Notebookcheck

Samsung Galaxy M30s Smartphone Review: A huge battery at an affordable price

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Alex Alderson), 11/26/2019

A normal monster. The Galaxy M series is typified by consisting of low-end midrange smartphones with modern designs and huge batteries. The Galaxy M30s is no different, with the device featuring a 6,000 mAh battery despite its relatively compact footprint. Read on to find out whether the latest entry in the Galaxy M series has more to offer than just a whopping battery.

Samsung Galaxy M30s

If you ask people what is important to them on their smartphone, two of the most important factors will likely be good cameras and long battery life. Samsung has sought to address these wishes for those who want to spend around 250 Euros (~US$275) on a smartphone with the Galaxy M30s, a handset that has three rear-facing cameras and a 6,000 mAh battery.

The M30s will not stand up against its competitors on battery life and cameras alone, though. Please see our table below that outlines the devices against which we will compare our review unit.

Samsung Galaxy M30s (Galaxy M Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
6.4 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 403 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, Super AMOLED, glossy: yes
Storage
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, , 50.5 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm jack, Card Reader: up to 512 GB microSD cards. Dedicated microSD card slot, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, compass, gyroscope, proximity sensor, USB Type-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, 1,800, 1,900 MHz. 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 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix , f/2.0, phase detection autofocus (PDAF), LED Flash, videos at up to 2160p/30 FPS. 8.0 MPix ultra-wide-angle lens, f/2.2,. 5.0 MPix depth of field camera, f/2.2.
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix , f/2.0
Additional features
Speakers: Mono speaker on the bottom edge of the device, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, Fast charger, USB cable, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, LTE speed: 600 Mbps downloads and 150 Mbps uploads. SAR values: Body - 1,130 W/kg, Head - 0.492 W/kg. FM radio, fanless
Weight
188 g ( = 6.63 oz / 0.41 pounds), Power Supply: 64 g ( = 2.26 oz / 0.14 pounds)
Price
249 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Device comparison

RatingDateModelWeightDriveSizeResolutionBest Price
80%11/2019Samsung Galaxy M30s
Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3
188 g64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.4"2340x1080
79%11/2019Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
665, Adreno 610
190 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.3"2340x1080
78%11/2019Motorola Moto G8 Plus
665, Adreno 610
188 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.3"2280x1080
78%09/2019Xiaomi Mi A3
665, Adreno 610
173.8 g64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.09"1560x720
80%04/2019Samsung Galaxy M20
7904, Mali-G71 MP2
186 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.3"2340x1080

Case - High-quality plastic

The Galaxy M series is known for having high-quality plastic cases, and the M30s is no exception. Samsung sells the device in blue, black and white, all of which have glossy finishes. The plastic back picks up fingerprints quickly, at least our white version does anyway.

The M30s weighs 188 g and is 8.9 mm thick, making it impressively compact for a device with a 6,000 mAh battery. Our review unit is about as large as most of our comparison devices, although none come close to offering the same battery capacity as the M30s does. By comparison, the Cubot King Kong 3 and the Gigaset GX290, which have 6,000 and 6,200 mAh batteries, respectively, are significantly heavier and thicker than the M30s.

The M30s also has a relatively restrained design. Samsung has equipped the device with a somewhat unobtrusive rear-facing camera housing and a fingerprint scanner that sits flush with the back plastic, while the device also has a pleasingly small notch in its display. The device's rounded edges help it fit nicely in our hands too, and there are hardly any gaps between materials.

On a side note, the M30s does not have an IP rating. Hence, we would recommend keeping it away from water or dusty areas.

Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Galaxy M30s

Size Comparison

159 mm / 6.26 inch 75.1 mm / 2.96 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 188 g0.4145 lbs158.4 mm / 6.24 inch 75.8 mm / 2.98 inch 9.1 mm / 0.3583 inch 188 g0.4145 lbs158.3 mm / 6.23 inch 75.3 mm / 2.96 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 190 g0.4189 lbs156.4 mm / 6.16 inch 74.5 mm / 2.93 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 186 g0.4101 lbs153.5 mm / 6.04 inch 71.9 mm / 2.83 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 173.8 g0.3832 lbs

Connectivity - Fast internal storage, a microSD card reader and a headphone jack

Samsung equips the M30s with 4 GB of RAM and 64 GB of UFS 2.1 flash storage, making the device fairly well-equipped. However, the Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 has double the storage for roughly the same price, although it is the slower eMMC type.

The M30s has a microSD card reader too, which supports up to 512-GB cards. The card reader has a dedicated slot, allowing you to use two nano-SIMs and a microSD card simultaneously. Rounding off the connectivity is a USB Type-C port, which operates on the USB 2.0 standard.

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

Software - One UI 1.5 and permanent third-party apps

Samsung preinstalls One UI 1.5 on the M30s, an in-house version of Android 9.0 Pie. While we are fans of its simplicity and the many functions that it offers, we do not like that the South Korean firm has installed a few third-party apps. Frustratingly, some of these are advertising apps and cannot be uninstalled.

Worse still, our review unit had the 1 August 2019 set of security patches installed at the time of writing. Considering that we tested the device in November of the same year, leaving a new handset on three-month-old security patches is unacceptable by our standards.

Separately, Samsung should eventually roll-out One UI 2.0 to the M30s. The South Korean company has not confirmed when it will do so, though.

Software information
Software information
Default home screen
Default home screen
Default app drawer
Default app drawer

Communication & GPS - Fast Wi-Fi and accurate location services

The M30s cut a fine figure in our Wi-Fi tests. The device performed on par with the Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 in the two iperf3 Client tests that we ran, demolishing our other comparison devices in the process. We occasionally noticed some drops in transfer speeds, but overall the M30s performed well when tested with our Netgear Nighthawk AX12 router.

The device also supports up to 600 Mb/s download speeds over LTE, which is on par with many other midrange handsets. Our review unit maintained decent network reception during our tests, which we conducted mostly inside buildings in an urban environment.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Adreno 610, 665, 128 GB eMMC Flash
339 (min: 320, max: 349) MBit/s ∼100% +3%
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9611, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
328 (min: 270, max: 341) MBit/s ∼97%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=461)
230 MBit/s ∼68% -30%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Adreno 610, 665, 64 GB eMMC Flash
182 (min: 11, max: 259) MBit/s ∼54% -45%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Adreno 610, 665, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
158 (min: 18, max: 227) MBit/s ∼47% -52%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Mali-G71 MP2, 7904, 64 GB eMMC Flash
64 (min: 52, max: 69) MBit/s ∼19% -80%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9611, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
323 (min: 257, max: 351) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Adreno 610, 665, 128 GB eMMC Flash
303 (min: 242, max: 355) MBit/s ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=461)
219 MBit/s ∼68% -32%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Adreno 610, 665, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
172 (min: 2, max: 282) MBit/s ∼53% -47%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Adreno 610, 665, 64 GB eMMC Flash
152 (min: 1, max: 254) MBit/s ∼47% -53%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Mali-G71 MP2, 7904, 64 GB eMMC Flash
41 (min: 2, max: 93) MBit/s ∼13% -87%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø328 (270-341)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø323 (257-351)
GPS Test: Outdoors
GPS Test: Outdoors
GPS Test: Indoors
GPS Test: Indoors

While the M30s cannot locate us from inside of buildings, it manages to find a satellite fix with up to five metres accuracy outdoors. The device still needs a moment or two to find us outdoors though, and while Google Maps is not always completely accurate, it is good enough for general use. Likewise, the built-in compass worked well too.

We also took our review unit on a bike ride to compare its location accuracy against a Garmin Edge 520, one of our reference bike computers. The M30s impressed us here and managed to record our route relatively accurately. The device even does a better job than the Garmin does occasionally, as the screenshots of our loop around some houses below demonstrate. We prefer the route that the M30s plotted in the narrow streets of the old town more than the one that the Garmin did too. While the M30s got slightly out of kilter when we cycled over a bridge, we would recommend it for all navigation tasks.

GPS test: Samsung Galaxy M30s - Overview
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy M30s - Overview
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy M30s - Loop
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy M30s - Loop
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy M30s - Bridge
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy M30s - Bridge
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge

Telephone Features & Call Quality - Loud, but with distortion

Samsung preinstalls its in-house suite of telephony apps on the M30s. The company lays out its phone app slightly differently than Google does, but most people should find their way around it soon enough. The system-wide dark mode applies to the phone app too, which is a nice touch.

The earpiece gets loud enough for even making calls from busy environments, so loud that people around you may overhear your conversation. However, its audio quality is mediocre, while we noticed some distortion now and then. Moreover, while the person on the other end of the line always remains intelligible throughout our call tests, their voice sounded rather dulled. The same applies to when making calls over the loudspeaker. Likewise, the microphone picks out our voice in most scenarios, but it occasionally distorts if we speak too loudly. Similarly, it struggles to capture soft sounds.

Cameras - Almost true zoom

Photographed with the front-facing camera
Photographed with the front-facing camera

The M30s has a rather large rear-facing camera housing, in which Samsung installs three sensors. Its primary camera is a 48 MP sensor that can interpolate four pixels into one for increased light sensitivity per pixel as the IMX586 can, for example. By default, the M30s shoots in 12 MP, but you can set the device to 48 MP if you prefer the latter resolution. There is also an ultra-wide-angle lens onboard, so theoretically the device should be capable of optical zoom. However, the default camera app does not offer stepless zoom, with it forcing you to select a sensor before you start zooming. The M30s uses its third lens for calculating depth of field information in portrait shots.

The primary camera struggles to capture many details of objects, but it does a much better job in environmental shots and landscapes. The sensor also has issues with exposing dark areas correctly, falling short of higher-quality smartphone cameras. However, the M30s has a decent and versatile set of cameras by current standards. Our review unit even performed comparatively well in low-light conditions, which surprised us.

You must also decide whether you want to use the primary or ultra-wide-angle camera before recording a video. While the former can record videos in up to 4K at 30 FPS, its autofocus is a bit slow by our reckoning. Conversely, the sensor reacts to changing lighting conditions relatively well.

There is also a 16 MP front-facing camera, which captures most scenes reasonably sharply. Our test shots look a bit grainy, though.

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 our review unit to further camera tests under controlled lighting conditions. We encountered surprisingly large colour deviations here, with the main camera reproducing yellow tones more accurately than other colours. Our test chart looks sharp and vibrant too, with black text on coloured backgrounds being easy to read. Colour transitions are reasonably even as well, while there is only a slight drop in contrast towards the top corner of the image. Predictably, the sensor has a harder time reproducing our chart at 1 lux than it does under controlled lighting conditions.

ColorChecker Photo
27.6 ∆E
46 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
31.7 ∆E
40.8 ∆E
55.5 ∆E
44.2 ∆E
31.1 ∆E
33.4 ∆E
27.6 ∆E
54.4 ∆E
52.9 ∆E
27.3 ∆E
43.1 ∆E
29.5 ∆E
57.6 ∆E
36.2 ∆E
38.3 ∆E
64.3 ∆E
64.3 ∆E
47.1 ∆E
34.3 ∆E
23.3 ∆E
13.4 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy M30s: 39.99 ∆E min: 13.38 - max: 64.29 ∆E
ColorChecker Photo
19.9 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
19.3 ∆E
27.7 ∆E
16.3 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
11 ∆E
16.6 ∆E
15.9 ∆E
11.7 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
8.3 ∆E
14.8 ∆E
16.4 ∆E
4 ∆E
11.3 ∆E
16.9 ∆E
3 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
11.5 ∆E
18.9 ∆E
18.3 ∆E
2.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy M30s: 12.96 ∆E min: 2.88 - max: 27.75 ∆E
A photo of our test chart in controlled lighting conditions
A photo of our test chart in controlled lighting conditions
A photo of our test chart at 1 lux

Accessories & Warranty - Limited accessories and regional restrictions

The M30s comes with a quick charger, a matching USB cable and card slot ejector tool. Samsung offers other accessories on its website, though.

Samsung includes a 24-month warranty with the M30s. Curiously, the South Korean company has imposed some regional restrictions on the handset. If you buy the device in the EU but want to use it in the US, for example, you must first insert an EU SIM card for at least five minutes before the device will recognise an American SIM card.

Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies & Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices & Operation - A precise touchscreen and fingerprint sensor

As we mentioned earlier, Samsung has placed a fingerprint sensor on the back of the M30s. A raised edge surrounds the sensor to help you feel it without looking at it, which is useful. The one in our review unit reliably unlocks the device but with a slight delay.

Likewise, the M30s has a precise touchscreen that remains accurate even into the edges of the display. One UI contains a setting for increasing the touchscreen's sensitivity too, should you want to apply a screen protector or use the device while wearing gloves.

Samsung preinstalls its in-house keyboard app, but you can replace this with your preferred one, as is the case on almost all modern Android smartphones. The default keyboard contains numerous settings, including the option of infinitely zooming in on characters within a given frame. It worked well during our tests.

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

Display - A bright and colour-accurate AMOLED panel

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

Samsung equips the M30s with an AMOLED display, which remains a rarity for a 250-Euro (~US$275) smartphone. Only the Xiaomi Mi A3 is as well equipped as the M30s is out of our comparison devices, with most OEMs still using IPS displays in their 250-Euro (~US$275) handsets. The AMOLED panel in the M30s is a big step-up from the TFT one in the Galaxy M20 too. Our review unit achieved a maximum average brightness of 597 cd/m² with automatic brightness on, according to X-Rite i1Pro 2. While the display does not get as bright as the one in the Xiaomi Redmi Note 8, it is bright enough for most environments.

The 6.4-inch panel operates natively at 2340x1080, which is a resolution that matches or betters those of our comparison devices. If you like vivid colours, then we would recommend using Samsung's vibrant colour mode. The South Korean company also includes a natural colour mode if that is more your thing.

581
cd/m²
601
cd/m²
606
cd/m²
592
cd/m²
600
cd/m²
609
cd/m²
587
cd/m²
597
cd/m²
603
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 609 cd/m² Average: 597.3 cd/m² Minimum: 3.74 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 600 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.5 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 2 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
98.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.013
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.3
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
IPS, 2280x1080, 6.3
Xiaomi Mi A3
AMOLED, 1560x720, 6.09
Samsung Galaxy M20
PLS TFT, 2340x1080, 6.3
Screen
22%
-56%
-70%
-73%
Brightness middle
600
656
9%
597
0%
348
-42%
452
-25%
Brightness
597
643
8%
596
0%
355
-41%
445
-25%
Brightness Distribution
95
95
0%
93
-2%
91
-4%
92
-3%
Black Level *
0.54
0.52
0.41
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.5
1.1
56%
5.93
-137%
5.86
-134%
5.3
-112%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
7.17
2.4
67%
9.42
-31%
15.6
-118%
9.5
-32%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2
2.2
-10%
5.3
-165%
3.6
-80%
6.8
-240%
Gamma
2.013 109%
2.2 100%
2.232 99%
2.232 99%
2.23 99%
CCT
6399 102%
6263 104%
7632 85%
7051 92%
8355 78%
Contrast
1215
1148
1102

* ... 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 118 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 118 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 118 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9331 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

We tested our review unit set to the natural mode, which delivers decent colour accuracy. The display reproduces most tones in line with the sRGB colour space to the naked eye, which is something that CalMAN supports. Theoretically, the M30s is colour accurate enough on which to edit photos reasonably well before printing them. CalMAN demonstrated that our review unit covered most of the sRGB colour space too, although these results are more indicative than anything else.

As the information above demonstrates, the screen also flickers at 118 Hz regardless of the brightness to which we set it. The flickering is not necessarily pulse-width modulation (PWM), but we would recommend trying the handset before you buy it if you are PWM sensitive. Incidentally, the display has comparatively short response times, which may please some gamers.

CalMAN: Colour accuracy
CalMAN: Colour accuracy
CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Colour space
CalMAN: Colour space
CalMAN: Colour saturation
CalMAN: Colour saturation

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
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. » 7 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
10 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5 ms rise
↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 8 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.5 ms).

As we indicated earlier, the M30s gets bright enough to use comfortably outdoors, even on a sunny day. We have no complaints about the viewing angles either, although the display will reflect artificial lights or sunlight at acute angles.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Using the Galaxy M30s outdoors
Using the Galaxy M30s outdoors

Performance - A fast and slightly revised SoC

Samsung has equipped the M30s with its Exynos 9611, an SoC that offers only minor improvements over the Exynos 9610. Specifically, the Exynos 9611 supports better camera modules than the Exynos 9610 does, but both have eight processor cores evenly split across performance and power-saving clusters.

Our review unit performed well in synthetic benchmarks, with it often being on par or slightly ahead of our comparison devices. Its ARM Mali-G72 MP3 GPU also offers class-typical performance.

Geekbench 5
Vulkan Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
663 Points ∼43%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
422 Points ∼27% -36%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
422 Points ∼27% -36%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
663 Points ∼43% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (183 - 3222, n=30)
1539 Points ∼100% +132%
OpenCL Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1393 Points ∼69%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
363 Points ∼18% -74%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
370 Points ∼18% -73%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1393 Points ∼69% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (183 - 4593, n=36)
2015 Points ∼100% +45%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1299 Points ∼65%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1327 Points ∼67% +2%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1379 Points ∼69% +6%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1299 Points ∼65% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (807 - 3575, n=47)
1995 Points ∼100% +54%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
349 Points ∼61%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
314 Points ∼55% -10%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
315 Points ∼55% -10%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
349 Points ∼61% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (155 - 1344, n=47)
575 Points ∼100% +65%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5925 Points ∼91%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6498 Points ∼99% +10%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6534 Points ∼100% +10%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6396 Points ∼98% +8%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5269 Points ∼81% -11%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
5925 Points ∼91% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11690, n=399)
5379 Points ∼82% -9%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
6697 Points ∼82%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
7446 Points ∼91% +11%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8186 Points ∼100% +22%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7984 Points ∼98% +19%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5802 Points ∼71% -13%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
6697 Points ∼82% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 15193, n=566)
5844 Points ∼71% -13%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2134 Points ∼79%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2250 Points ∼84% +5%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2268 Points ∼84% +6%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2300 Points ∼85% +8%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2028 Points ∼75% -5%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
2134 Points ∼79% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=76)
2691 Points ∼100% +26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1320 Points ∼47%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
898 Points ∼32% -32%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
901 Points ∼32% -32%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
908 Points ∼32% -31%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
964 Points ∼34% -27%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1320 Points ∼47% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=76)
2807 Points ∼100% +113%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1442 Points ∼57%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1036 Points ∼41% -28%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1040 Points ∼41% -28%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1049 Points ∼41% -27%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1091 Points ∼43% -24%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1442 Points ∼57% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=76)
2550 Points ∼100% +77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2103 Points ∼88%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2298 Points ∼96% +9%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2341 Points ∼98% +11%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2387 Points ∼100% +14%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1657 Points ∼69% -21%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
2103 Points ∼88% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5576, n=406)
2002 Points ∼84% -5%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1267 Points ∼69%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
980 Points ∼54% -23%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
981 Points ∼54% -23%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
987 Points ∼54% -22%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
488 Points ∼27% -61%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1267 Points ∼69% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=406)
1824 Points ∼100% +44%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1390 Points ∼82%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1134 Points ∼67% -18%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1126 Points ∼67% -19%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1135 Points ∼67% -18%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
579 Points ∼34% -58%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1390 Points ∼82% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6916, n=407)
1693 Points ∼100% +22%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2275 Points ∼95%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2348 Points ∼98% +3%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2393 Points ∼100% +5%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2343 Points ∼98% +3%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1677 Points ∼70% -26%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
2275 Points ∼95% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5133, n=435)
1910 Points ∼80% -16%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1634 Points ∼67%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1668 Points ∼69% +2%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1670 Points ∼69% +2%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1674 Points ∼69% +2%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
650 Points ∼27% -60%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1634 Points ∼67% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=435)
2432 Points ∼100% +49%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1743 Points ∼85%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1778 Points ∼87% +2%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1790 Points ∼88% +3%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1787 Points ∼88% +3%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
752 Points ∼37% -57%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1743 Points ∼85% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=435)
2040 Points ∼100% +17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2255 Points ∼91%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2408 Points ∼97% +7%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2424 Points ∼98% +7%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2477 Points ∼100% +10%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1657 Points ∼67% -27%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
2255 Points ∼91% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4909, n=486)
1907 Points ∼77% -15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1203 Points ∼80%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
967 Points ∼64% -20%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
979 Points ∼65% -19%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
931 Points ∼62% -23%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
488 Points ∼32% -59%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1203 Points ∼80% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=486)
1510 Points ∼100% +26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1342 Points ∼92%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1114 Points ∼77% -17%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1128 Points ∼78% -16%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1081 Points ∼74% -19%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
582 Points ∼40% -57%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1342 Points ∼92% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=487)
1453 Points ∼100% +8%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2286 Points ∼93%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2378 Points ∼96% +4%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2452 Points ∼99% +7%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2471 Points ∼100% +8%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1677 Points ∼68% -27%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
2286 Points ∼93% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4900, n=527)
1770 Points ∼72% -23%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1468 Points ∼74%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1607 Points ∼81% +9%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1634 Points ∼82% +11%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1651 Points ∼83% +12%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
650 Points ∼33% -56%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1468 Points ∼74% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=526)
1982 Points ∼100% +35%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1595 Points ∼90%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1728 Points ∼97% +8%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1765 Points ∼99% +11%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1782 Points ∼100% +12%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
752 Points ∼42% -53%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1595 Points ∼90% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8338, n=529)
1708 Points ∼96% +7%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
20118 Points ∼99%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
20354 Points ∼100% +1%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
18698 Points ∼92% -7%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
19552 Points ∼96% -3%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
12500 Points ∼61% -38%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
20118 Points ∼99% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=687)
14357 Points ∼71% -29%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
15971 Points ∼63%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
24654 Points ∼98% +54%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
24992 Points ∼99% +56%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
25219 Points ∼100% +58%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
13392 Points ∼53% -16%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
15971 Points ∼63% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=685)
22559 Points ∼89% +41%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
16738 Points ∼71%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
23534 Points ∼99% +41%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
23253 Points ∼98% +39%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
23693 Points ∼100% +42%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
13183 Points ∼56% -21%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
16738 Points ∼71% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=685)
18200 Points ∼77% +9%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
41 fps ∼100%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
36 fps ∼88% -12%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
36 fps ∼88% -12%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
36 fps ∼88% -12%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
14 fps ∼34% -66%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
41 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=705)
38.5 fps ∼94% -6%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
37 fps ∼71%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
33 fps ∼63% -11%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
34 fps ∼65% -8%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
52 fps ∼100% +41%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
12 fps ∼23% -68%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
37 fps ∼71% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=714)
28.3 fps ∼54% -24%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
20 fps ∼90%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
19 fps ∼85% -5%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
20 fps ∼90% 0%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
20 fps ∼90% 0%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
7 fps ∼31% -65%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
20 fps ∼90% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=610)
22.3 fps ∼100% +12%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
17 fps ∼50%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
17 fps ∼50% 0%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
18 fps ∼53% +6%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
34 fps ∼100% +100%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
6.2 fps ∼18% -64%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
17 fps ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=619)
19.6 fps ∼58% +15%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14 fps ∼77%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
13 fps ∼71% -7%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
13 fps ∼71% -7%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
13 fps ∼71% -7%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.3 fps ∼24% -69%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
14 fps ∼77% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=475)
18.2 fps ∼100% +30%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14 fps ∼54%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
12 fps ∼46% -14%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
12 fps ∼46% -14%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
26 fps ∼100% +86%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
3.8 fps ∼15% -73%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
14 fps ∼54% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=477)
17 fps ∼65% +21%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.3 fps ∼81%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2.8 fps ∼27% -66%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
4.5 fps ∼44% -46%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
9.1 fps ∼89% +10%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2.7 fps ∼26% -67%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
8.3 fps ∼81% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=198)
10.2 fps ∼100% +23%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
3.6 fps ∼51%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
4.4 fps ∼62% +22%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2.8 fps ∼40% -22%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2.8 fps ∼40% -22%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1.7 fps ∼24% -53%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
3.6 fps ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 33, n=197)
7.08 fps ∼100% +97%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.8 fps ∼59%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
7.2 fps ∼48% -18%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7.6 fps ∼51% -14%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
15 fps ∼100% +70%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.3 fps ∼29% -51%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
8.8 fps ∼59% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=202)
15 fps ∼100% +70%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
9.8 fps ∼58%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
8.1 fps ∼48% -17%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8.2 fps ∼49% -16%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8.4 fps ∼50% -14%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.7 fps ∼28% -52%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
9.8 fps ∼58% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 87, n=202)
16.8 fps ∼100% +71%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
9.6 fps ∼77%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6.9 fps ∼56% -28%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7.2 fps ∼58% -25%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7.1 fps ∼57% -26%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2.6 fps ∼21% -73%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
9.6 fps ∼77% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=400)
12.4 fps ∼100% +29%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.8 fps ∼68%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6.1 fps ∼47% -31%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6.6 fps ∼51% -25%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
13 fps ∼100% +48%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2.7 fps ∼21% -69%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
8.8 fps ∼68% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=404)
11.1 fps ∼85% +26%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
13.8 fps ∼16%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
8.24 (min: 5.77, max: 20.65) fps ∼10% -40%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
11.99 fps ∼14% -13%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
13.8 fps ∼16% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (8.24 - 4528, n=66)
85.4 fps ∼100% +519%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10.82 fps ∼17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6.65 (min: 3.4, max: 18.65) fps ∼11% -39%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
10.74 fps ∼17% -1%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
10.8 fps ∼17% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.57 - 2850, n=59)
62.8 fps ∼100% +480%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
12.34 fps ∼13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
7.44 (min: 3.6, max: 21.99) fps ∼8% -40%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
12.3 fps ∼13% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.88 - 4462, n=56)
97.3 fps ∼100% +688%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1755 Score ∼77%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1134 Score ∼50% -35%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1092 Score ∼48% -38%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1755 Score ∼77% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 5025, n=63)
2271 Score ∼100% +29%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1025 Points ∼73%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
937 Points ∼67% -9%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
926 Points ∼66% -10%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1400 Points ∼100% +37%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
984 Points ∼70% -4%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
1025 Points ∼73% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=643)
765 Points ∼55% -25%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2127 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1881 Points ∼88% -12%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1916 Points ∼90% -10%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1886 Points ∼89% -11%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1038 Points ∼49% -51%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
2127 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=643)
2116 Points ∼99% -1%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2122 Points ∼67%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2808 Points ∼88% +32%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2835 Points ∼89% +34%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
3174 Points ∼100% +50%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2973 Points ∼94% +40%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
2122 Points ∼67% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=643)
1558 Points ∼49% -27%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
4978 Points ∼98%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
5006 Points ∼98% +1%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
5000 Points ∼98% 0%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
5089 Points ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
3957 Points ∼78% -21%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
4978 Points ∼98% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=643)
3039 Points ∼60% -39%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2191 Points ∼86%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2254 Points ∼88% +3%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2240 Points ∼88% +2%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2556 Points ∼100% +17%
Samsung Galaxy M20
Samsung Exynos 7904, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1862 Points ∼73% -15%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
2191 Points ∼86% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=643)
1526 Points ∼60% -30%
AnTuTu v8
UX (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
33717 Points ∼87%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
27535 Points ∼71% -18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
27535 Points ∼71% -18%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
27705 Points ∼71% -18%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
33717 Points ∼87% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6969 - 78191, n=17)
38778 Points ∼100% +15%
MEM (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
44128 Points ∼89%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
38271 Points ∼77% -13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
38271 Points ∼77% -13%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
37857 Points ∼76% -14%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
44128 Points ∼89% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (24176 - 100390, n=17)
49489 Points ∼100% +12%
GPU (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
34020 Points ∼42%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
33000 Points ∼41% -3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
33000 Points ∼41% -3%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
33527 Points ∼41% -1%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
34020 Points ∼42% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5938 - 199051, n=17)
81164 Points ∼100% +139%
CPU (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
63005 Points ∼71%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
70889 Points ∼80% +13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
70889 Points ∼80% +13%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
70133 Points ∼79% +11%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
63005 Points ∼71% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (40746 - 151146, n=17)
88721 Points ∼100% +41%
Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy M30s
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
174870 Points ∼68%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
169695 Points ∼66% -3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
169695 Points ∼66% -3%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
169222 Points ∼66% -3%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
174870 Points ∼68% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (84645 - 501784, n=17)
258152 Points ∼100% +48%

The M30s also proved to be one of the fastest devices in its class in the browser benchmarks that we ran. Our review unit loads websites quickly, but we found ourselves waiting an additional few seconds before media content appeared.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 133, n=115)
36.4 Points ∼100% +27%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
30.692 Points ∼84% +7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
30.65 Points ∼84% +7%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78)
30.531 Points ∼84% +6%
Samsung Galaxy M30s (Chrome 78)
28.73 Points ∼79%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
28.7 Points ∼79% 0%
Samsung Galaxy M20 (Samsung Brwoser 9.2)
22.57 Points ∼62% -21%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy M30s (Chrome 78)
51.922 Points ∼100%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
51.9 Points ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
51.046 Points ∼98% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
50.33 Points ∼97% -3%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78)
49.754 Points ∼96% -4%
Samsung Galaxy M20 (Samsung Browser 9.2)
45.142 Points ∼87% -13%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=540)
42.5 Points ∼82% -18%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 157, n=103)
40.2 runs/min ∼100% +32%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
30.8 runs/min ∼77% +1%
Samsung Galaxy M30s (Chrome 78)
30.5 runs/min ∼76%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78)
30.5 runs/min ∼76% 0%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
30.5 runs/min ∼76% 0%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chome 76)
29.5 runs/min ∼73% -3%
Samsung Galaxy M20
19.3 runs/min ∼48% -37%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=173)
67.4 Points ∼100% +35%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
58 Points ∼86% +16%
Samsung Galaxy M20
52 Points ∼77% +4%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
52 Points ∼77% +4%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78)
51 Points ∼76% +2%
Samsung Galaxy M30s (Chrome 78)
50 Points ∼74%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
50 Points ∼74% 0%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy M30s (Chrome 78)
9684 Points ∼100%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
9684 Points ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
9405 Points ∼97% -3%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
9260 Points ∼96% -4%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78)
9107 Points ∼94% -6%
Samsung Galaxy M20
9087 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=701)
6908 Points ∼71% -29%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (571 - 59466, n=726)
10451 ms * ∼100% -141%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
4583.8 ms * ∼44% -6%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
4561.76 ms * ∼44% -5%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78)
4504 ms * ∼43% -4%
Samsung Galaxy M30s (Chrome 78)
4332.2 ms * ∼41%
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
4332 ms * ∼41% -0%
Samsung Galaxy M20
3703 ms * ∼35% +15%

* ... smaller is better

Likewise, the UFS 2.1 flash storage with which Samsung has equipped the M30s achieved comparatively good transfer speeds in AndroBench. While the M30s did not outperform all our comparison devices in all tasks, it finished at the top of our comparison table overall. In short, the M30s should load apps and files more quickly than all our comparison devices can.

The M30s coped well in AndroBench's microSD card benchmarks too, regardless of whether we formatted our Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 reference card in exFAT or FAT32. Our review unit finished second to its predecessor here but achieved considerably higher write speeds than our other comparison devices could.

Samsung Galaxy M30sXiaomi Redmi Note 8Motorola Moto G8 PlusXiaomi Mi A3Samsung Galaxy M20Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-24%
-17%
-8%
-28%
-5%
-44%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
61.1 (Tohsiba Exceria Pro M501)
52.83 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-14%
52.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-15%
50.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-18%
65.29 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
7%
51.1 (17.1 - 71.9, n=28)
-16%
49.5 (1.7 - 87.1, n=437)
-19%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
74.19 (Tohsiba Exceria Pro M501)
71.63 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-3%
72.6 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
67.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-9%
81.48 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
10%
67.4 (18 - 86.6, n=28)
-9%
67.7 (8.1 - 96.5, n=437)
-9%
Random Write 4KB
137.1
91.23
-33%
124.9
-9%
117.4
-14%
44
-68%
60.1 (8.77 - 165, n=38)
-56%
23.1 (0.14 - 259, n=762)
-83%
Random Read 4KB
133.8
84.76
-37%
59.9
-55%
126.9
-5%
64
-52%
134 (78.2 - 173, n=38)
0%
48.5 (1.59 - 226, n=762)
-64%
Sequential Write 256KB
190.7
160.53
-16%
217.4
14%
184
-4%
137
-28%
199 (133 - 388, n=38)
4%
99.5 (2.99 - 590, n=762)
-48%
Sequential Read 256KB
483.6
297.65
-38%
302.5
-37%
502.2
4%
300
-38%
711 (484 - 895, n=38)
47%
280 (12.1 - 1781, n=762)
-42%

Games - 60 FPS gaming, for the most part

The ARM Mali-G72 MP3 GPU is powerful enough for 60 FPS gaming, but not in all titles that we tested. Our review unit had no issues with maintaining 60 FPS in Arena of Valor on high graphics, for example. Frame rates only dropped below that threshold in Shadow Fight 3 on high graphics between rounds. Hence, this slight throttling does not impact on playability.

However, the M30s could not maintain 30 FPS stably in Asphalt 9: Legends even at low graphics. The game remains playable at these frame rates in our opinion, but you probably need a more powerful smartphone if you are a fan of the fast-paced racing game. Incidentally, the touchscreen and all sensors worked perfectly during our gaming tests.

Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Shadow Fight 3
Shadow Fight 3
Asphalt 9: Legends
Asphalt 9: Legends
0102030405060Tooltip
; Arena of Valor; min; 1.31.1.5: Ø59.9 (58-60)
; Arena of Valor; high HD; 1.31.1.5: Ø59.8 (54-60)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; High Quality; 1.8.1a: Ø27.8 (22-31)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; Standard / low; 1.8.1a: Ø28 (18-30)
; Shadow Fight 3; high; 1.19.4: Ø57.3 (1-60)
; Shadow Fight 3; minimal; 1.19.4: Ø59.8 (59-60)

Emissions - Low surface temperatures, but thermal throttling and a mediocre speaker

Temperature

The M30s hardly heats up even under sustained load. The hottest area of our review unit only peaked at 36 °C, while most of the device remained below 30 °C. 36 °C will feel warm to the touch, but not dangerously so. Similarly, the M30s always stayed cool when idling.

We also tested how well the M30s performed under continuous load by running GFXBench benchmarks on a loop. While most smartphones throttle eventually, our review unit restricted its SoC by about two-thirds by the 18th benchmark pass. In short, expect to see the M30s suffer from frame rate drops during prolonged gaming sessions.

Max. Load
 36 °C
97 F
29.9 °C
86 F
28.6 °C
83 F
 
 35 °C
95 F
30.1 °C
86 F
29.2 °C
85 F
 
 32.5 °C
91 F
29.1 °C
84 F
28.5 °C
83 F
 
Maximum: 36 °C = 97 F
Average: 31 °C = 88 F
27.4 °C
81 F
29.1 °C
84 F
33.3 °C
92 F
27.8 °C
82 F
29.2 °C
85 F
33.9 °C
93 F
28.2 °C
83 F
29.7 °C
85 F
32.3 °C
90 F
Maximum: 33.9 °C = 93 F
Average: 30.1 °C = 86 F
Power Supply (max.)  36.5 °C = 98 F | Room Temperature 21.4 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 31 °C / 88 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 36 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 35.5 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 33.9 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.1 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load

Speakers

Pink noise speaker test
Pink noise speaker test

The M30s, like the Galaxy M20, has a mono speaker that sounds rather shrill to our ears. This is especially true at maximum volume, as the speaker does not reproduce frequencies linearly. The speaker in our review unit hardly reproduces any bass tones either, with those that it can deliver being masked by high-pitched frequencies.

Overall, the Xiaomi Mi A3 offers a better listening experience than the M30s does. However, you will probably have no complaints about the M30s if you only occasionally use its mono speaker. Alternatively, you could use Bluetooth or the headphone jack for listening to music, watching videos or making calls. Both methods worked without any issues during our tests.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204346.42536.842.93132.833.74033.735.75040.1386331.333.58024.725.410025.624.912522.123.216019.927.420019.337.125017.244.331517.451.240017.156.850017.360.56301562.58001563.6100018.672.1125014.574.8160015.774.4200014.472.3250014.470.9315014.166.9400014.259.7500014.358.1630014.562.4800014.570.81000014.577.31250014.565.71600014.752.6SPL64.460.727.582.8N1612.9149.8median 15median 62.4Delta1.512.832.233.527.824.824.125.824.924.833.333.223.824.426.23326.227.117.429.617.239.717.339.816.444.216.250.815.755.314.661.316.364.113.468.613.870.714.371.313.869.714.370.514.671.513.775.514.57214.470.314.37014.672.514.673.314.569.714.859.826.783.30.855median 14.6median 69.71.410.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy M30sSamsung Galaxy M20
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy M30s audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.6% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 56% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 73% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy M20 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 31.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 12% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 82% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 39% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management - A 6,000 mAh battery and exceptional runtimes

Power Consumption

The M30s consumed about as much as the Galaxy M20 during our tests, making it not as efficient as the Xiaomi Redmi Note 8. However, the M30s consumes less on average than the power-hungry Motorola Moto G8 Plus does, putting our review unit in the middle of the pack overall.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.2 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1 / 1.9 / 2.4 Watt
Load midlight 5 / 6.3 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy M30s
6000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
4000 mAh
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi A3
4030 mAh
Samsung Galaxy M20
5000 mAh
Average Samsung Exynos 9611
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
21%
-30%
-5%
5%
0%
12%
Idle Minimum *
1
0.62
38%
1.7
-70%
0.8
20%
0.94
6%
1
-0%
0.882 (0.2 - 3.4, n=791)
12%
Idle Average *
1.9
1.77
7%
2.3
-21%
2
-5%
2.37
-25%
1.9
-0%
1.74 (0.6 - 6.2, n=790)
8%
Idle Maximum *
2.4
1.8
25%
3.5
-46%
3.3
-38%
2.42
-1%
2.4
-0%
2.03 (0.74 - 6.6, n=791)
15%
Load Average *
5
3.42
32%
4.7
6%
4.1
18%
3.83
23%
5
-0%
4.07 (0.8 - 10.8, n=785)
19%
Load Maximum *
6.3
6.14
3%
7.5
-19%
7.7
-22%
5.07
20%
6.3
-0%
5.94 (1.2 - 14.2, n=785)
6%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

None of our comparison devices come close to offering the same battery capacity as the M30s does. While all have at least 4,000 mAh batteries, the M30s excels with a 6,000 mAh cell. Correspondingly, our review unit leads the way with a runtime of 19:14 hours in our practical Wi-Fi battery life test. The Galaxy M20 comes closest to matching the M30s here, but it still needs recharging 2:28 hours sooner than the M30s does.

However, our tests demonstrate that the M30s does not make full use of its exemplary battery capacity. The Xiaomi Mi A3, for example, lasted about 15% less than the M30s did in our Wi-Fi battery life test despite having a 50% smaller battery capacity. In short, the M30s continues what we noticed with recent Galaxy S series devices in offering comparatively poor power management. Nevertheless, 2.5 workdays' worth of continuously browsing the internet between charges is probably enough battery life for most people.

Samsung includes a 15 W charger in the box. While we would still class this as a fast-charger, the extraordinary battery capacity that the M30s has means that it takes over two hours to recharge fully.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
36h 46min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
19h 14min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
21h 9min
Load (maximum brightness)
5h 36min
Samsung Galaxy M30s
6000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
4000 mAh
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi A3
4030 mAh
Samsung Galaxy M20
5000 mAh
Battery Runtime
-25%
-14%
-17%
-15%
Reader / Idle
2206
2139
-3%
2002
-9%
1724
-22%
1904
-14%
H.264
1269
859
-32%
996
-22%
1023
-19%
1121
-12%
WiFi v1.3
1154
824
-29%
980
-15%
985
-15%
927.5
-20%
Load
336
217
-35%
302
-10%
297
-12%
288
-14%

Pros

+ class-leading battery life
+ stylish design
+ well-built
+ low surface temperatures even under load
+ fast internal storage
+ bright display
+ precise fingerprint sensor
+ accurate GPS module
+ fast Wi-Fi

Cons

- outdated security patch updates
- preinstalled advertising apps
- unimpressive mono speaker
- performance throttling under high load

Verdict - Accomplished and recommendable

The Samsung Galaxy M30s smartphone review.
The Samsung Galaxy M30s smartphone review.

The Samsung Galaxy M30s is an affordable handset with few compromises. Our review unit has excellent battery life, fast storage, plenty of RAM and is built robustly despite its plastic back cover.

The device also has comparatively fast Wi-Fi too, while the accuracy of its GPS module impressed us. Likewise, its 6.4-inch AMOLED panel should get bright enough for most people, and few should have any complaints about the accuracy of its touchscreen or fingerprint scanner.

The Galaxy M30s suffers from some shortcomings, though. Firstly, Samsung has been lax at issuing security patch updates of late. At the time of writing, our review is stuck on patches that are three months old, which is unacceptable in our opinion. Moreover, Samsung preinstalls third-party advertising apps, which is another faux pas. Secondly, our review unit throttles under sustained load, which is disappointing. We have our qualms with the audio quality of the mono speaker, the call quality of our review unit and the power of the bundled charger too, but these are more minor issues than the SoC and software ones.

The Samsung Galaxy M30s has fantastic battery life, good cameras and a bright AMOLED display. While we have some issues with the device, we would still recommend it if you have a budget of around 250 Euros (~US$275).

Overall, the Galaxy M30s offers great value for money. Our review unit impressed us in many areas, while our issues with it should have limited impact in daily use.

Samsung Galaxy M30s - 11/25/2019 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
77%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
96%
Connectivity
46 / 70 → 66%
Weight
89%
Battery
92%
Display
88%
Games Performance
15 / 64 → 23%
Application Performance
59 / 86 → 69%
Temperature
94%
Noise
100%
Audio
69 / 90 → 76%
Camera
62%
Average
73%
80%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 2 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 M30s Smartphone Review: A huge battery at an affordable price
Florian Schmitt, 2019-11-26 (Update: 2019-11-27)
Alex Alderson
Alex Alderson - News Editor - @aldersonaj
Prior to writing and translating for Notebookcheck, I worked for various companies including Apple and Neowin. I have a BA in International History and Politics from the University of Leeds, which I have since converted to a Law Degree. Happy to chat on Twitter or Notebookchat.