Notebookcheck

Samsung Galaxy M21 Smartphone Review - Plain, but good

Should it have been less? The Samsung Galaxy M21 is a close but lower-priced relative of the Galaxy M31. It offers less storage space and a slightly cut-down camera system. However, it still features the same gigantic battery. Is the Galaxy M21 the ideal smartphone for bargain hunters? Read our review to find out.
Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Stanislav Kokhanyuk),
Samsung Galaxy M21

The Galaxy M series is intended for price-conscious buyers who want a usable camera and a large battery. Unlike Galaxy A series devices, the smartphones from the M series such as the Galaxy M31 and the already-released M51 are not available everywhere. However, in some cases, it might be worth it to seek these devices out. The Galaxy M21, which we are currently reviewing, is cheaper than the M31. However, the M21 offers less storage space and does not feature a macro lens, but it costs 50 Euros (~$58) less. It sounds like a good deal for those who can live with the limitations, does it not?

Samsung Galaxy M21 (Galaxy M21 Series)
Processor
Samsung Exynos 9611 8 x 1.7 - 2.3 GHz, Exynos 7 Series
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
6.40 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 403 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, Super AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 3, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, 56 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm headphone jack, Card Reader: up to 512 GB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: motion sensor, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, USB-C
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): 8.9 x 159 x 75.1 ( = 0.35 x 6.26 x 2.96 in)
Battery
6000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix f/​2.0, phase detection autofocus, LED flash, Video @2160p/​30fps (camera 1); 8.0MP, f/​2.2, wide-angle (camera 2); 5.0MP, f/​2.2, depth sensor (camera 3)
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix f/2.2
Additional features
Speakers: mono speaker on the bottom, Keyboard: virtual, charger, USB cable, SIM card removal tool, 24 Months Warranty, LTE speed: 600 Mb/s (Download), 150 Mb/s (Upload); SAR value: 0.492 W/​kg (head), 1.13 W/​kg (body) , fanless
Weight
188 g ( = 6.63 oz / 0.41 pounds), Power Supply: 54 g ( = 1.9 oz / 0.12 pounds)
Price
200 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Comparison Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
80 %
09/2020
Samsung Galaxy M21
Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3
188 g64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.40"2340x1080
75 %
10/2020
Sony Xperia L4
Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320
178 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.20"1680x720
77 %
08/2020
Oppo A72
SD 665, Adreno 610
192 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.50"2400x1080
79 %
06/2020
Samsung Galaxy A41
Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2
152 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.10"2400x1080
81 %
05/2020
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
SD 720G, Adreno 618
209 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.67"2400x1080

Case – Simple design, good build quality

Except for the camera system, the Galaxy M31 and the Galaxy M21 look the same. However, there is a small difference in weight. Both smartphones also come in identical colour schemes known as Black, Blue and Green. Both devices feature the same plastic back, the same Gorilla Glass 3 on the front and the same tear-drop notch for the front-facing camera.

The M21 offers a very good build quality. It is very rigid. Thanks to the rounded edges, the smartphone is comfortable to hold in the hand. However, the back is still very susceptible to fingerprints.

People with small hands are going to be better off with either the Samsung Galaxy A41 or the Sony Xperia L4, because the Galaxy M21 is quite big and therefore somewhat unwieldy.

Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Galaxy M21

Size Comparison

165.8 mm / 6.53 inch 76.7 mm / 3.02 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 209 g0.4608 lbs162 mm / 6.38 inch 75.5 mm / 2.97 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 192 g0.4233 lbs159 mm / 6.26 inch 75.1 mm / 2.96 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 188 g0.4145 lbs159 mm / 6.26 inch 71 mm / 2.8 inch 8.7 mm / 0.3425 inch 178 g0.3924 lbs149.9 mm / 5.9 inch 69.8 mm / 2.75 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 152 g0.3351 lbs

Hardware Configuration – NFC for contactless payments

The M21 comes with 4 GB of RAM and 64 GB of storage space, which is quite usual for a device in this price range. However, the UFS 2.1 memory is relatively fast. Moreover, the smartphone also has a USB Type-C port, a 3.5-mm headphone jack and an NFC chip for contactless payments.

The SIM card tray features enough space for two SIM cards and a microSD card, meaning that you can use dual SIM functionality and enjoy more storage at the same time.

Bottom: 3.5-mm headphone jack, USB-C port, microphone hole, speaker grill
Bottom: 3.5-mm headphone jack, USB-C port, microphone hole, speaker grill
Top: Microphone hole
Top: Microphone hole
Left: SIM card slot
Left: SIM card slot
Right: Power button, volume rocker
Right: Power button, volume rocker

Software – Android-based proprietary software

The M21 runs Android 10 with a custom launcher from Samsung known as OneUI 2.0.  At the time of our review, the security patches from July, 2020 are relatively up to date. With its software, Samsung has made a concerted effort to improve one-handed operation. This is why most intractable elements are often located in the bottom half of the screen.

The M21 comes with a number of preinstalled third-party applications, some of which can only be disabled. This means that these applications will always stay on your smartphone and occupy storage space even if you do not want to use them.

Software of the Samsung Galaxy M21
Software of the Samsung Galaxy M21
Software of the Samsung Galaxy M21

Communication and Geolocation – Wi-Fi 5 with good transfer rates

The Wi-Fi 5 module in the M21 offers good data transfer rates for a device with this price tag. We conduct our Wi-Fi benchmarks using our reference-grade router Netgear Nighthawk AX12. Our review device does not support many LTE bands, which is why it is advisable to find out what LTE bands are used in each country before traveling there.

When it comes to cellular reception, the Galaxy M21 offers a mediocre level of performance. Here, competing devices do a better job, especially indoors.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio P65, 64 GB eMMC Flash
365 (349min - 370max) MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Oppo A72
Adreno 610, SD 665, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
347 (330min - 356max) MBit/s ∼95% +5%
Samsung Galaxy M21
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9611, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
332 (231min - 352max) MBit/s ∼91%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Adreno 618, SD 720G, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
286 (225min - 321max) MBit/s ∼78% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=620)
286 MBit/s ∼78% -14%
Sony Xperia L4
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P22 MT6762, 64 GB eMMC Flash
120 (106min - 124max) MBit/s ∼33% -64%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio P65, 64 GB eMMC Flash
349 (339min - 355max) MBit/s ∼100% +15%
Oppo A72
Adreno 610, SD 665, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
330 (284min - 346max) MBit/s ∼95% +9%
Samsung Galaxy M21
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9611, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
304 (285min - 323max) MBit/s ∼87%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=620)
273 MBit/s ∼78% -10%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Adreno 618, SD 720G, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
256 (247min - 263max) MBit/s ∼73% -16%
Sony Xperia L4
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P22 MT6762, 64 GB eMMC Flash
109 (103min - 114max) MBit/s ∼31% -64%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø331 (231-352)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø304 (285-323)
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors
Available satellites
Available satellites

The Galaxy M21 establishes a connection with the satellites very quickly. It supports various global navigation satellite systems but does not support SBAS. The Galaxy M21 has a good margin of error of 6 metres (~20 ft).

In order to determine how accurate our review device is when it comes to geolocation, we take it with us on a bike ride. During this ride, we are also accompanied by the professional navigator Garmin Edge 520. The Samsung Galaxy M21 proves to be a very good navigation device, even though it was not particularly accurate at the roundabout. However, overall, it was more accurate than the Garmin Edge 520. This is why we think that the Samsung smartphone is well suited for navigation.

Garmin Edge 520 – Route overview
Garmin Edge 520 – Route overview
Garmin Edge 520 – Roundabout
Garmin Edge 520 – Roundabout
Garmin Edge 520 – Bridge
Garmin Edge 520 – Bridge
Samsung Galaxy M21 – Route overview
Samsung Galaxy M21 – Route overview
Samsung Galaxy M21 – Roundabout
Samsung Galaxy M21 – Roundabout
Samsung Galaxy M21 – Bridge
Samsung Galaxy M21 – Bridge

Telephony & Call Quality – Do not speak too quietly

The Samsung smartphone comes with a proprietary phone application. On the home screen, it shows the dial pad. However, users also have easy access to recent calls and saved contacts. Both VoLTE and VoWiFi are supported. However, users will have to enable VoWiFi in the settings menu of the phone application, because it is disabled by default.

When making phone calls users should not speak very quietly, lest the call partner not hear them. The ear-speaker could have been louder. It is difficult to hear anything when you are in a very loud environment. In loudspeaker mode, the caller sounds somewhat muffled, but is still easy to understand. Here, the microphone also struggles to pick up our voice, which is why speaking loud is beneficial.

Cameras – Very flexible

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

The 48-megapixel main camera on the back supports pixel binning, which allows four adjacent pixels to act as one. This improve photo quality. However, it also means that photographs have a resolution of 12 megapixels, which is good enough for the vast majority of situations. Those who need more pixels can select the 48 megapixel mode in the camera application.

The M21 also features an 8-megapixel ultra wide-angle lens and a depth sensor. Zooming between the two main lenses is not possible. Buyers will have to use either the main sensor or the ultra wide-angle lens.

The photographs taken with the main camera are on a good level for a device in this price range. The colour reproduction is good and the overall image quality is okay. However, the images look a little blurry, especially in the corners, which is normal for a smartphone with such a price tag. The photographs taken under low-light conditions appear very grainy and are not well exposed. The ultra wide-angle camera offers a good dynamic range. Nevertheless, it produces somewhat blurry images.

Video can be recorded at 2160p, but without digital stabilisation. However, users can shoot video at 1080p with digital stabilisation. 

The M21 has a different front-facing camera when compared to the Samsung Galaxy M31: Our review device features a 20-megapixel selfie shooter instead of a 32-megapixel selfie camera. It takes acceptable pictures under good lighting conditions.

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Main camera: FlowersMain camera: CityscapeMain camera: Low-light photographyUltra wide-angle

The photographs of our test patterns confirm our impression of the main camera. The edges of the images are blurry, but the images themselves are colour-accurate. Under controlled lighting conditions, the colours look too dim.

ColorChecker
27.6 ∆E
46 ∆E
36 ∆E
31.9 ∆E
41.1 ∆E
56 ∆E
43.6 ∆E
30.7 ∆E
34 ∆E
27.3 ∆E
55.7 ∆E
55.5 ∆E
26.5 ∆E
42.8 ∆E
29.5 ∆E
65 ∆E
38.2 ∆E
39.3 ∆E
59.9 ∆E
62.3 ∆E
47.7 ∆E
35.4 ∆E
23.3 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy M21: 40.35 ∆E min: 13.35 - max: 65.03 ∆E
ColorChecker
11.4 ∆E
10.1 ∆E
13 ∆E
18.3 ∆E
12.6 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
8 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
10.3 ∆E
2.1 ∆E
11.1 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
9 ∆E
3.2 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
3.6 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy M21: 8.11 ∆E min: 2.1 - max: 18.27 ∆E

Accessories & Warranty - 2 years of warranty

In the box, there is a USB-A charger with an appropriate USB-C cable for the M21. Moreover, there is also a SIM card removal tool.

The M21 comes with a 24-month warranty.

Input Devices & Handling - Fast fingerprint sensor

There is a fingerprint scanner on the back. It is slightly recessed into the housing and its edges are raised. The initial setup is very fast and the fingerprint reader recognises fingerprints very quickly. It can also be used for gestures. For instance, if you run your finger down the fingerprint sensor you can bring down the notification shade. The M21 also supports face recognition, which works quickly and reliably.

The M21 comes with Samsung’s proprietary keyboard, which appears to be heavily inspired by Apple’s virtual keyboard. Other keyboards can be easily installed. The touchscreen works without any issues. The hardware buttons on the right side do not feel particularly premium. Nevertheless, they still work well.

Keyboard in landscape mode
Keyboard in landscape mode
Keyboard in portrait mode
Keyboard in portrait mode

Display – Bright, good screen

Pixel arrangement
Pixel arrangement

Samsung's lower mid-range smartphone comes with a Full HD AMOLED screen. Our measurements show that it is very similar to the display of the Samsung Galaxy M31, which is why we think that the M21 and the M31 feature the same panel.

According to our brightness measurements, the Samsung smartphone has an average screen brightness of 614 cd/m². The brightness is very evenly distributed. Because individual OLED pixels can completely switch off, the screen has a black value of 0 cd/m². This is why dark tones appear very deep.

600
cd/m²
614
cd/m²
621
cd/m²
599
cd/m²
617
cd/m²
629
cd/m²
602
cd/m²
616
cd/m²
626
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 629 cd/m² Average: 613.8 cd/m² Minimum: 1.82 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 617 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.11 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.7
ΔE Greyscale 2.6 | 0.64-98 Ø5.9
141.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.073
Samsung Galaxy M21
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.40
Sony Xperia L4
IPS, 1680x720, 6.20
Oppo A72
IPS LCD, 2400x1080, 6.50
Samsung Galaxy A41
Super AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
IPS, 2400x1080, 6.67
Screen
-103%
-100%
-18%
-46%
Brightness middle
617
429
-30%
505
-18%
554
-10%
622
1%
Brightness
614
404
-34%
482
-21%
559
-9%
612
0%
Brightness Distribution
95
92
-3%
93
-2%
92
-3%
94
-1%
Black Level *
0.26
0.55
0.56
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.11
6.14
-191%
6.3
-199%
2
5%
3.98
-89%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
3.41
10.51
-208%
10.1
-196%
7.7
-126%
7.33
-115%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.6
6.6
-154%
6.8
-162%
1.6
38%
4.5
-73%
Gamma
2.073 106%
2.23 99%
2.29 96%
2.11 104%
2.206 100%
CCT
6921 94%
8346 78%
8161 80%
6589 99%
7361 88%
Contrast
1650
918
1111
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
114.9

* ... 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 215.5 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 215.5 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 215.5 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 9668 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Our CalMAN test reveals good grayscale performance. However, the Delta E 2000 colour deviations are quite significant, especially when it comes to the red part of the spectrum. The colour reproduction improves in Natural mode. The colour space coverage is on a good level for a smartphone in this price range. Nevertheless, we have to mention that in this instance our measurements should be viewed as indications of real-life performance.

CalMAN: Grayscale tracking
CalMAN: Grayscale tracking
CalMAN: Colour accuracy
CalMAN: Colour accuracy
CalMAN: Colour space coverage (sRGB)
CalMAN: Colour space coverage (sRGB)
CalMAN: Colour space coverage (AdobeRGB)
CalMAN: Colour space coverage (AdobeRGB)
CalMAN: Colour space coverage (DCI P3)
CalMAN: Colour space coverage (DCI P3)
CalMAN: Saturation
CalMAN: Saturation
CalMAN: Colour accuracy (natural)
CalMAN: Colour accuracy (natural)
 

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. » 8 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.3 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 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 9 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (38.6 ms).

There is a noticeable drop in brightness when the device is viewed at extreme angles. However, it appears much more pronounced in photographs than in real life. The Galaxy M21 is usable outside on cloudy days. In direct sunlight, the screen content is difficult to read. Howbeit, the display is bright enough for many light-filled rooms.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Outdoor use
Outdoor use

Performance – Too slow for a device in this price range

The Samsung Exynos 9611 is a solid choice for a lower mid-range smartphone. However, it is beaten by the Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G. The MediaTek SoC in the Samsung Galaxy A41 is also faster.

The Exynos 9611 offers enough performance for day-to-day use. However, it struggles in very demanding applications. If you try to run several highly demanding applications at the same time, the smartphone may become completely unresponsive. That being said, the M21 is powerful enough for running simple applications.

Geekbench 5.1 - 5.3
OpenCL Score 5.3 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1565 Points ∼79%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
387 Points ∼20% -75%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1565 - 1605, n=3)
1592 Points ∼81% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (259 - 5532, n=50)
1969 Points ∼100% +26%
Vulkan Score 5.3 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1208 Points ∼72%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
453 Points ∼27% -62%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1208 - 1345, n=3)
1299 Points ∼77% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (72 - 4789, n=55)
1689 Points ∼100% +40%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1322 Points ∼67%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
883 Points ∼45% -33%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1256 Points ∼64% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1222 Points ∼62% -8%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
1690 Points ∼86% +28%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1207 - 1387, n=4)
1310 Points ∼67% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 4160, n=148)
1968 Points ∼100% +49%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
349 Points ∼61%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
150 Points ∼26% -57%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
309 Points ∼54% -11%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
357 Points ∼63% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
559 Points ∼98% +60%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (345 - 349, n=4)
347 Points ∼61% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1604, n=148)
570 Points ∼100% +63%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5892 Points ∼52%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
5251 Points ∼46% -11%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
11432 Points ∼100% +94%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
6742 Points ∼59% +14%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
7673 Points ∼67% +30%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (5080 - 5925, n=7)
5572 Points ∼49% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=547)
6048 Points ∼53% +3%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
6043 Points ∼67%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
6909 Points ∼77% +14%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7651 Points ∼85% +27%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
7594 Points ∼84% +26%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
9027 Points ∼100% +49%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (5777 - 6697, n=7)
6166 Points ∼68% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=703)
6654 Points ∼74% +10%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2125 Points ∼77%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2287 Points ∼83% +8%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2281 Points ∼82% +7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2765 Points ∼100% +30%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1972 - 2163, n=7)
2099 Points ∼76% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4061, n=199)
2664 Points ∼96% +25%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1439 Points ∼47%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
981 Points ∼32% -32%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1005 Points ∼33% -30%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2257 Points ∼74% +57%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1320 - 1442, n=7)
1414 Points ∼46% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 11259, n=199)
3059 Points ∼100% +113%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1550 Points ∼57%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1123 Points ∼41% -28%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1148 Points ∼42% -26%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2353 Points ∼87% +52%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1442 - 1557, n=7)
1525 Points ∼56% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6977, n=199)
2715 Points ∼100% +75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2260 Points ∼69%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1102 Points ∼34% -51%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2154 Points ∼66% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2427 Points ∼75% +7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3256 Points ∼100% +44%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1463 - 2332, n=7)
2115 Points ∼65% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=554)
2268 Points ∼70% 0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1532 Points ∼60%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
467 Points ∼18% -70%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
987 Points ∼39% -36%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1028 Points ∼40% -33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2551 Points ∼100% +67%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1267 - 1533, n=7)
1488 Points ∼58% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 12146, n=554)
2259 Points ∼89% +47%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1650 Points ∼62%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
536 Points ∼20% -68%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1097 Points ∼41% -34%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1179 Points ∼44% -29%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2680 Points ∼100% +62%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1390 - 1659, n=7)
1588 Points ∼59% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 9643, n=555)
2088 Points ∼78% +27%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1917 Points ∼59%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1106 Points ∼34% -42%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2199 Points ∼67% +15%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2466 Points ∼75% +29%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3267 Points ∼100% +70%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1402 - 2336, n=6)
2087 Points ∼64% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=586)
2184 Points ∼67% +14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1601 Points ∼42%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
782 Points ∼21% -51%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1653 Points ∼43% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1486 Points ∼39% -7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3803 Points ∼100% +138%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1601 - 2021, n=6)
1873 Points ∼49% +17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 22052, n=586)
3080 Points ∼81% +92%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1662 Points ∼45%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
836 Points ∼23% -50%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1765 Points ∼48% +6%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1630 Points ∼44% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3669 Points ∼100% +121%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1662 - 2074, n=6)
1903 Points ∼52% +15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 11895, n=586)
2536 Points ∼69% +53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2186 Points ∼69%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1078 Points ∼34% -51%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2246 Points ∼71% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2296 Points ∼73% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3152 Points ∼100% +44%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1415 - 2258, n=7)
2084 Points ∼66% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5262, n=634)
2142 Points ∼68% -2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1445 Points ∼61%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
405 Points ∼17% -72%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
980 Points ∼41% -32%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1016 Points ∼43% -30%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2369 Points ∼100% +64%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1203 - 1478, n=7)
1422 Points ∼60% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 11573, n=634)
1883 Points ∼79% +30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1563 Points ∼62%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
470 Points ∼19% -70%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1134 Points ∼45% -27%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1160 Points ∼46% -26%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2507 Points ∼100% +60%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1342 - 1601, n=7)
1524 Points ∼61% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 9138, n=635)
1786 Points ∼71% +14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2176 Points ∼71%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1084 Points ∼35% -50%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2282 Points ∼74% +5%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2181 Points ∼71% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3070 Points ∼100% +41%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1390 - 2286, n=6)
2079 Points ∼68% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=676)
2013 Points ∼66% -7%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2092 Points ∼57%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
680 Points ∼19% -67%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1564 Points ∼43% -25%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1093 Points ∼30% -48%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3647 Points ∼100% +74%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1468 - 2092, n=6)
1944 Points ∼53% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 16670, n=675)
2497 Points ∼68% +19%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2110 Points ∼60%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
741 Points ∼21% -65%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1675 Points ∼48% -21%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1229 Points ∼35% -42%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3501 Points ∼100% +66%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1595 - 2110, n=6)
1958 Points ∼56% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 11256, n=678)
2134 Points ∼61% +1%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
19902 Points ∼99%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
14930 Points ∼75% -25%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
17865 Points ∼89% -10%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
17231 Points ∼86% -13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
20019 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (13103 - 20393, n=6)
18907 Points ∼94% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 59268, n=820)
15818 Points ∼79% -21%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
25024 Points ∼47%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
11549 Points ∼22% -54%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
24321 Points ∼46% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
22232 Points ∼42% -11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
52700 Points ∼100% +111%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (15971 - 25625, n=6)
23092 Points ∼44% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 224130, n=818)
28467 Points ∼54% +14%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
23670 Points ∼61%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
12161 Points ∼31% -49%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
22445 Points ∼58% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
20885 Points ∼54% -12%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
38671 Points ∼100% +63%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (16738 - 24052, n=6)
21849 Points ∼56% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 117606, n=818)
21881 Points ∼57% -8%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
35 fps ∼41%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
35 fps ∼41% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
39 fps ∼45% +11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
86 fps ∼100% +146%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (28 - 48, n=7)
39.1 fps ∼45% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=818)
47.7 fps ∼55% +36%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
31 fps ∼53%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
32 fps ∼54% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
37 fps ∼63% +19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
59 fps ∼100% +90%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (25 - 44, n=7)
35.1 fps ∼59% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 138, n=827)
32 fps ∼54% +3%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
18 fps ∼43%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
19 fps ∼45% +6%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
21 fps ∼50% +17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
42 fps ∼100% +133%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (17 - 26, n=7)
20.4 fps ∼49% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 180, n=723)
28.3 fps ∼67% +57%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
19 fps ∼51%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
17 fps ∼46% -11%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
20 fps ∼54% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
37 fps ∼100% +95%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (15 - 24, n=7)
19.9 fps ∼54% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=731)
23.3 fps ∼63% +23%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
16 fps ∼52%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
13 fps ∼42% -19%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
13 fps ∼42% -19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
31 fps ∼100% +94%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (10 - 16, n=7)
14.7 fps ∼47% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=586)
22.7 fps ∼73% +42%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14 fps ∼52%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
11 fps ∼41% -21%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
13 fps ∼48% -7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
27 fps ∼100% +93%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (8.9 - 14, n=7)
13.3 fps ∼49% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=588)
20.2 fps ∼75% +44%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5.6 fps ∼48%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
4.1 fps ∼35% -27%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
4 fps ∼34% -29%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
4.9 fps ∼42% -12%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
11 fps ∼94% +96%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (5.5 - 8.3, n=7)
6.01 fps ∼51% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=346)
11.7 fps ∼100% +109%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
3.5 fps ∼42%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1.4 fps ∼17% -60%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2.7 fps ∼33% -23%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2.8 fps ∼34% -20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
7 fps ∼85% +100%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (3.5 - 3.6, n=7)
3.56 fps ∼43% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=344)
8.24 fps ∼100% +135%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
9.2 fps ∼53%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
6.4 fps ∼37% -30%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6.2 fps ∼36% -33%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
7.5 fps ∼43% -18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
17 fps ∼98% +85%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (8.8 - 9.7, n=7)
9.26 fps ∼53% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=350)
17.4 fps ∼100% +89%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 fps ∼50%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
3.8 fps ∼19% -62%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7.8 fps ∼39% -22%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
7.5 fps ∼37% -25%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (7.8 - 10, n=7)
9.66 fps ∼48% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=349)
20.1 fps ∼100% +101%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 fps ∼56%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6.9 fps ∼38% -31%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
8.1 fps ∼45% -19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
18 fps ∼100% +80%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (6.4 - 10, n=7)
9.43 fps ∼52% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 75, n=511)
15.1 fps ∼84% +51%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.9 fps ∼56%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6 fps ∼38% -33%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
7.7 fps ∼48% -13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
16 fps ∼100% +80%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (5.5 - 9.6, n=7)
8.53 fps ∼53% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=515)
13.4 fps ∼84% +51%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
180019 Points ∼55%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
177251 Points ∼54% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
157473 Points ∼48% -13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
275931 Points ∼85% +53%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (152185 - 187087, n=7)
175473 Points ∼54% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 622888, n=139)
326530 Points ∼100% +81%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1200 Points ∼85%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1231 Points ∼87% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1062 Points ∼75% -11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
1410 Points ∼100% +18%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (10 - 1202, n=7)
620 Points ∼44% -48%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=753)
835 Points ∼59% -30%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2138 Points ∼56%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1897 Points ∼50% -11%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1113 Points ∼29% -48%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3807 Points ∼100% +78%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (2127 - 2168, n=7)
2149 Points ∼56% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=753)
2592 Points ∼68% +21%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1759 Points ∼41%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2451 Points ∼57% +39%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2148 Points ∼50% +22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
4295 Points ∼100% +144%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (1291 - 2122, n=7)
1706 Points ∼40% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8874, n=753)
1947 Points ∼45% +11%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
4586 Points ∼67%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
4787 Points ∼70% +4%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
5142 Points ∼75% +12%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
6828 Points ∼100% +49%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (2839 - 4978, n=7)
4361 Points ∼64% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=753)
3552 Points ∼52% -23%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M21
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2133 Points ∼60%
Oppo A72
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2232 Points ∼63% +5%
Samsung Galaxy A41
Mediatek Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1901 Points ∼54% -11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3542 Points ∼100% +66%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
  (634 - 2191, n=7)
1418 Points ∼40% -34%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6273, n=753)
1823 Points ∼51% -15%

In the browser benchmarks, the Galaxy M21 does very poorly when compared to other competing devices. However, in day-to-day use, the scrolling is relatively smooth and webpages do not take forever to load.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81)
48.527 Points ∼100% +58%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 161, n=213)
42.5 Points ∼88% +39%
Samsung Galaxy A41 (Chrome 83.0.4103.101)
32.643 Points ∼67% +7%
Samsung Galaxy M21 (Chrome 85)
30.642 Points ∼63%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611 (27.5 - 30.6, n=7)
28.2 Points ∼58% -8%
Oppo A72 (Chrome 83)
22.887 Points ∼47% -25%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81)
89.457 Points ∼100% +81%
Samsung Galaxy A41 (Chrome 83.0.4103.101)
55.972 Points ∼63% +13%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611 (47.5 - 51.9, n=7)
50.4 Points ∼56% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 375, n=647)
49.6 Points ∼55% 0%
Samsung Galaxy M21 (Chrome 85)
49.497 Points ∼55%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 196, n=194)
44.9 runs/min ∼100% +69%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chome 81)
44.1 runs/min ∼98% +66%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611 (26.6 - 30.5, n=7)
29 runs/min ∼65% +9%
Oppo A72 (Chrome 83)
28.2 runs/min ∼63% +6%
Samsung Galaxy A41 (Chrome 83.0.4103.101)
27.8 runs/min ∼62% +5%
Samsung Galaxy M21 (Chome 85)
26.6 runs/min ∼59%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 194, n=284)
71 Points ∼100% +29%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81)
69 Points ∼97% +25%
Samsung Galaxy M21 (Chrome 85)
55 Points ∼77%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611 (46 - 57, n=7)
53.4 Points ∼75% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A41 (Chrome 83.0.4103.101)
52 Points ∼73% -5%
Oppo A72 (Chrome 83)
50 Points ∼70% -9%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81)
17303 Points ∼100% +76%
Samsung Galaxy A41 (Chrome 83.0.4103.101)
10499 Points ∼61% +7%
Samsung Galaxy M21 (Chrome 85)
9810 Points ∼57%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611 (7442 - 10687, n=7)
9667 Points ∼56% -1%
Oppo A72 (Chrome 83)
9345 Points ∼54% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 58632, n=816)
8273 Points ∼48% -16%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (460 - 59466, n=842)
9571 ms * ∼100% -105%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611 (4332 - 6212, n=7)
4863 ms * ∼51% -4%
Samsung Galaxy M21 (Chrome 85)
4664.3 ms * ∼49%
Oppo A72 (Chrome 83)
4487.2 ms * ∼47% +4%
Samsung Galaxy A41 (Chrome 83.0.4103.101)
3778.9 ms * ∼39% +19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81)
2794.2 ms * ∼29% +40%

* ... smaller is better

In the storage benchmarks, the Samsung smartphone achieves very good write speeds, thanks to its UFS 2.1 memory. All in all, the M21 offers good data transfer rates for a device in this price range. Having said that, the Huawei P30 Lite New Edition offers even faster storage.

With our reference-grade microSD card Toshiba Exceria Pro M501, the Samsung smartphone manages to achieve good write and read speeds.

Samsung Galaxy M21Sony Xperia L4Oppo A72Samsung Galaxy A41Xiaomi Redmi Note 9SAverage 64 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-30%
-8%
-15%
1%
-4%
-34%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
62.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
62.5 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
31.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-50%
67 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
8%
54.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-12%
51.4 (17.1 - 71.9, n=31)
-17%
51.4 (1.7 - 87.1, n=550)
-17%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
77.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
83.5 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
7%
37.76 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-52%
83.01 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
7%
74.5 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-4%
67.5 (18 - 87.1, n=31)
-13%
69.3 (8.1 - 96.5, n=550)
-11%
Random Write 4KB
124.2
22.5
-82%
152.9
23%
72.53
-42%
123.6
0%
67.6 (8.77 - 165, n=42)
-46%
38.6 (0.14 - 319, n=914)
-69%
Random Read 4KB
126
61.2
-51%
135.91
8%
84
-33%
137
9%
134 (78.2 - 173, n=42)
6%
61.8 (1.59 - 325, n=914)
-51%
Sequential Write 256KB
192.7
165
-14%
234.61
22%
211.05
10%
214.8
11%
199 (133 - 388, n=42)
3%
135 (2.99 - 1321, n=914)
-30%
Sequential Read 256KB
487.8
293.4
-40%
504.32
3%
299.89
-39%
496.6
2%
708 (476 - 895, n=42)
45%
356 (12.1 - 2037, n=914)
-27%

Gaming – Only for simple games

We use Gamebench to record frame rates for our gaming benchmarks. In Armajet, the M21 manages to hit 60 FPS some of the time. The M21 struggles in more demanding titles such as PUBG Mobile. Here, the Samsung smartphone cannot achieve playable frame rates with the HD preset. However, on the lowest settings, PUBG Mobile is somewhat playable.

Our review device is suited for simple games. Those who want to play graphically demanding titles will need a smartphone with more gaming performance.

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Armajet
Armajet
0102030405060Tooltip
; PUBG Mobile; Smooth; 1.0.0: Ø36.3 (28-41)
; PUBG Mobile; HD; 1.0.0: Ø25 (10-40)
; Armajet; 1.15.1: Ø56.1 (37-60)

Emissions – Fluctuating performance under load

Temperature

GFXBench battery test
GFXBench battery test

The area around the front-facing camera gets hottest under load. The maximum surface temperature of 42.5 °C (108.5 °F) is quite reasonable, as long as you are in an environment with a normal ambient temperature. The smartphone can become unpleasant to use on hot summer days. However, the M21 is always cool when idle.

We use a battery testing utility known as GFXBench to examine how well our review device performs under continuous load. Here, we observed fluctuations in performance of up to 25%. All in all, the M21 fails to maintain its full performance in the GFXBench benchmark.

Max. Load
 42.5 °C
109 F
36.1 °C
97 F
34.3 °C
94 F
 
 41.5 °C
107 F
36.2 °C
97 F
34.4 °C
94 F
 
 40.1 °C
104 F
36.6 °C
98 F
34.4 °C
94 F
 
Maximum: 42.5 °C = 109 F
Average: 37.3 °C = 99 F
33.1 °C
92 F
35.2 °C
95 F
38.1 °C
101 F
33.8 °C
93 F
35.2 °C
95 F
39.2 °C
103 F
33.9 °C
93 F
36.2 °C
97 F
38.3 °C
101 F
Maximum: 39.2 °C = 103 F
Average: 35.9 °C = 97 F
Power Supply (max.)  41.2 °C = 106 F | Room Temperature 21.9 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.3 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 32.9 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.5 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.2 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.8 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
Heat distribution on the front
Heat distribution on the front
Heat distribution on the back
Heat distribution on the back

Speakers

Frequency response
Frequency response

The mono-speaker on the bottom offers a mediocre volume. However, it has no trouble reproducing voices. The high tones are significantly overrepresented, because the lows and the mids are almost completely missing. At maximum volume, the speaker sounds unpleasantly tinny.

For a better listening experience, we recommend you use a set of headphones, which can be connected to the device via either the 3.5-mm audio jack or Bluetooth 5.0. The headphone jack offers a low level of background noise. The Bluetooth connection is stable and easy to establish and the audio quality is quite good.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2038.941.42536.838.33133.135.14032.935.25035.337.36328.728.18019.121.810020.421.612520.519.316017.227.320014.237.325014.545.831514.550.840012.85450013.456.863013.661.780018.966.2100018.672.6125021.273.7160014.975.2200014.174.4250014.672.6315014.769.4400015.566.6500016.263.163001766.880001875.51000018.876.61250019.663.21600020.549.5SPL62.158.42983.8N14.110.61.154.2median 16.2median 63.2Delta2.512.234.829.419.626.323.92524.324.730.533.418.726.820.422.518.621.417.517.419.532.919.239.416.448.315.254.314.25714.760.413.862.514.66714.168.613.568.414.473.113.976.513.878.413.873.714.772.414.275.414.473.714.974.61563.415.152.315.350.126.585.50.859.7median 14.7median 63.40.813.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy M21Samsung Galaxy A41
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy M21 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.9% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (28% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 76% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 16% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 84% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 11% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Samsung Galaxy A41 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.9% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 73% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 19% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 82% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 13% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery Life - Large battery with good runtimes

Energy Consumption

The Samsung Galaxy M21 is not particularly energy-efficient. However, the Galaxy M31 is even less energy-efficient. The Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S has a higher power draw when idle, but it consumes less energy under load.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.1 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.2 / 1.8 / 2.1 Watt
Load midlight 6.2 / 7.9 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy M21
6000 mAh
Oppo A72
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A41
3500 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
5020 mAh
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
20%
29%
-8%
-11%
18%
Idle Minimum *
1.2
0.7
42%
0.96
20%
1.5
-25%
1.173 (0.9 - 1.6, n=7)
2%
0.892 (0.2 - 3.4, n=911)
26%
Idle Average *
1.8
1.97
-9%
1.57
13%
2.1
-17%
2.28 (1.7 - 4.24, n=7)
-27%
1.758 (0.6 - 6.2, n=910)
2%
Idle Maximum *
2.1
1.98
6%
1.61
23%
2.5
-19%
2.86 (1.8 - 4.34, n=7)
-36%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=911)
3%
Load Average *
6.2
3.83
38%
2.93
53%
5.2
16%
5.97 (5 - 6.99, n=7)
4%
4.12 (0.8 - 10.8, n=905)
34%
Load Maximum *
7.9
6.2
22%
4.97
37%
7.5
5%
7.83 (6.3 - 9.4, n=7)
1%
6.12 (1.2 - 14.2, n=905)
23%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Samsung’s Exynos SoCs are not known for their efficiency. However, thanks to a 6000-mAh battery, the M21 should last for a long time. In our Wi-Fi test, the M21 achieves a stellar battery runtime of over 21 hours. Here, the Galaxy M31 does slightly better. That being said, no other competing device comes even close to reaching such a great battery runtime. The smartphone can easily last three work days before it dies.

The 6000-mAh battery takes more than two hours to fully charge with the included 15-watt charger.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
38h 17min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
21h 38min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
22h 32min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 49min
Samsung Galaxy M21
6000 mAh
Sony Xperia L4
3580 mAh
Oppo A72
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A41
3500 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
5020 mAh
Battery Runtime
-40%
-22%
-26%
-5%
Reader / Idle
2297
1843
-20%
2263
-1%
H.264
1352
998
-26%
1269
-6%
WiFi v1.3
1298
783
-40%
1018
-22%
650
-50%
1187
-9%
Load
289
268
-7%
279
-3%

Pros

+ bright AMOLED screen
+ great battery life
+ flexible camera system
+ accurate geolocation

Cons

- poor performance
- SoC is not energy-efficient
- preinstalled bloatware

Verdict – For those who are looking for something solid

Review of the Samsung Galaxy M21
Review of the Samsung Galaxy M21

The Samsung Galaxy M21 offers a mediocre camera system and a mediocre level of performance. Other manufacturers are chasing specs and putting emphasis on the camera performance. Samsung just builds solid smartphones, which have no weaknesses and offer a couple of special features on top.

The Galaxy M21 is in the exact place, which much more expensive smartphones with very good battery life and bright OLED screens used to occupy. 

The Samsung Galaxy M21 is a rock solid, lower mid-range smartphone with a great screen and good battery life.

As we mentioned before, the M21 has very few weaknesses, all of which can be attributed to the simple fact that Samsung chose to use its proprietary Exynos SoC: It is not as energy-efficient or powerful as the SoCs from the competition, but it still offers a rather decent level of performance.

In day-to-day use, the Galaxy M21 is all right, and it brings to the table everything that a smartphone in this price range should.

Samsung Galaxy M21 - 09/24/2020 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
80%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
94%
Connectivity
46 / 70 → 66%
Weight
89%
Battery
93%
Display
89%
Games Performance
17 / 64 → 27%
Application Performance
57 / 86 → 66%
Temperature
89%
Noise
100%
Audio
68 / 90 → 76%
Camera
60%
Average
73%
80%
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 M21 Smartphone Review - Plain, but good
Florian Schmitt, 2020-09-24 (Update: 2020-09-27)
Florian Schmitt
Editor of the original article: Florian Schmitt - Managing Editor Mobile
When I was 12, the first computer came into the house and immediately I started tinkering around, taking it apart, getting new parts and replacing them - after all, there always had to be enough power for the current games. When I came to Notebookcheck in 2009, I was passionate about testing gaming notebooks. Since 2012, my attention has been focused on smartphones, tablets and future technologies.