max: 361) MBit/s ∼100% +58%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=423)
224 MBit/s ∼64% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A40
Mali-G71 MP2, 7904, 64 GB eMMC Flash
222 (min: 203, max: 243) MBit/s ∼63%
Gigaset GS280
Adreno 505, 430, 32 GB eMMC Flash
153 (min: 135, max: 165) MBit/s ∼44% -31%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 32 GB eMMC Flash
120 MBit/s ∼34% -46%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Mali-G71 MP2, 7904, 64 GB eMMC Flash
64 (min: 52, max: 69) MBit/s ∼18% -71%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy A40
Mali-G71 MP2, 7904, 64 GB eMMC Flash
268 (min: 244, max: 288) MBit/s ∼100%
Gigaset GS280
Adreno 505, 430, 32 GB eMMC Flash
247 (min: 227, max: 265) MBit/s ∼92% -8%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
238 (min: 189, max: 285) MBit/s ∼89% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=423)
214 MBit/s ∼80% -20%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 32 GB eMMC Flash
123 MBit/s ∼46% -54%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Mali-G71 MP2, 7904, 64 GB eMMC Flash
41 (min: 2, max: 93) MBit/s ∼15% -85%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø221 (203-243)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø268 (244-288)
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test near the window
GPS Test near the window
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors

In terms of locating, according to the GPS Test app, the Galaxy A40 is unable to receive sufficient satellite signals indoors to allow it to determine its location accurately. This situation does not improve even near the window. While it is able to quickly find satellites outdoors, the locating does not succeed there either. This can be due to many factors, but with other smartphones, we did get a satellite reception at the same time and place.

Google Maps, which additionally orients itself using the WLAN networks it can connect to, is able to locate our position quickly and fairly accurately, so we can see that the compass built into the smartphone works well.

With a bike tour we evaluate the ability of the smartphone to determine its location in practice, also taking the Garmin Edge 520 professional navigation device. While the A40 likes to cut off some curves and sometimes places us next to the road in the small alleyways of the old city, the professional device also is not perfect there either. Thus, we are able to attest the Galaxy A40 with acceptable locating capabilities, even if the failure in the GPS Test app remains a flaw.

GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – traffic circle
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – traffic circle
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Samsung Galaxy A40 – overview
GPS Samsung Galaxy A40 – overview
GPS Samsung Galaxy A40 – traffic circle
GPS Samsung Galaxy A40 – traffic circle
GPS Samsung Galaxy A40 – bridge
GPS Samsung Galaxy A40 – bridge

Telephone Functions and Voice Quality – Booming from time to time

The Telephone app was developed by Samsung itself and offers similar functions as Google's standard app. You start with the telephone keyboard and can then go through the previous calls or contacts, or discover nearby places. VoWiFi and VoLTE are supported, as long as the network operator plays along.

While the voice quality through the earpiece is solid, the voice of our conversation partner booms noticeably at maximum volume. The microphone transfers our voice fairly clearly and without any additional noises. Through the speaker and with hands-free operation, the voice of our conversation partner also sounds slightly booming at high volumes, but otherwise the sound is pleasantly warm and clear. Our voice should neither be too quiet nor too loud, since otherwise our conversation partner either hears nothing or some booming. 

Cameras – Dual camera with two focal lengths

Picture taken with front camera
Picture taken with front camera

Compared to the Samsung Galaxy A6 2018, the camera arrangement has changed significantly. There is now a dual-camera system in the back and a very highly resolving lens in the front. The main camera continues to have a resolution of 16 Megapixels, but there is also a 5-Megapixel lens with a 123° wide angle. With a click inside the camera app, you can change the lens used, resulting in some creative possibilities. At the same time the second lens supports some Bokeh effects, but this only works if it recognizes a face.

As with the Galaxy A6 2018, we basically like the images of the main camera very much, they offer a lot of detail and strong colors. While the dynamic could have been higher and the brightness could have been better in weak-light scenarios, overall the performance of the main camera is not bad for a smartphone of the lower mid-range.

With the main camera, you can record videos at 30 FPS with a maximum resolution of 1080p. Alternatively, you can also record more pixels in the width, in order to create a video with the Galaxy A40 that fills the whole screen. The exposure reacts to changing conditions well and fast without any visible steps, and we also like the image quality overall. Before making the recording, you can select which of the lenses in the back you want to use and decide whether you want more of a wide-angle or a focused image.

The Galaxy A40 is definitely designed as a selfie phone, even if you have to make do without an auto-focus and flash in the front camera. At least you can use the screen as a replacement for the flash. At 25 Megapixels, you can take very high-resolution selfies, but by default selfies are recorded at 12 Megapixels. In bright light or with higher contrasts, it might happen that the edges are not reproduced correctly and the image is overexposed. In addition, you have to be careful to keep the right distance, since otherwise the sharpness is lacking due to the missing auto-focus.

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

We take a picture of our test chart with the main camera under controlled light conditions in our lab. This shows the slightly unclean reproduction of color areas, and the pictures also look a little dark. Overall, the sharpness is at a good level.

The color chart shows us that colors are reproduced significantly too bright in parts, which becomes particularly visible with green and blue color tones.

Picture of our test chart
Picture of our test chart
Test chart detail
Test chart detail
ColorChecker: The target color is displayed in the bottom half of each field.
ColorChecker: The target color is displayed in the bottom half of each field.

Accessories and Warranty – Quick-charger included

In addition to the 10-watt charger and a USB-C cable, there are also a SIM tool and headset in the box. While the latter offers an acceptable sound, it does not really fit securely in everybody's ears.

In its online shop, Samsung offers various covers, such as the gradation cover, which adds a new design element with its color gradation. Those who are looking for a folding wallet cover with a screen protector can also find that.

The warranty on the smartphone is 24 months.

Input Devices and Operation – Fast fingerprint sensor

The touchscreen is very accurate up to the corners and has a sliding-friendly surface that offers only little resistance to the sliding finger. While You can increase the sensitivity in the settings allowing you to use a screen protector, this mode is not suitable for navigation with gloves.

There is a fingerprint sensor on the back. It is only distinguished from the rest of the back by a slightly elevated edge and can therefore be found easily by your finger. It unlocks the device quickly, even from standby. The accuracy convinces us as well. You can also use face recognition to unlock the phone. However, even before you set this up Samsung offers a warning that this method is not quite as secure. At least you can choose between the faster or the more secure method. When it gets too dark, the display brightens automatically to illuminate your face, but our test unit did not succeed in unlocking in complete darkness. Generally the device needs several seconds before the face is recognized, so unlocking the smartphone is faster and more secure via fingerprint.

As in most of the current smartphones, you can find the keys for the menu navigation on the display, and you can also use gestures or rearrange the keys. In terms of the hardware buttons, there is a volume rocker and a standby button on the right side of the case. Your finger can find them easily, and they offer a good pressure point.

Keyboard - landscape
Keyboard - landscape
Keyboard - portrait
Keyboard - portrait

Display – Mid-range smartphone with an AMOLED display

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid

As a distinctive feature in the affordable mid-range, Samsung uses an AMOLED display in its devices of the Galaxy-A series. The Galaxy A40 is no exception here and additionally brings a decent 2340x1080 pixels, which corresponds to a slightly expanded Full HD resolution.

Unfortunately, the brightness of the display is not completely convincing in our tests. We measure 370 cd/m² on average and a 379 cd/m² maximum, and an illuminated brightness sensor will not change this. Other devices offer significantly brighter screens here. On the other hand, at 94%, the brightness is evenly distributed in the Galaxy smartphone.

373
cd/m²
356
cd/m²
375
cd/m²
374
cd/m²
358
cd/m²
378
cd/m²
379
cd/m²
362
cd/m²
378
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 379 cd/m² Average: 370.3 cd/m² Minimum: 1.9 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 94 %
Center on Battery: 358 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 7.4 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.3
142.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.084
Samsung Galaxy A40
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 5.9
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Super AMOLED, 1480x720, 5.6
Samsung Galaxy M20
PLS TFT, 2340x1080, 6.3
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.3
Gigaset GS280
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.7
Screen
34%
4%
41%
6%
Brightness middle
358
453
27%
452
26%
541
51%
472
32%
Brightness
370
459
24%
445
20%
540
46%
473
28%
Brightness Distribution
94
93
-1%
92
-2%
91
-3%
87
-7%
Black Level *
0.41
0.33
0.28
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
7.4
2.6
65%
5.3
28%
2.7
64%
4.7
36%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
12.5
9.2
26%
9.5
24%
4.6
63%
9.6
23%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4
1.6
60%
6.8
-70%
3.1
22%
7
-75%
Gamma
2.084 106%
2.07 106%
2.23 99%
2.26 97%
2.26 97%
CCT
7078 92%
6356 102%
8355 78%
6853 95%
7730 84%
Contrast
1102
1639
1686

* ... 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 245 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 245 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 245 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9418 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Naturally the contrast is very good, due to the pixels that can be deactivated to produce absolute black. However, the color deviations are relatively high in our tests. You can chose between various display modes, with the "Cinema" mode offering the most accurate color reproduction. Overall, the color reproduction is fairly warm, and only the "Adjustable Display" mode produces a slight blue tint.

The color space coverage is sufficient for a large part of AdobeRGB and DCI P3, so those who calibrate the display will be able to easily judge colors in photos or printed media, for example. 

CalMAN Color Accuracy – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Color Accuracy – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Color Accuracy – Simple mode
CalMAN Color Accuracy – Simple mode
CalMAN Color Accuracy – Photo mode
CalMAN Color Accuracy – Photo mode
CalMAN Color Accuracy – Cinema mode
CalMAN Color Accuracy – Cinema mode
CalMAN Grayscales – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Grayscales – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Grayscales – Simple mode
CalMAN Grayscales – Simple mode
CalMAN Grayscales – Photo mode
CalMAN Grayscales – Photo mode
CalMAN Grayscales – Cinema mode
CalMAN Grayscales – Cinema mode
CalMAN Saturation – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Saturation – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Color Space sRGB – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Color Space sRGB – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Color Space AdobeRGB – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Color Space AdobeRGB – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Color Space DCI P3 – Adjustable Display mode
CalMAN Color Space DCI P3 – Adjustable Display mode

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
8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5 ms rise
↘ 3 ms fall
The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 6 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
10 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5 ms rise
↘ 5 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 7 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.8 ms).

Outdoors, the low brightness becomes a problem for the display and you should look for a shady place during sunny days.

As usual for AMOLED displays, the viewing angles are very good. Even if you look at the screen from the side, the image still remains easily recognizable with its original colors.

Outdoor use – brightness sensor
Outdoor use – brightness sensor
Outdoor use – maximum brightness
Outdoor use – maximum brightness
Outdoor use – medium brightness
Outdoor use – medium brightness
Outdoor use – minimum brightness
Outdoor use – minimum brightness
Viewing angles
Viewing angles
 

Performance – A Galaxy smartphone with decent power

In terms of SoC, the Samsung Exynos 7904 is used. The Galaxy A40 does not need to hide with this: Although the Xiaomi Redmi Note 7 offers even more power, compared to the Galaxy A6 2018 or the Gigaset GS280, the advantage is significant. The Galaxy M20 achieved fairly similar performance values.

Things look similar in terms of the graphics performance, where the Galaxy A40 also offers a lot of power for its price range and runs smoothly in everyday operation.

Geekbench 4.4
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
3722 Points ∼67%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
3704 Points ∼66% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
5576 Points ∼100% +50%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2313 Points ∼41% -38%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (3213 - 3722, n=3)
3546 Points ∼64% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=317)
4676 Points ∼84% +26%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4105 Points ∼69%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
3741 Points ∼63% -9%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4096 Points ∼69% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
5913 Points ∼100% +44%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2222 Points ∼38% -46%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (4017 - 4105, n=3)
4073 Points ∼69% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 11598, n=376)
4682 Points ∼79% +14%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1329 Points ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
732 Points ∼45% -45%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1320 Points ∼81% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1639 Points ∼100% +23%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
659 Points ∼40% -50%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (1268 - 1329, n=3)
1306 Points ∼80% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4824, n=376)
1413 Points ∼86% +6%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5293 Points ∼86%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
3809 Points ∼62% -28%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5269 Points ∼85% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
6187 Points ∼100% +17%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
3408 Points ∼55% -36%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (5269 - 5452, n=3)
5338 Points ∼86% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11440, n=367)
5225 Points ∼84% -1%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
6923 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
4878 Points ∼70% -30%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5802 Points ∼84% -16%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
6870 Points ∼99% -1%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
4291 Points ∼62% -38%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (5802 - 6923, n=3)
6394 Points ∼92% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 14439, n=538)
5652 Points ∼82% -18%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2061 Points ∼77%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2028 Points ∼76% -2%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (2028 - 2061, n=3)
2047 Points ∼76% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=54)
2680 Points ∼100% +30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
604 Points ∼22%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
964 Points ∼36% +60%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (604 - 964, n=3)
727 Points ∼27% +20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=54)
2699 Points ∼100% +347%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
717 Points ∼29%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1091 Points ∼44% +52%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (717 - 1091, n=3)
844 Points ∼34% +18%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=54)
2460 Points ∼100% +243%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1691 Points ∼61%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
1602 Points ∼58% -5%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1657 Points ∼60% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2768 Points ∼100% +64%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1081 Points ∼39% -36%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (1657 - 1755, n=3)
1701 Points ∼61% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 4535, n=373)
1938 Points ∼70% +15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
549 Points ∼32%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
241 Points ∼14% -56%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
488 Points ∼29% -11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1262 Points ∼74% +130%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
301 Points ∼18% -45%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (488 - 549, n=3)
528 Points ∼31% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8206, n=373)
1701 Points ∼100% +210%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
646 Points ∼41%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
297 Points ∼19% -54%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
579 Points ∼36% -10%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1436 Points ∼90% +122%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
358 Points ∼23% -45%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (579 - 646, n=3)
624 Points ∼39% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6312, n=374)
1589 Points ∼100% +146%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1710 Points ∼62%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
1601 Points ∼58% -6%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
1601 Points ∼58% -6%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1677 Points ∼60% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2772 Points ∼100% +62%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1072 Points ∼39% -37%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (1677 - 1716, n=3)
1701 Points ∼61% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4703, n=401)
1848 Points ∼67% +8%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
823 Points ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
387 Points ∼17% -53%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
387 Points ∼17% -53%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
650 Points ∼29% -21%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2006 Points ∼90% +144%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
519 Points ∼23% -37%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (650 - 823, n=3)
765 Points ∼34% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 14951, n=401)
2227 Points ∼100% +171%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
930 Points ∼45%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
465 Points ∼22% -50%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
465 Points ∼22% -50%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
752 Points ∼36% -19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2073 Points ∼100% +123%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
586 Points ∼28% -37%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (752 - 930, n=3)
871 Points ∼42% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 8141, n=401)
1905 Points ∼92% +105%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1675 Points ∼62%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
1709 Points ∼63% +2%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1657 Points ∼61% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2708 Points ∼100% +62%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1096 Points ∼40% -35%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (1657 - 1704, n=3)
1679 Points ∼62% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4320, n=452)
1844 Points ∼68% +10%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
539 Points ∼38%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
211 Points ∼15% -61%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
488 Points ∼35% -9%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1189 Points ∼85% +121%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
249 Points ∼18% -54%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (488 - 542, n=3)
523 Points ∼37% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 6362, n=452)
1404 Points ∼100% +160%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
635 Points ∼47%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
262 Points ∼19% -59%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
582 Points ∼43% -8%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1358 Points ∼100% +114%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
301 Points ∼22% -53%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (582 - 639, n=3)
619 Points ∼46% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 5734, n=453)
1357 Points ∼100% +114%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1687 Points ∼60%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
1705 Points ∼60% +1%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1677 Points ∼59% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2834 Points ∼100% +68%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1095 Points ∼39% -35%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (1677 - 1702, n=3)
1689 Points ∼60% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4454, n=494)
1714 Points ∼60% +2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
702 Points ∼36%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
264 Points ∼14% -62%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
650 Points ∼34% -7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1925 Points ∼100% +174%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
503 Points ∼26% -28%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (650 - 708, n=3)
687 Points ∼36% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 10008, n=493)
1844 Points ∼96% +163%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
807 Points ∼39%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
325 Points ∼16% -60%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
752 Points ∼36% -7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2073 Points ∼100% +157%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
572 Points ∼28% -29%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (752 - 814, n=3)
791 Points ∼38% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 7820, n=496)
1603 Points ∼77% +99%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
12321 Points ∼65%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
6184 Points ∼32% -50%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
12500 Points ∼65% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
19087 Points ∼100% +55%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
8253 Points ∼43% -33%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (12321 - 12994, n=3)
12605 Points ∼66% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=653)
13917 Points ∼73% +13%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
13821 Points ∼47%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
5376 Points ∼18% -61%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
13392 Points ∼45% -3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
29496 Points ∼100% +113%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9530 Points ∼32% -31%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (13392 - 13821, n=3)
13669 Points ∼46% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 162695, n=651)
20570 Points ∼70% +49%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
13457 Points ∼51%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
5537 Points ∼21% -59%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
13183 Points ∼50% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
26308 Points ∼100% +95%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9213 Points ∼35% -32%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (13183 - 13608, n=3)
13416 Points ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 83518, n=651)
17077 Points ∼65% +27%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
25 fps ∼49%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
12 fps ∼24% -52%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
14 fps ∼27% -44%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
51 fps ∼100% +104%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
16 fps ∼31% -36%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (14 - 25, n=3)
21.3 fps ∼42% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 251, n=675)
36 fps ∼71% +44%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
23 fps ∼52%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
19 fps ∼43% -17%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
12 fps ∼27% -48%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
44 fps ∼100% +91%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
15 fps ∼34% -35%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (12 - 24, n=3)
19.7 fps ∼45% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=684)
27.6 fps ∼63% +20%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
13 fps ∼57%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
5.4 fps ∼23% -58%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
7 fps ∼30% -46%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
23 fps ∼100% +77%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
7 fps ∼30% -46%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (7 - 13, n=3)
11 fps ∼48% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 132, n=581)
20.5 fps ∼89% +58%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
12 fps ∼60%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
10 fps ∼50% -17%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
6.2 fps ∼31% -48%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
20 fps ∼100% +67%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
6.6 fps ∼33% -45%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (6.2 - 13, n=3)
10.4 fps ∼52% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=590)
18.9 fps ∼95% +58%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
8.1 fps ∼48%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
3.2 fps ∼19% -60%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.3 fps ∼26% -47%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
15 fps ∼89% +85%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
4.6 fps ∼27% -43%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (4.3 - 8.1, n=3)
6.83 fps ∼41% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 88, n=447)
16.8 fps ∼100% +107%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
7.4 fps ∼46%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
6.9 fps ∼43% -7%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
3.8 fps ∼23% -49%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
13 fps ∼80% +76%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
4.3 fps ∼27% -42%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (3.8 - 7.7, n=3)
6.3 fps ∼39% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=449)
16.2 fps ∼100% +119%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2.9 fps ∼31%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2.7 fps ∼29% -7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
4.8 fps ∼51% +66%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1.4 fps ∼15% -52%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (2.7 - 3, n=3)
2.87 fps ∼31% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 59, n=165)
9.37 fps ∼100% +223%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1.8 fps ∼28%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1.7 fps ∼26% -6%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
3.2 fps ∼49% +78%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
0.88 fps ∼13% -51%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (1.7 - 1.8, n=3)
1.767 fps ∼27% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 31, n=164)
6.54 fps ∼100% +263%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.2 fps ∼30%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.3 fps ∼31% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
7.6 fps ∼55% +81%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2.5 fps ∼18% -40%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (4.2 - 4.9, n=3)
4.47 fps ∼32% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 59, n=169)
13.9 fps ∼100% +231%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.7 fps ∼31%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.7 fps ∼31% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
8.7 fps ∼57% +85%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2.6 fps ∼17% -45%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (4.7 - 5, n=3)
4.8 fps ∼31% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 63, n=169)
15.3 fps ∼100% +226%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5.2 fps ∼45%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
2 fps ∼17% -62%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2.6 fps ∼23% -50%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
9.1 fps ∼79% +75%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2.6 fps ∼23% -50%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (2.6 - 5.2, n=3)
4.33 fps ∼38% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 54, n=372)
11.5 fps ∼100% +121%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.6 fps ∼44%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
4 fps ∼38% -13%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2.7 fps ∼26% -41%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
7.8 fps ∼75% +70%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2.5 fps ∼24% -46%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (2.7 - 5, n=3)
4.1 fps ∼39% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 58, n=376)
10.4 fps ∼100% +126%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
6.21 fps ∼37%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (6.21 - 8.72, n=2)
7.47 fps ∼44% +20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.24 - 37.4, n=59)
17 fps ∼100% +174%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
6.43 fps ∼45%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
 
6.43 fps ∼45% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.57 - 37.3, n=53)
14.2 fps ∼100% +121%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5.35 fps ∼31%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
 
5.35 fps ∼31% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.88 - 39.7, n=50)
17.5 fps ∼100% +227%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
103205 Points ∼72%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
61794 Points ∼43% -40%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
108360 Points ∼76% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
143352 Points ∼100% +39%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
58755 Points ∼41% -43%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (101367 - 108360, n=3)
104311 Points ∼73% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (17073 - 398720, n=283)
136819 Points ∼95% +33%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
927 Score ∼43%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
 
927 Score ∼43% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 5025, n=57)
2139 Score ∼100% +131%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
974 Points ∼90%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
732 Points ∼67% -25%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
984 Points ∼91% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1086 Points ∼100% +11%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
675 Points ∼62% -31%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (974 - 1016, n=3)
991 Points ∼91% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1731, n=621)
751 Points ∼69% -23%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1114 Points ∼48%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
533 Points ∼23% -52%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1038 Points ∼45% -7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2308 Points ∼100% +107%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
718 Points ∼31% -36%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (1038 - 1114, n=3)
1075 Points ∼47% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 15969, n=621)
1986 Points ∼86% +78%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1935 Points ∼65%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
1096 Points ∼37% -43%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2973 Points ∼100% +54%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2332 Points ∼78% +21%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
684 Points ∼23% -65%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (1935 - 2973, n=3)
2329 Points ∼78% +20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=621)
1487 Points ∼50% -23%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
3788 Points ∼74%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
2201 Points ∼43% -42%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
3957 Points ∼77% +4%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
5141 Points ∼100% +36%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1794 Points ∼35% -53%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (3517 - 3957, n=3)
3754 Points ∼73% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 12202, n=621)
2910 Points ∼57% -23%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1679 Points ∼72%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, Mali-T830 MP2, 3072
985 Points ∼42% -41%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1862 Points ∼80% +11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2342 Points ∼100% +39%
Gigaset GS280
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
878 Points ∼37% -48%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (1679 - 1862, n=3)
1741 Points ∼74% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=621)
1460 Points ∼62% -13%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A40
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
241 Points ∼33%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
  (241 - 301, n=2)
271 Points ∼37% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (35 - 2754, n=102)
730 Points ∼100% +203%

A significant improvement can be seen in the surfing speed. Compared to the Galaxy A6 2018, the Galaxy A40 performs considerably faster on the Internet. This can also be seen when images on websites are quickly loaded during scrolling and pages are rendered quickly overall.

Demanding HTML-5 pages also pose no problems for the Galaxy A40.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 108, n=94)
31.9 Points ∼100% +41%
Samsung Galaxy A40 (Chrome 73)
22.65 Points ∼71%
Samsung Galaxy M20 (Samsung Brwoser 9.2)
22.57 Points ∼71% 0%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (22.1 - 22.7, n=3)
22.5 Points ∼71% -1%
Gigaset GS280 (Chrome 72)
10.994 Points ∼34% -51%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 123, n=84)
34.9 runs/min ∼100% +45%
Samsung Galaxy A40 (Chrome 73)
24.1 runs/min ∼69%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (19.3 - 24.1, n=3)
21.7 runs/min ∼62% -10%
Samsung Galaxy M20
19.3 runs/min ∼55% -20%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 161, n=150)
64.2 Points ∼100% +23%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7 (Chrome 72)
61 Points ∼95% +17%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (52 - 56, n=3)
53.3 Points ∼83% +3%
Samsung Galaxy M20
52 Points ∼81% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A40 (Chrome 73)
52 Points ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137)
31 Points ∼48% -40%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7 (Chrome 72)
10679 Points ∼100% +37%
Samsung Galaxy M20
9087 Points ∼85% +17%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (7798 - 9087, n=3)
8527 Points ∼80% +9%
Samsung Galaxy A40 (Chrome 73)
7798 Points ∼73%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 43280, n=677)
6450 Points ∼60% -17%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137)
3739 Points ∼35% -52%
Gigaset GS280 (Chrome 72)
3291 Points ∼31% -58%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Gigaset GS280 (Chrome 72)
13609.8 ms * ∼100% -174%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137)
11807.6 ms * ∼87% -137%
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=702)
10678 ms * ∼78% -115%
Samsung Galaxy A40 (Chrome 73)
4975.8 ms * ∼37%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (3703 - 4976, n=3)
4245 ms * ∼31% +15%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7 (Chrome 72)
3948 ms * ∼29% +21%
Samsung Galaxy M20
3703 ms * ∼27% +26%

* ... smaller is better

The storage is also faster than that of the predecessor. Particularly in terms of its read rates, the internal storage shows significantly better values. However, in the class comparison, it is still only sufficient for a place in the middle of the field.

The microSD card is accessed at the usual speeds, as our test with our Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 reference card shows.

Samsung Galaxy A40Samsung Galaxy A6 2018Samsung Galaxy M20Xiaomi Redmi Note 7Gigaset GS280Average 64 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-19%
43%
21%
-14%
17%
-6%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
65.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
65.66 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
65.29 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
59.51 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-9%
55.67
-15%
57.6 (11.2 - 74.7, n=98)
-12%
49 (3.4 - 87.1, n=410)
-25%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
81.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
81.39 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
81.48 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
83.18 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
78.67
-3%
76.3 (21.1 - 87.2, n=98)
-6%
67.2 (8.1 - 96.5, n=410)
-17%
Random Write 4KB
13.2
10.68
-19%
44
233%
16.06
22%
9.83
-26%
24 (3.4 - 88.2, n=112)
82%
21.3 (0.14 - 250, n=730)
61%
Random Read 4KB
75.7
24.54
-68%
64
-15%
82.94
10%
44.26
-42%
54.3 (11.4 - 149, n=112)
-28%
46.1 (1.59 - 196, n=730)
-39%
Sequential Write 256KB
99.6
100.64
1%
137
38%
204.72
106%
104.38
5%
171 (40 - 246, n=112)
72%
94.6 (2.99 - 590, n=730)
-5%
Sequential Read 256KB
295
208.44
-29%
300
2%
283.36
-4%
281.8
-4%
273 (95.6 - 704, n=112)
-7%
266 (12.1 - 1504, n=730)
-10%

Games – Often 60 FPS, but not everything is playable

In games, the Samsung Galaxy A40 generally does well. Some very current games such as "Asphalt 9" cannot be played easily on the device, since the manufacturer considers the graphics hardware as too weak and the game is not displayed in the Google Play Store. Probably there also will be some trouble starting it, if you download the game from elsewhere.

Fortunately, both games accept the 60-Hz mode on the smartphone, allowing you to play quite smoothly. However, some drops are noticeable in high settings. We determine the frame rates using GameBench.

The control via position sensor and touchscreen works without a hitch.

Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Shadow Fight 3
Shadow Fight 3
010203040506070Tooltip
; Shadow Fight 3; high; 1.18.2: Ø58.7 (42-61)
; Shadow Fight 3; minimal; 1.18.2: Ø59.6 (52-61)
; Arena of Valor; min; 1.28.2.2: Ø59.9 (52-61)
; Arena of Valor; high HD; 1.28.2.2: Ø59 (46-61)

Emissions – Slight warming but no throttling

Temperature

GFXBench battery test
GFXBench battery test

After a prolonged period of load, the case temperatures are fairly elevated. However, as in its larger sibling, the Samsung Galaxy A50, the warming is noticeable but by no means critical in the Galaxy A40. In idle mode, while it is turned on with no significant loads, there is no noticeable warming in the smartphone.

Even after prolonged periods of load, the Galaxy A40 does not throttle. We can find out about this with the battery test of GFXBench, which records the differences in the achieved frame rates while rendering the same sequence thirty times in a row. Since the Galaxy A40 shows no differences worth mentioning, we can assume that the full power is still available even after longer time periods.

Max. Load
 41.6 °C
107 F
38.4 °C
101 F
36.2 °C
97 F
 
 42.4 °C
108 F
38 °C
100 F
36.4 °C
98 F
 
 41.2 °C
106 F
38.4 °C
101 F
36.2 °C
97 F
 
Maximum: 42.4 °C = 108 F
Average: 38.8 °C = 102 F
34.9 °C
95 F
38.8 °C
102 F
40.8 °C
105 F
35.6 °C
96 F
39.7 °C
103 F
41.5 °C
107 F
35.8 °C
96 F
37.3 °C
99 F
41.2 °C
106 F
Maximum: 41.5 °C = 107 F
Average: 38.4 °C = 101 F
Power Supply (max.)  37.8 °C = 100 F | Room Temperature 21.4 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38.8 °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 42.4 °C / 108 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 41.5 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.3 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
Heatmap - back
Heatmap - back
Heatmap - front
Heatmap - front

Speaker

Pink Noise speaker test
Pink Noise speaker test

With its mono speaker at the bottom edge, the Galaxy A40 does not get quite as loud as its predecessor, the Galaxy A6 (2018), which also had the more linear sound reproduction across all frequencies. However, we can still attest the A40 with a fairly warm sound, although at maximum volume, it sounded a bit uncomfortable to our ears, since some very high frequencies are overemphasized. Overall, the sound is decent, particularly in this price range.

There continues to be a 3.5-mm audio port in the Galaxy A40, and you also can connect speakers or headphones via Bluetooth. Both work quickly and without any problems, and we also like the sound that is offered.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204342.52539.141.43132.933.74038.836.35042.237.86332.4318026.725.510025.92512529.226.816024.936.320020.141.825019.144.931518.950.940018.557.250019.560.463017.165.480016.167.7100016.272.2125015.673.2160016.472.920001771.4250016.370.1315015.365400015.463.2500015.268.7630015.272.3800015.475.91000015.565.31250015.448.21600015.545.9SPL67.173.666.728.782.6N20.828.218.51.253.1median 16.3median 65Delta2.412.135.236.932.938.737.236.931.737.939.63728.335.427.332.926.93226.738.82443.220.947.220.951.319.556.218.563.517.566.817.569.615.772.815.872.416.675.615.87215.471.915.574.21671.215.880.71679.916.372.816.372.716.271.416.465.516.463.228.6871.167.8median 16.4median 71.22.17.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy A40Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy A40 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 50% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 69% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy A6 2018 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 3% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 27% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 67% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management – Almost good endurance

Power Consumption

In terms of the power consumption, the Samsung Galaxy A40 does a fairly good job, even if the predecessor was significantly more efficient overall. While the Galaxy A40 uses quite a lot of power, particularly under load, it also offers significantly more performance than the Galaxy A6 (2018).

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.1 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.8 / 1.4 / 2.3 Watt
Load midlight 7.4 / 8.6 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy A40
3100 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy M20
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
4000 mAh
Gigaset GS280
5000 mAh
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
31%
-1%
6%
-48%
Idle Minimum *
0.8
0.81
-1%
0.94
-18%
0.61
24%
1.88
-135%
Idle Average *
1.4
1.26
10%
2.37
-69%
1.95
-39%
3.12
-123%
Idle Maximum *
2.3
1.3
43%
2.42
-5%
2.03
12%
3.21
-40%
Load Average *
7.4
2.87
61%
3.83
48%
4.56
38%
4.34
41%
Load Maximum *
8.6
4.82
44%
5.07
41%
9.15
-6%
7.33
15%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The 3100-mAh battery does not help the Galaxy A40 in getting decent runtimes. Many devices in this price range, such as the Galaxy M20 or the Gigaset GS280, use an especially powerful battery that results in more weight but also a longer battery life. However, we must say that with 12%, the difference between our test unit and the Gigaset GS280 is not particularly large.

The A40 lasts for 10:43 hours in our WLAN test, which means that you might also get though two work days if you are not always using your smartphone. Under full load, the device lasts for 4:37 hours. This places it at about the same level overall as the Galaxy A6 from last year.

The included charger is rated at 10 watts and needs a good two hours to completely recharge the smartphone.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
28h 9min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
10h 43min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
13h 45min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 37min
Samsung Galaxy A40
3100 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy M20
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7
4000 mAh
Gigaset GS280
5000 mAh
Battery Runtime
1%
24%
11%
12%
Reader / Idle
1689
1616
-4%
1904
13%
1950
15%
H.264
825
868
5%
1121
36%
940
14%
WiFi v1.3
643
608
-5%
927.5
44%
768
19%
719
12%
Load
277
301
9%
288
4%
259
-6%

Pros

+ good price-performance ratio
+ high-quality case
+ dual cameras with different focal lengths
+ compact and light
+ decent battery life
+ warm speaker sound
+ AMOLED display with a large color space
+ no throttling

Cons

- inaccurate locating
- mediocre voice quality
- dark display

Verdict – A high quality for the lower mid-range

Testing the Samsung Galaxy A40, test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de
Testing the Samsung Galaxy A40, test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de

The Samsung Galaxy A40 is a compact smartphone of the lower mid-range that offers many advantages compared to its predecessor, thanks to a high performance, an elegant case, and a variable camera.

All the other smartphones within its price class now also have to compete with its compact build and light weight, with its case that is robust and high-quality at the same time, and with its high performance capabilities.

Some minor disadvantages result from the dark display, the spotty GPS reception, and the call quality that is only mediocre. However, the large color space of the display, the dual-camera system with its variable focal length, and the solid battery life warrant a clear purchase recommendation for the Samsung Galaxy A40.

An affordable, high-quality and high-performance smartphone of the lower mid-range.

Compared to the more affordable M series, the A40 distinguishes itself with its higher-quality case, the lower weight, and the smaller form factor. Those who are only looking for performance can also grab the M20, since there are no differences in this regard.

Samsung Galaxy A40 - 09/17/2019 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
89%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
96%
Connectivity
46 / 70 → 65%
Weight
93%
Battery
89%
Display
81%
Games Performance
8 / 64 → 13%
Application Performance
51 / 86 → 59%
Temperature
89%
Noise
100%
Audio
74 / 90 → 82%
Camera
59%
Average
72%
81%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 3 comments / answer
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 A40 Smartphone Review
Florian Schmitt, 2019-05- 9 (Update: 2019-05-13)