Notebookcheck

Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) Smartphone Review

Manuel Masiero, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Alex Alderson), 12/21/2018

6-inch bargain. If you are looking for a budget smartphone with a large display, dual SIM and LTE functionality, then you should look no further than the Galaxy J4 Plus (2018). The device is well-designed, offers solid performance, and it is identical, except for a few details, to the more expensive Galaxy J6 Plus.

Samsung has expanded its range of smartphones with new entry-level devices. The company’s cheapest new smartphone is the Galaxy J4 Plus (2018), which launched at 189 Euros (~US$215). The J4 Plus (2018) packs in plenty for the money though. Samsung has equipped the device with a 6-inch IPS display that runs at a native 1480x720 resolution, which corresponds to a slim 18.5:9 aspect ratio.

Moreover, the J4 Plus (2018) currently ships with Android 8.1 Oreo, while it is also equipped with a 13-MP camera, 2 GB RAM, 32 GB of internal storage, and dual-SIM functionality. The Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 SoC powers the J4 Plus (2018) and integrates a Qualcomm Adreno 308 GPU. Both the CPU and GPU should be powerful enough for most apps and games, although the SoC is almost three years old at the time of writing.

The J4 Plus (2018) has no fingerprint sensor, which is a rarity for a smartphone released in 2018. The Galaxy J6 Plus, by contrast, has a fingerprint sensor and dual rear-facing cameras, the latter of which the J4 Plus also lacks. The Galaxy J6 Plus is Samsung’s second new budget device and is mostly the same as its cheaper sibling besides having 1 GB more RAM and the two aforementioned features. Please see here for an overview of the differences between the Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) and the Galaxy J6 Plus. The article is in German, but many of the terms should be understandable for an English speaker.

We have chosen to compare the Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) against other budget devices to assess its strengths and weaknesses. Our comparison devices include the BQ Aquaris C, Huawei Y6 2018, LG K11, Motorola Moto E5 Plus, Nokia 2.1, and Xiaomi Redmi 6.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Currently wanted: 
German-English-Translator - Details here

Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018 (Galaxy J Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
2048 MB 
Display
6 inch 18.5:9, 1480 x 720 pixel 274 PPI, Capacitive, 16 million colours, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 24.2 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm headphone jack, Card Reader: up to 512 GB microSD cards, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, Proximity sensor, USB-OTG, Samsung Smart Switch, Wi-Fi Direct
Networking
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM: 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900 MHz. UMTS: 850, 900, 1,900, 2,100 MHz. LTE Cat. 4: Bands 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 38, 40, 41. Dual-Nano SIM: up to 150 Mbps download speeds. SAR values: Head - 0.315 W/kg, Body – 1.463 W/kg, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.9 x 161.4 x 76.9 ( = 0.31 x 6.35 x 3.03 in)
Battery
3300 mAh Lithium-Ion, Talk time 3G (according to manufacturer): 23 h
Operating System
Android 8.1 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix f/1.9, 28 mm, LED flash, Autofocus, videos up to 1920x1080 at 30 FPS
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix f/2.2, flash, videos up to 1920x1080 at 30 FPS
Additional features
Speakers: Single speaker on the right-hand side of the device, Keyboard: virtual, Google apps, Samsung apps, Microsoft apps, 24 Months Warranty, fanless
Weight
178 g ( = 6.28 oz / 0.39 pounds), Power Supply: 30 g ( = 1.06 oz / 0.07 pounds)
Price
189 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) does not look like an entry-level smartphone in our opinion. Firstly, it has a 6-inch display, rounded corners, and a glass back case. In short, the budget price tag belies its premium design. The back glass has a glossy finish though, which proved to be a fingerprint magnet during our tests and makes the device feel unnervingly slippery in our hands.

Our test device is well-made and is just as good as the more-expensive Galaxy A and Galaxy S series in principle. We can twist our test device though, but the case does not emit any creaking or cracking sounds when we do so. Moreover, we could not get the display to deform by applying pressure directly to it, which is often a structural issue of many budget smartphones.

The J4 Plus (2018) is larger and heavier than most of our comparison devices. It is the second-thinnest at 7.9 mm though and is only 0.1 mm thicker than the Huawei Y6 2018.

Samsung currently sells the J4 Plus (2018) in black, gold and pink, the latter of which is the colour of our test device.

Size Comparison

Connectivity

Many smartphones advertise dual-SIM functionality, but the marketing is often disingenuous. Even premium devices like the Sony Xperia XZ3 are ‘dual-SIM’ and support microSD card expansion, but they only have two card slots, which means that you can choose dual-SIM functionality or microSD card expansion but not both.

By contrast, the J4 Plus (2018) has three card slots and supports up to 512-GB microSD cards. The device can read cards that are formatted in exFAT too. Moreover, the J4 Plus (2018) can store apps and data on external storage, which is useful if you run out of space on the internal storage. The J4 Plus (2018) has 32 GB of internal storage, but only around 24 GB is free to use, with the remaining 8 GB used up by the OS and its partitions.

Samsung has also equipped the device with an NFC chip, which is not always found in budget smartphones. Unfortunately, the device lacks a fingerprint sensor and has a micro-USB port rather than a USB Type-C port, which is reversible and generally can charge devices faster than micro-USB connections can. The J4 Plus (2018) supports USB On-The-Go (OTG) though, should you wish to connect external peripherals like a keyboard and mouse.

Left-hand side: volume rocker, SIM slot 1, SIM slot 2 & microSD slot
Left-hand side: volume rocker, SIM slot 1, SIM slot 2 & microSD slot
Right-hand side: power button, speaker
Right-hand side: power button, speaker
Topside: No connections
Topside: No connections
Underside: Micro-USB 2.0 port, microphone, headphone jack
Underside: Micro-USB 2.0 port, microphone, headphone jack

Software

The J4 Plus (2018) ships with Android 8.1 Oreo, while our test device has September 1, 2018 Android Security patches installed, which are almost four months old at the time of writing.

The device runs the Samsung Experience UI, which is the company’s customised version of Android. Our test device runs Samsung Experience 9.5, which differs slightly from stock Android. Principally, Samsung has used a different icon pack, reorganised the Settings menu and added some battery-saving features. Most people who are familiar with Android should not need much time to get used to Samsung Experience.

Our test device also has plenty of preinstalled apps from Google, Microsoft and Samsung. We have included screenshots below of all the apps that are included by default. Many preinstalled apps can be uninstalled or disabled, but others like LinkedIn cannot be, which is frustrating.

Default home screen
Default home screen
Default app drawer
Default app drawer
Preinstalled Google apps
Preinstalled Google apps
Preinstalled Microsoft apps
Preinstalled Microsoft apps
Preinstalled Samsung apps
Preinstalled Samsung apps
Storage Information
Storage Information
Device Information
Device Information
Device Information
Device Information

Communication & GPS

The J4 Plus (2018) can connect to GSM, 3G and 4G networks. The device supports LTE Cat.4 for up to 150 Mb/s download speeds and can connect to a wide range of LTE bands that are common in Central Europe. We had no issues connecting to LTE networks on the rural Vodafone network during our tests.

The device also supports NFC, Bluetooth 4.2 and modern Wi-Fi standards up to IEEE 802.11 n, which limits it to only 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi networks. Our test device achieved moderate Wi-Fi transfer speeds when tested with our Linksys EA8500 reference router. The J4 Plus (2018) averaged less than 50 Mb/s in both iperf3 (Client) Wi-Fi tests, which puts it below most of our comparison devices. Moreover, our test device struggled to maintain its Wi-Fi speed, which often caused transfer speeds to drop to around 20 Mb/s. Only the Moto E5 Plus achieved slower transfer speeds in both tests of our comparison devices, but overall the J4 Plus (2018) finished on par with its competitors. The BQ Aquaris C is the outlier here with over 200 Mb/s transfer speeds in both tests.

Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
BQ Aquaris C
Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash
268 (min: 247, max: 276) MBit/s ∼100% +457%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=323)
216 MBit/s ∼81% +349%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P22 MT6762, 32 GB eMMC Flash
62.1 (min: 30, max: 62) MBit/s ∼23% +29%
Huawei Y6 2018
Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash
50.5 MBit/s ∼19% +5%
Nokia 2.1
Adreno 308, 425, 8 GB eMMC Flash
48.7 (min: 29, max: 54) MBit/s ∼18% +1%
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
Adreno 308, 425, 32 GB eMMC Flash
48.1 (min: 23, max: 55) MBit/s ∼18%
LG K11
Mali-T860 MP2, MT6750, 16 GB eMMC Flash
46.1 MBit/s ∼17% -4%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
Adreno 308, 425, 32 GB eMMC Flash
43.2 (min: 36, max: 52) MBit/s ∼16% -10%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
BQ Aquaris C
Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash
216 (min: 189, max: 218) MBit/s ∼100% +468%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=323)
210 MBit/s ∼97% +453%
LG K11
Mali-T860 MP2, MT6750, 16 GB eMMC Flash
58.6 MBit/s ∼27% +54%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P22 MT6762, 32 GB eMMC Flash
55.5 (min: 47, max: 59) MBit/s ∼26% +46%
Nokia 2.1
Adreno 308, 425, 8 GB eMMC Flash
52.7 (min: 27, max: 58) MBit/s ∼24% +39%
Huawei Y6 2018
Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash
52.2 MBit/s ∼24% +37%
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
Adreno 308, 425, 32 GB eMMC Flash
38 (min: 19, max: 52) MBit/s ∼18%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
Adreno 308, 425, 32 GB eMMC Flash
35.4 (min: 23, max: 51) MBit/s ∼16% -7%
0102030405060Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø47.6 (23-55)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø39.2 (19-52)
GPS Test: Inside
GPS Test: Inside
GPS Test: Outside
GPS Test: Outside

The Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) uses BeiDou, GLONASS, GPS and SBAS for location services. Our test device can locate us with up to three metres accuracy even when tested inside of buildings, which is on par with some flagship devices.

We also took our test device on a bike ride to compare its navigation skills against the Garmin Edge 500, a professional navigation system. The J4 (2018) performed remarkably well for its price, with its recorded route differing by only 20 metres compared to the Garmin’s. Our test device lacks the fine location accuracy that the Garmin has, but overall the Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) is precise enough for most navigation tasks.

GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) - Overview
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) - Overview
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) – Cycling around a lake
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) – Cycling around a lake
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) - Loop
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) - Loop
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 – Cycling around a lake
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 – Cycling around a lake
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 - Loop
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 - Loop

Telephone Features & Call Quality

Samsung currently only sells the dual-SIM version of the J4 Plus (2018) on its website, which carries the DUOS branding. The device can assign either SIM as the default for voice calls, messages and data services.

Our test device has decent call quality, with voices sounding clear and undistorted when making calls using the earpiece or over speakerphone. We noticed that the microphone would pick up background noise from time to time though, although not intrusively so.

Cameras

Photo taken with the rear-facing camera
Photo taken with the rear-facing camera

The J4 Plus (2018) has a single rear-facing camera, which is one fewer than how many the J6 Plus has. The J4 Plus (2018) has a 13 MP rear-facing sensor with an f/1.9 aperture that can capture photos in up to 4128x3096 resolution and shoots videos in up to 1920x1080 at 30 FPS. By contrast, the front-facing camera is a 5 MP sensor with an f/2.2 aperture. Both cameras are supported by an LED flash.

The default camera app has numerous options including an HDR function, multiple camera modes and a timer. The app has AR Sticker, Beauty, Panorama and Pro modes, the latter of which includes options to manually set the ISO, exposure level and the white balance should you wish to do so. Conveniently, the shutter button can be moved freely, which improves usability. Unfortunately, the shutter button is fixed when using the front-facing camera, which also lacks the image effects and stickers that are available when using the rear-facing camera.

Photo taken with the front-facing camera
Photo taken with the front-facing camera

The J4 Plus (2018) takes passable photos, but it cannot compete with its more expensive competitors. In isolation, the rear-facing camera takes vivid shots with bright colours in daylight, as demonstrated by scenes 1 and 2. However, photos lack detail even in perfect conditions, while the camera algorithms overly sharpen objects to the point where the scene starts looking unrealistic.

The rear-facing camera predictably struggles more in low-light conditions, despite Samsung claiming “Quality photos, even in low-light” on its J4 Plus (2018) product page. Photos taken in low light are underexposed and lack detail, as scene 3 demonstrates.

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 also subjected the J4 Plus (2018) to further camera tests under controlled lighting conditions. We check the quality of colour reproduction with X-Rite ColorChecker Passport and the image sharpness with our test chart.

The J4 Plus (2018) reproduces colours too strongly compared to reference colours like many smartphones, but the rear-facing camera’s colour accuracy is better than most. However, our review device struggled in our test chart assessment, in which it could not capture our test chart sharply.

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

Accessories & Warranty

Samsung includes a USB Type-A to Micro-USB cable in the box along with a 5 V/1 A charger, a set of headphones, a SIM tool and a quick-start guide. The company does not sell any J4 Plus (2018) specific accessories on its website.

The J4 Plus (2018) comes with 24 months manufacturer’s warranty. The battery is only covered for 12 months though, while its accessories have just six months warranty.

Input Devices & Operation

The touchscreen on our test device recognises up to five fingers simultaneously and generally responds well to commands. The same applies to the accelerometer, which converted screen rotations with a slight delay during our tests. The physical buttons have minimal play in their housings and have clear pressure points. The buttons respond with a pleasing clicking sound when pressed too.

Samsung has dispensed with a fingerprint sensor on the J4 Plus (2018). The device can be unlocked with a pattern, PIN or with a face, which all worked reliably throughout testing. Please keep in mind that the facial unlocking is not as secure as Apple FaceID or any other 3D facial authentication solutions.

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

Display

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

Samsung has equipped the J4 Plus (2018) with a 6-inch IPS panel that operates at a native 1480x720 resolution. The display has an 18.5:9 aspect ratio and achieved an average maximum brightness of 548.9 cd/m² according to X-Rite i1Pro 2, which is brighter than most of our comparison devices. The BQ Aquaris C is our only comparison device to achieve a brighter value, with the remaining devices generally having 100 cd/m² darker displays than the J4 Plus (2018).

Our test device achieved a slightly darker maximum luminosity of 548 cd/m² according to the more realistic APL50 test, which is still a respectable value. Maximum luminosity drops to a less impressive 484 cd/m² when the ambient light sensor is disabled though.

536
cd/m²
548
cd/m²
554
cd/m²
533
cd/m²
558
cd/m²
575
cd/m²
515
cd/m²
544
cd/m²
577
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 577 cd/m² Average: 548.9 cd/m² Minimum: 4.6 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 89 %
Center on Battery: 558 cd/m²
Contrast: 979:1 (Black: 0.57 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 7 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 9.4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.4
92.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.15
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
IPS, 1480x720, 6
BQ Aquaris C
IPS, 1440x720, 5.45
Huawei Y6 2018
IPS, 1440x720, 5.7
LG K11
IPS, 1280x720, 5.3
Nokia 2.1
IPS, 1280x720, 5.5
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
IPS, 1440x720, 6
Xiaomi Redmi 6
IPS, 1440x720, 5.45
Screen
19%
12%
-21%
10%
1%
6%
Brightness middle
558
623
12%
483
-13%
394
-29%
338
-39%
518
-7%
373
-33%
Brightness
549
608
11%
460
-16%
385
-30%
327
-40%
481
-12%
361
-34%
Brightness Distribution
89
91
2%
88
-1%
93
4%
82
-8%
87
-2%
94
6%
Black Level *
0.57
0.61
-7%
0.4
30%
0.66
-16%
0.27
53%
0.85
-49%
0.53
7%
Contrast
979
1021
4%
1208
23%
597
-39%
1252
28%
609
-38%
704
-28%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
7
4.5
36%
5.8
17%
8.2
-17%
5.36
23%
4.47
36%
4.22
40%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
13.3
7.33
45%
12.6
5%
21.5
-62%
9.77
27%
8.04
40%
10.14
24%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
9.4
4.8
49%
5
47%
7.5
20%
6.2
34%
5.4
43%
3.3
65%
Gamma
2.15 102%
2.596 85%
2.6 85%
2.6 85%
2.345 94%
2.318 95%
2.321 95%
CCT
9626 68%
7557 86%
7709 84%
7581 86%
8460 77%
7134 91%
6862 95%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
4.42

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9152 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

We subjected our test device to further tests with the CalMAN analysis software and a spectrophotometer, which revealed that the display has a 979:1 contrast ratio, which is considerably lower than what the Huawei Y6 2018 and Nokia 2.1 achieve. The J4 Plus (2018) has an underwhelming contrast ratio because of its 0.57 cd/m² black value, which is much higher than our comparison devices with higher contrast ratios.

Moreover, the display has a 9,626 K colour temperature, which is much higher than the ideal temperature. Our test device has high DeltaE grey and colour deviations too, which means that the display is comparatively colour inaccurate. The display also has a slight blue tint to it, which is disappointing.

CalMAN: Colour Accuracy
CalMAN: Colour Accuracy
CalMAN: Colour Space
CalMAN: Colour Space
CalMAN: Greyscale
CalMAN: Greyscale
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
25.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7.6 ms rise
↘ 18 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 43 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (25.7 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
51.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 22.8 ms rise
↘ 28.4 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. » 86 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (41 ms).

The J4 Plus (2018) is easy to use outside thanks to its bright display, although you may struggle to read the screen in direct sunlight. The IPS display also has strong viewing angles. We did not notice brightness or colour distortions even at acute viewing angles, so the J4 Plus (2018) should remain usable at practically any angle.

Using the Samsung Galaxy J4 (Plus) outdoors
Using the Samsung Galaxy J4 (Plus) outdoors
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance

The Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 SoC has been around for almost three years, which makes it old in the fast-moving world of smartphone tech. The quad-core processor still performs comparatively well though by today's standards.

The Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) performed well in our benchmarks, primarily because many of our comparison devices are equipped with the same SoC. Our test device is on par with the MediaTek MT6750-powered LG K11 too. In daily use, the J4 Plus (2018) generally feels snappy, although we did notice occasional short delays when switching between apps or when we subjected it to sustained load.

However, the ageing SoC would not run some current benchmarks like 3DMark Sling Shot Extreme and GFXBench from version 3.1 upwards. The integrated Adreno 308 GPU is a weak point of the SoC as it is not powerful enough to run many modern games.

Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
1413 Points ∼31%
BQ Aquaris C
1218 Points ∼27% -14%
Huawei Y6 2018
1419 Points ∼31% 0%
LG K11
1559 Points ∼35% +10%
Nokia 2.1
1405 Points ∼31% -1%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
1380 Points ∼31% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
2799 Points ∼62% +98%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (1113 - 1460, n=12)
1340 Points ∼30% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (2461 - 21070, n=214)
4510 Points ∼100% +219%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
1816 Points ∼42%
BQ Aquaris C
1769 Points ∼41% -3%
Huawei Y6 2018
1939 Points ∼45% +7%
LG K11
2259 Points ∼52% +24%
Nokia 2.1
1602 Points ∼37% -12%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
883 Points ∼20% -51%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
3660 Points ∼84% +102%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (883 - 1939, n=14)
1766 Points ∼41% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (2542 - 11598, n=264)
4338 Points ∼100% +139%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
652 Points ∼51%
BQ Aquaris C
647 Points ∼51% -1%
Huawei Y6 2018
692 Points ∼54% +6%
LG K11
609 Points ∼48% -7%
Nokia 2.1
636 Points ∼50% -2%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
541 Points ∼42% -17%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
824 Points ∼65% +26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (541 - 692, n=14)
656 Points ∼51% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (674 - 4824, n=265)
1274 Points ∼100% +95%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
3214 Points ∼67%
BQ Aquaris C
3281 Points ∼68% +2%
Huawei Y6 2018
3629 Points ∼76% +13%
LG K11
3249 Points ∼68% +1%
Nokia 2.1
3146 Points ∼66% -2%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
2829 Points ∼59% -12%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
4801 Points ∼100% +49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (2829 - 3629, n=14)
3279 Points ∼68% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (3146 - 9868, n=273)
4628 Points ∼96% +44%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
4009 Points ∼65%
BQ Aquaris C
4058 Points ∼65% +1%
Huawei Y6 2018
4756 Points ∼77% +19%
LG K11
4241 Points ∼68% +6%
Nokia 2.1
Points ∼0% -100%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
3681 Points ∼59% -8%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
6200 Points ∼100% +55%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (4009 - 4813, n=14)
4077 Points ∼66% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (4009 - 13531, n=441)
5043 Points ∼81% +26%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
Points ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2018
Points ∼0%
LG K11
1121 Points ∼65%
Nokia 2.1
Points ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
955 Points ∼55%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (0 - 0, n=5)
0 Points ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (1167 - 4439, n=293)
1732 Points ∼100%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
Points ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2018
Points ∼0%
LG K11
248 Points ∼17%
Nokia 2.1
Points ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
376 Points ∼25%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (0 - 0, n=5)
0 Points ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (305 - 8206, n=293)
1475 Points ∼100%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
Points ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2018
Points ∼0%
LG K11
300 Points ∼22%
Nokia 2.1
Points ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
435 Points ∼32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (0 - 0, n=6)
0 Points ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (365 - 5200, n=296)
1371 Points ∼100%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
887 Points ∼52%
BQ Aquaris C
861 Points ∼50% -3%
Huawei Y6 2018
902 Points ∼53% +2%
LG K11
1207 Points ∼71% +36%
Nokia 2.1
885 Points ∼52% 0%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
375 Points ∼22% -58%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
971 Points ∼57% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (375 - 911, n=13)
831 Points ∼49% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (375 - 4493, n=309)
1707 Points ∼100% +92%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
246 Points ∼12%
BQ Aquaris C
247 Points ∼12% 0%
Huawei Y6 2018
250 Points ∼12% +2%
LG K11
384 Points ∼19% +56%
Nokia 2.1
250 Points ∼12% +2%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
248 Points ∼12% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
647 Points ∼31% +163%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (118 - 250, n=13)
238 Points ∼12% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (131 - 14951, n=309)
2056 Points ∼100% +736%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
293 Points ∼17%
BQ Aquaris C
294 Points ∼17% 0%
Huawei Y6 2018
298 Points ∼17% +2%
LG K11
453 Points ∼26% +55%
Nokia 2.1
297 Points ∼17% +1%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
268 Points ∼15% -9%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
699 Points ∼40% +139%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (145 - 298, n=13)
282 Points ∼16% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (159 - 7856, n=310)
1731 Points ∼100% +491%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
Points ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2018
Points ∼0%
LG K11
1233 Points ∼74%
Nokia 2.1
Points ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
1023 Points ∼61%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (0 - 0, n=5)
0 Points ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (1103 - 4216, n=368)
1666 Points ∼100%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
Points ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2018
Points ∼0%
LG K11
252 Points ∼21%
Nokia 2.1
Points ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
309 Points ∼26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (0 - 0, n=5)
0 Points ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (257 - 5246, n=368)
1199 Points ∼100%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
Points ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2018
Points ∼0%
LG K11
306 Points ∼27%
Nokia 2.1
Points ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
366 Points ∼32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (0 - 0, n=6)
0 Points ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (310 - 4734, n=376)
1148 Points ∼100%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
890 Points ∼57%
BQ Aquaris C
845 Points ∼54% -5%
Huawei Y6 2018
907 Points ∼58% +2%
LG K11
1127 Points ∼72% +27%
Nokia 2.1
892 Points ∼57% 0%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
851 Points ∼54% -4%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
1050 Points ∼67% +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (622 - 907, n=14)
864 Points ∼55% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (532 - 4215, n=401)
1565 Points ∼100% +76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
55 Points ∼3%
BQ Aquaris C
55 Points ∼3% 0%
Huawei Y6 2018
55 Points ∼3% 0%
LG K11
381 Points ∼23% +593%
Nokia 2.1
46 Points ∼3% -16%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
55 Points ∼3% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
523 Points ∼32% +851%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (31 - 55, n=14)
47.2 Points ∼3% -14%
Average of class Smartphone (46 - 8312, n=401)
1637 Points ∼100% +2876%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
69 Points ∼5%
BQ Aquaris C
69 Points ∼5% 0%
Huawei Y6 2018
70 Points ∼5% +1%
LG K11
447 Points ∼32% +548%
Nokia 2.1
58 Points ∼4% -16%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
69 Points ∼5% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
589 Points ∼42% +754%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (39 - 70, n=14)
59.7 Points ∼4% -13%
Average of class Smartphone (58 - 6454, n=409)
1397 Points ∼100% +1925%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
10151 Points ∼78%
BQ Aquaris C
10105 Points ∼78% 0%
Huawei Y6 2018
10344 Points ∼80% +2%
LG K11
10285 Points ∼79% +1%
Nokia 2.1
10427 Points ∼80% +3%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
3958 Points ∼30% -61%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
11048 Points ∼85% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (3958 - 10714, n=14)
9677 Points ∼74% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (3958 - 37475, n=557)
13000 Points ∼100% +28%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
5340 Points ∼29%
BQ Aquaris C
5434 Points ∼30% +2%
Huawei Y6 2018
5426 Points ∼30% +2%
LG K11
8177 Points ∼45% +53%
Nokia 2.1
5487 Points ∼30% +3%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
5480 Points ∼30% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
9536 Points ∼52% +79%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (2546 - 5547, n=14)
5258 Points ∼29% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (1152 - 162695, n=557)
18177 Points ∼100% +240%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
5969 Points ∼39%
BQ Aquaris C
6056 Points ∼40% +1%
Huawei Y6 2018
6067 Points ∼40% +2%
LG K11
8567 Points ∼56% +44%
Nokia 2.1
6133 Points ∼40% +3%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
5049 Points ∼33% -15%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
9835 Points ∼64% +65%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (2951 - 6186, n=14)
5809 Points ∼38% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 77599, n=558)
15305 Points ∼100% +156%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
7.6 fps ∼24%
BQ Aquaris C
7.6 fps ∼24% 0%
Huawei Y6 2018
7.7 fps ∼24% +1%
LG K11
13 fps ∼41% +71%
Nokia 2.1
7.6 fps ∼24% 0%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
7.7 fps ∼24% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
19 fps ∼60% +150%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (3.4 - 7.8, n=14)
7.36 fps ∼23% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 251, n=582)
31.8 fps ∼100% +318%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
13 fps ∼50%
BQ Aquaris C
13 fps ∼50% 0%
Huawei Y6 2018
14 fps ∼54% +8%
LG K11
22 fps ∼85% +69%
Nokia 2.1
14 fps ∼54% +8%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
13 fps ∼50% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
26 fps ∼100% +100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (6.4 - 14, n=14)
13 fps ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=585)
25.3 fps ∼97% +95%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
2.8 fps ∼16%
BQ Aquaris C
2.8 fps ∼16% 0%
Huawei Y6 2018
2.8 fps ∼16% 0%
LG K11
5.3 fps ∼31% +89%
Nokia 2.1
2.7 fps ∼16% -4%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
2.8 fps ∼16% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
9.4 fps ∼55% +236%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (1.3 - 2.8, n=14)
2.68 fps ∼16% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 132, n=504)
17.1 fps ∼100% +511%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
5.5 fps ∼32%
BQ Aquaris C
5.6 fps ∼33% +2%
Huawei Y6 2018
5.9 fps ∼35% +7%
LG K11
11 fps ∼65% +100%
Nokia 2.1
6.1 fps ∼36% +11%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
5.6 fps ∼33% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
17 fps ∼100% +209%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (3.7 - 6.4, n=14)
5.64 fps ∼33% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 115, n=507)
16.3 fps ∼96% +196%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
fps ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2018
fps ∼0%
LG K11
3.5 fps ∼24%
Nokia 2.1
fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
4.6 fps ∼32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (0 - 0, n=4)
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (2.5 - 88, n=365)
14.6 fps ∼100%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
fps ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2018
fps ∼0%
LG K11
8.6 fps ∼61%
Nokia 2.1
fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
11 fps ∼77%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (0 - 0, n=4)
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (6.3 - 110, n=368)
14.2 fps ∼100%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 2.1
fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
4.3 fps ∼44%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917)
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (1.4 - 59, n=75)
9.86 fps ∼100%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 2.1
fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
1.4 fps ∼22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917)
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (0.88 - 31, n=75)
6.46 fps ∼100%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 2.1
fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
6.8 fps ∼47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917)
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 59, n=75)
14.4 fps ∼100%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 2.1
fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
3.5 fps ∼23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917)
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (2.6 - 63, n=74)
15.4 fps ∼100%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
fps ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2018
fps ∼0%
LG K11
1.9 fps ∼19%
Nokia 2.1
fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
2.1 fps ∼21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (0 - 0, n=4)
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (2.6 - 54, n=296)
9.94 fps ∼100%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
fps ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2018
fps ∼0%
LG K11
4.3 fps ∼48%
Nokia 2.1
fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
4.8 fps ∼53%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (0 - 0, n=4)
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone (3.8 - 58, n=299)
9.03 fps ∼100%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
42138 Points ∼35%
BQ Aquaris C
43307 Points ∼36% +3%
Huawei Y6 2018
46710 Points ∼39% +11%
LG K11
Points ∼0% -100%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
46450 Points ∼39% +10%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
75706 Points ∼63% +80%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (32557 - 46710, n=9)
43145 Points ∼36% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (17073 - 348178, n=188)
119589 Points ∼100% +184%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
37022 Points ∼48%
BQ Aquaris C
36719 Points ∼47% -1%
Huawei Y6 2018
39089 Points ∼50% +6%
LG K11
39898 Points ∼51% +8%
Nokia 2.1
37484 Points ∼48% +1%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
39106 Points ∼50% +6%
Xiaomi Redmi 6
57169 Points ∼74% +54%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (30924 - 39106, n=14)
36785 Points ∼47% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 254229, n=405)
77630 Points ∼100% +110%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
636 Points ∼91%
BQ Aquaris C
10 Points ∼1% -98%
Huawei Y6 2018
616 Points ∼88% -3%
LG K11
679 Points ∼97% +7%
Nokia 2.1
649 Points ∼93% +2%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
664 Points ∼95% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (10 - 802, n=14)
641 Points ∼91% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1731, n=516)
701 Points ∼100% +10%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
430 Points ∼25%
BQ Aquaris C
434 Points ∼25% +1%
Huawei Y6 2018
443 Points ∼25% +3%
LG K11
487 Points ∼28% +13%
Nokia 2.1
428 Points ∼24% 0%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
433 Points ∼25% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (428 - 447, n=14)
438 Points ∼25% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 15969, n=516)
1755 Points ∼100% +308%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
647 Points ∼51%
BQ Aquaris C
457 Points ∼36% -29%
Huawei Y6 2018
1069 Points ∼84% +65%
LG K11
728 Points ∼57% +13%
Nokia 2.1
502 Points ∼39% -22%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
794 Points ∼62% +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (367 - 1372, n=14)
717 Points ∼56% +11%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 6283, n=516)
1276 Points ∼100% +97%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
1220 Points ∼48%
BQ Aquaris C
1187 Points ∼46% -3%
Huawei Y6 2018
1043 Points ∼41% -15%
LG K11
1599 Points ∼62% +31%
Nokia 2.1
1228 Points ∼48% +1%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
1245 Points ∼49% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (1043 - 1477, n=14)
1283 Points ∼50% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 12202, n=516)
2565 Points ∼100% +110%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
682 Points ∼54%
BQ Aquaris C
219 Points ∼17% -68%
Huawei Y6 2018
743 Points ∼58% +9%
LG K11
787 Points ∼62% +15%
Nokia 2.1
643 Points ∼50% -6%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
730 Points ∼57% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (219 - 891, n=14)
667 Points ∼52% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 6097, n=520)
1274 Points ∼100% +87%

Legend

 
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018 Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Qualcomm Adreno 308, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
BQ Aquaris C Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Qualcomm Adreno 308, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei Y6 2018 Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Qualcomm Adreno 308, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
LG K11 Mediatek MT6750, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Nokia 2.1 Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Qualcomm Adreno 308, 8 GB eMMC Flash
 
Motorola Moto E5 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Qualcomm Adreno 308, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 32 GB eMMC Flash

The Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) loads websites quickly, although media content takes a bit longer to appear. Elaborate websites like Let’s play OUIGO bring our test device to its knees though; the online pinball game is playable, but the experience is sluggish and not enjoyable.

JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 273, n=440)
37 Points ∼100% +105%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 (Chrome 70)
22.736 Points ∼61% +26%
Huawei Y6 2018 (Chrome 66)
18.55 Points ∼50% +3%
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018 (Chrome 71.0.3578.98)
18.055 Points ∼49%
BQ Aquaris C (Chrome 70)
17.914 Points ∼48% -1%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus (Chrome 70)
17.765 Points ∼48% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (15.9 - 18.7, n=13)
17.7 Points ∼48% -2%
LG K11 (Chrome 67)
16.634 Points ∼45% -8%
Nokia 2.1 (Chrome 70)
15.853 Points ∼43% -12%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=576)
5658 Points ∼100% +82%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 (Chrome 70)
4257 Points ∼75% +37%
LG K11 (Chrome 67)
3397 Points ∼60% +9%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus (Chrome 70)
3250 Points ∼57% +4%
BQ Aquaris C (Chrome 70)
3160 Points ∼56% +1%
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018 (Chrome 71.0.3578.98)
3114 Points ∼55%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (2503 - 3289, n=14)
2999 Points ∼53% -4%
Huawei Y6 2018 (Chrome 66)
2582 Points ∼46% -17%
Nokia 2.1 (Chrome 70)
2503 Points ∼44% -20%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Huawei Y6 2018 (Chrome 66)
16192.4 ms * ∼100% -25%
LG K11 (Chrome 67)
14149.5 ms * ∼87% -9%
Nokia 2.1 (Chrome 70)
13821 ms * ∼85% -7%
BQ Aquaris C (Chrome 70)
13253 ms * ∼82% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (10742 - 16192, n=14)
13014 ms * ∼80% -1%
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018 (Chrome 71.0.3578.98)
12935.3 ms * ∼80%
Motorola Moto E5 Plus (Chrome 70)
12723 ms * ∼79% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=596)
11366 ms * ∼70% +12%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 (Chrome 70)
10846 ms * ∼67% +16%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (25 - 161, n=69)
63.7 Points ∼100% +145%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 (Chrome 70)
29 Points ∼46% +12%
Huawei Y6 2018 (Chrome 66)
28 Points ∼44% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (26 - 28, n=3)
27 Points ∼42% +4%
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018 (Chrome 71.0.3578.98)
26 Points ∼41%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Average of class Smartphone (77 - 362, n=291)
113 Points ∼100% +47%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 (Chrome 70)
91 Points ∼81% +18%
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018 (Chrome 71.0.3578.98)
77 Points ∼68%
Huawei Y6 2018 (Chrome 66)
71 Points ∼63% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917) (62 - 79, n=6)
70 Points ∼62% -9%

* ... smaller is better

The Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) has relatively fast eMMC flash storage. Its read and write speeds are slightly better than our BQ, Huawei, LG and Nokia comparison devices, although it is not at the level of the Moto E5 Plus and the Xiaomi Redmi 6.

The microSD card reader is quick too, but it has slower read speeds than most of our comparison devices. Moreover, our test device gets nowhere near to achieving our Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 reference card’s full potential of up to 270 MB/s read and 150 MB/s write speeds.

Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018BQ Aquaris CHuawei Y6 2018LG K11Nokia 2.1Motorola Moto E5 PlusXiaomi Redmi 6Average 32 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-17%
-14%
-11%
-7%
63%
35%
-8%
-12%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
62.35 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
59.18 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-5%
64 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
3%
61.11 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
61.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
60.68 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-3%
64.4 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
3%
47.5 (3.4 - 87.1, n=114)
-24%
46.4 (3.4 - 87.1, n=333)
-26%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
76.65 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
83.02 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
8%
84.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
11%
82.81 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
8%
79.4 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
4%
83.87 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
9%
82.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
8%
66.4 (8.2 - 96.5, n=114)
-13%
64.6 (8.2 - 96.5, n=333)
-16%
Random Write 4KB
13.33
9.8
-26%
9
-32%
13.16
-1%
13.45
1%
56.14
321%
36.3
172%
18.9 (0.75 - 77.3, n=155)
42%
17 (0.14 - 250, n=624)
28%
Random Read 4KB
48.42
39.1
-19%
38.8
-20%
45.8
-5%
50.46
4%
62.71
30%
52.5
8%
36.8 (3.59 - 117, n=155)
-24%
39.5 (1.59 - 173, n=624)
-18%
Sequential Write 256KB
99.58
45.7
-54%
65.6
-34%
48.32
-51%
51.18
-49%
137.89
38%
118.4
19%
95 (14.8 - 189, n=155)
-5%
82.3 (2.99 - 253, n=624)
-17%
Sequential Read 256KB
292.15
275.9
-6%
254.3
-13%
252.96
-13%
288.26
-1%
248.49
-15%
287
-2%
231 (25.8 - 440, n=155)
-21%
235 (12.1 - 912, n=624)
-20%

Games

The Adreno 308 GPU plays most modern games smoothly, but only when graphics are set to medium/low levels, otherwise games will feel jerky. Moreover, maximum graphics are often unavailable, like in Shadow Fight 3. Additionally, the GPU is now so underpowered that the Google Play Store hides some more-complex games like Asphalt 9: Legends.

Dead Trigger 2
Dead Trigger 2
Shadow Fight 3
Shadow Fight 3
Dead Trigger 2
010203040Tooltip
; 1.5.2: Ø29.9 (9-31)
Shadow Fight 3
010203040Tooltip
; 1.15.0: Ø27.4 (1-38)

Emissions

Temperature

GFXBench Battery Test: T-Rex OpenGL ES 2.0
GFXBench Battery Test: T-Rex OpenGL ES 2.0

The Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) manages its surface temperatures well. Our test device reaches a maximum of 32.2 °C on the back under load, while most of the device will not exceed 30 °C, which is impressive.

Our test device also does not thermal throttle, which we confirmed by running the GFXBench T-Rex benchmark 30 times on a loop. Frame rates remained mostly consistent throughout the benchmark loop and finished only marginally lower than when we began the benchmark. Incidentally, the more complex Manhattan benchmark would not run on our test device.

Max. Load
 29 °C
84 F
28.7 °C
84 F
31.9 °C
89 F
 
 30 °C
86 F
30.8 °C
87 F
31.5 °C
89 F
 
 29.6 °C
85 F
31 °C
88 F
31.3 °C
88 F
 
Maximum: 31.9 °C = 89 F
Average: 30.4 °C = 87 F
28.8 °C
84 F
29.5 °C
85 F
29.6 °C
85 F
29.1 °C
84 F
30.4 °C
87 F
29.6 °C
85 F
29 °C
84 F
30.6 °C
87 F
32.2 °C
90 F
Maximum: 32.2 °C = 90 F
Average: 29.9 °C = 86 F
Power Supply (max.)  31.2 °C = 88 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 30.4 °C / 87 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 31.9 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 35.6 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 32.2 °C / 90 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.1 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load

Speakers

Speaker characteristics
Speaker characteristics

The Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) has a single speaker on the right-hand side of the frame. Its positioning means that most people will struggle to obscure the speaker when holding the device in landscape mode, but you may cover it with your hand when holding the device in portrait mode depending on your grip.

The speaker reaches 84.2 dB(A) at maximum volume, which is decent. We noticed no audio distortion even at high volumes, although the frequency range is dominated by mid and high tones.

Our test device delivers listenable audio quality over the included headphones or via Bluetooth. The Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) can even use Dolby Atmos over Bluetooth too if the connected device supports LDAC.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.835.12524.324.43118.6264024.3265033.837.26321.222.98024.822.110018.51812516.416.816017.126.620017.933.325016.842.431514.949.540015.153.750014.259.863013.964.180014.868100014.269.6125014.773.6160014.473200014.367.825001470.1315013.876400014.877.4500014.471.463001568.2800014.771.81000014.865.31250014.856.91600014.747.6SPL26.784.2N0.855.9median 14.8median 65.3Delta0.613.135.536.334.936.539.538.238.639.53945.32833.829.728.628.526.624.72823.734.522.546.52150.620.857.219.965.520.1671966.418.570.119.270.41975.918.176.31875.117.477.117.677.817.879.11881.51876.11874.61875.918731858.673.164.469.464.130.688.531.416.525.917.21.573.6median 18.5median 70.4210.9hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018BQ Aquaris C
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 34.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 68% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 80% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

BQ Aquaris C audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (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
» 31% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 58% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Life

Power Consumption

The Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) consumes comparatively little at idle and is more efficient than all but the LG K11 of our comparison devices. Our test device is generally economic under load too, although it consumes more than many of our comparison devices when it is pushed hard.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.16 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.68 / 1.78 / 1.82 Watt
Load midlight 4.44 / 6.13 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
3300 mAh
BQ Aquaris C
3000 mAh
Huawei Y6 2018
3000 mAh
LG K11
3000 mAh
Nokia 2.1
4000 mAh
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 6
3000 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917)
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-5%
-59%
9%
15%
4%
17%
-25%
-4%
Idle Minimum *
0.68
0.7
-3%
1.7
-150%
0.57
16%
0.7
-3%
0.9
-32%
0.6
12%
1.134 (0.54 - 4.02, n=14)
-67%
0.878 (0.2 - 3.4, n=656)
-29%
Idle Average *
1.78
1.9
-7%
2.5
-40%
1.48
17%
1.2
33%
1.5
16%
1.3
27%
2.28 (1.2 - 6, n=14)
-28%
1.725 (0.6 - 6.2, n=655)
3%
Idle Maximum *
1.82
2.5
-37%
3.2
-76%
1.54
15%
1.9
-4%
2
-10%
2.1
-15%
2.64 (1.62 - 6.64, n=14)
-45%
2 (0.74 - 6.6, n=656)
-10%
Load Average *
4.44
4.1
8%
5.2
-17%
4.56
-3%
3.2
28%
3.2
28%
3
32%
4.31 (2.9 - 9.6, n=14)
3%
4.04 (0.8 - 10.8, n=650)
9%
Load Maximum *
6.13
5.2
15%
6.8
-11%
6.16
-0%
4.8
22%
4.9
20%
4.4
28%
5.51 (4.3 - 7.34, n=14)
10%
5.78 (1.2 - 14.2, n=650)
6%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) has a 3,300 mAh battery, which is 10% larger than the battery capacities of many of our comparison devices. By contrast, the Nokia 2.1 and Moto E5 Plus have 4,000 mAh and 5,000 mAh batteries, respectively. 

Our test device has decent battery life and lasted almost 12 hours in our Wi-Fi battery life test, which we conducted by setting the display to approximately 150 cd/m² and running a script that simulates the load required to render a website every 30 seconds. The J4 Plus (2018) also lasted around 14 hours in our H.264 looped video battery life test, although it did finish fourth behind the LG K11, Nokia 2.1 and Moto E5 Plus in our Wi-Fi battery life test, which is the only test we ran on all our comparison devices. In short, the J4 Plus (2018) has good battery life, but it does not significantly outlast some of our comparison devices with 3,000 mAh batteries.

The included charger recharges our test device fully in around 3 hours.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
28h 50min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
11h 47min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
13h 58min
Load (maximum brightness)
6h 38min
Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018
3300 mAh
BQ Aquaris C
3000 mAh
Huawei Y6 2018
3000 mAh
LG K11
3000 mAh
Nokia 2.1
4000 mAh
Motorola Moto E5 Plus
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 6
3000 mAh
Battery Runtime
-18%
-20%
5%
14%
52%
-18%
Reader / Idle
1730
1329
-23%
1425
-18%
H.264
838
702
-16%
752
-10%
WiFi v1.3
707
583
-18%
643
-9%
741
5%
809
14%
1078
52%
695
-2%
Load
398
279
-30%
238
-40%

Pros

+ 6-inch display
+ dual-SIM
+ LTE and NFC
+ accurate GPS
+ Android 8.1 Oreo
+ decent 13 MP rear-facing camera
+ face unlock
+ bright IPS display
+ long battery life

Cons

- only a Micro-USB 2.0 port
- no fingerprint sensor
- poor Wi-Fi
- performance in games is limited
- no fast charging

Verdict

The Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) smartphone review. Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de.
The Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) smartphone review. Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de.

The Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) is an impressive budget smartphone. Its 6-inch display and stylish design make the device look more expensive than it is, while its dual-SIM functionality, bright IPS display, long battery life and Android 8.1 Oreo OS are impressive for such a cheap device.

The Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) is an excellent entry-level smartphone that is great value for money.

The ageing Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 SoC is still doing surprisingly well in 2018, but it cannot run complex games like Asphalt 9: Legends. The list of other drawbacks is pleasingly short though. We would have liked to see a fingerprint sensor and a USB Type-C port, but alas Samsung reserves these for its more-expensive devices. The lack of a USB Type-C port also means that there is no fast-charging functionality, and the device can only connect to 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi networks; our test device performed underwhelmingly in our Wi-Fi tests too.

Overall, the Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) is a good option for those who are looking for a budget smartphone with a large display. The device would not look out of place next to its more-expensive Galaxy A and S series siblings too, which is a testament to how well designed the Galaxy J4 Plus (2018) is.

Samsung Galaxy J4 Plus 2018 - 12/20/2018 v6
Manuel Masiero

Chassis
81%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
82%
Connectivity
38 / 60 → 63%
Weight
90%
Battery
95%
Display
82%
Games Performance
7 / 63 → 10%
Application Performance
38 / 70 → 54%
Temperature
94%
Noise
100%
Audio
65 / 91 → 71%
Camera
66%
Average
70%
79%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 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 J4 Plus (2018) Smartphone Review
Manuel Masiero, 2018-12-21 (Update: 2018-12-22)