Notebookcheck

Samsung Galaxy S10 Smartphone Review

Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by Alex Alderson), 03/16/2019

Dwarf galaxy - Samsung has priced the smaller version of the top-tier S10 models more attractively than the S10+. In addition to its smaller display comes a lower capacity battery, a single front-facing camera along with less internal storage. Likewise, there is no option for a ceramic back as there is with the S10+. Read on to find out how the Galaxy S10 compares against its Plus namesake and how it stands up against other modern flagships.
Update: Review completed.

The Galaxy S10 series is upon us. We have already reviewed the largest and most expensive model of the three, and now it is time to see how the regular Galaxy S10 fares in our tests.

The Galaxy S10 is generally more compact than the Galaxy S10+ due to its smaller display. Its Dynamic AMOLED display measures 6.1-inches, which is 0.3-inches smaller than the one in the Galaxy S10+, but it still has the rounded screen edges that you may have seen with the Galaxy S8 or Galaxy S9. However, unlike the Galaxy S10+, the S10 has only one punch-hole front-facing camera, which may appeal more to those who prefer a clean look than what Galaxy S10+ offers.

Our test device has 8 GB of RAM and 128 GB of storage, which currently retails for €899 (~$1022). There is also a 512 GB model that also has 8 GB of RAM and which costs €250 (US$250) more. You could purchase a comparable microSD card for considerably less though.

The S10 has a 3,400 mAh, which is 700 mAh smaller than the one in the S10+ but 400 mAh larger than the battery in the Galaxy S9. Samsung has also equipped the S10 with three rear-facing cameras as it has with the Galaxy S10+. Additionally, the S10 features the same ultrasonic fingerprint sensor as its larger sibling and the reverse wireless charging PowerShare functionality too. Moreover, the S10 and Galaxy S10+ are some of the first commercially available smartphones to support Wi-Fi 6, which you may have seen referred to as the 802.11 ax standard, along with LTE Cat. 20. Samsung should also release a 5G model of the S10 in Q2’19, which has an even larger display and a larger battery.

We have chosen to compare the Galaxy S10 against other non-plus-sized flagship smartphones. Our comparison devices will include the Apple iPhone XS, the Huawei P20 Pro, the LG V40 ThinQ, the OnePlus 6T, the Sony Xperia XZ3 and the Nokia 8 Sirocco.

  • 03.15.2019: First impressions, Case, Connectivity, Software, Telephony, Accessories, Warranty, Display and Power Consumption sections added
  • 03.19.2019: GPS, Cameras, Input Devices & Operation, Temperature and Speakers sections added. Display section completed and initial battery life runtimes added.
  • 03.20.2019: Review completed.
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Galaxy S Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
, LPDDR4x
Display
6.1 inch 19:9, 3040 x 1440 pixel 551 PPI, Capacitive touchscreen, 10-point multitouch , Curved Dynamic AMOLED, OLED, glossy: yes
Storage
128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 108.5 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm combined headphone and microphone jack, Card Reader: Up to 512 GB microSD cards. FAT, FAT32 and exFAT file systems supported, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, Barometer, Gyro sensor, Geomagnetic sensor, Hall sensor, Heart Rate sensor, Proximity sensor, MST, Glonass, BeiDou, Galileo, Ant+, Samsung DeX
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM/GPRS/Edge: 850, 900, 1,800 and 1,900 MHz. UMTS/HSPA+: 850, 900, 1,880, 1,900, 2,010, 2,100 and AWS. LTE Cat. 20: 700, 800, 850, 900, 1,500, 1,800, 1,900, 2,100, 2,300, 2,500, 2,600 MHz, AWS and AWS-3., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.8 x 149.9 x 70.4 ( = 0.31 x 5.9 x 2.77 in)
Battery
12.71 Wh, 3400 mAh Lithium-Ion, 3.85 V, QuickCharge 2.0, AFC, PD 3.0, Wireless Charging, Wireless PowerShare
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix (Dual-pixel autofocus, 77°, f/1.5 & f/2.4, 1.4 μm, OIS) & 12 MPix (Telephoto, 2 x magnification, PDAF, 45°, f/2.4, OIS) & 16 MPix (Ultra-Wide-Angle, Fixed focus, 123°, f/2.2), Ultra HD video; Camera2 API: Full
Secondary Camera: 10 MPix (Dual-pixel autofocus, 80°, f/1.9); Camera2 API: Full
Additional features
Speakers: Dual speakers, Keyboard: Virtual, Charger, USB cable, 2 OTG adapters, AKG headset, quick start guide, safety instructions, One UI, Galaxy App Store, 24 Months Warranty, IP68 certified, SAR values: Body – 1.593 W/kg, Head - 0.477 W/kg., fanless
Weight
157 g ( = 5.54 oz / 0.35 pounds), Power Supply: 57 g ( = 2.01 oz / 0.13 pounds)
Price
899 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

There is no ceramic version of the S10, unlike the Galaxy S10+. Samsung has instead opted to equip the former with a glass back, which the company reports is made from Corning Gorilla Glass 5. By contrast, the touchscreen is protected by the newer Corning Gorilla Glass 6, which promises to be up to 2 times tougher than its predecessor. The S10 is just as thick as its larger sibling at 7.8 mm (~0.3 in), while its triple rear-facing camera housing protrudes from the back glass by approximately 0.6 mm (~0.02 in). The latter means that the S10 cannot lie flat on a table, but there is an edge around the housing that should prevent it from being scratched as easily.

Samsung currently sells the S10 in Prism White, Black, Blue and Green. Our test device is the second of the four colours and picks up fingerprints more easily than our ceramic Galaxy S10+. However, there is no difference in the quality of craftsmanship between the two devices. Our review unit’s dark stainless-steel frame makes the device feel heavy, but also more premium than smartphones made from aluminium. The gaps between materials are all tight and even, with the two pieces of glass almost blending seamlessly in with the frame. The S10 is impervious to our attempts to bend it too, and its OLED panel does not distort no matter how hard we apply pressure to it.

The plastic card slot also sits completely flush with the frame, but it has a slightly glossier finish than the stainless-steel, which prevents it from blending in completely. The card slot is also quite flexible and has a rubber ring around its outer edge to prevent the ingress of dust and water. Our review unit is the DUOS model, which means that it supports dual-SIM functionality. The card slot has two nano-SIM card slots with the second SIM slot also doubling as a microSD card slot. You must forego dual-SIM functionality if you want to use a microSD card though.

The battery can only be replaced by removing the back glass, as has been the case with Samsung Galaxy phones since the S6. The back glass is secured with water-resistant and dustproof adhesive which helps gives the S10 its IP68 certification, but it does prevent people from replacing the battery without voiding the device’s warranty.

Size Comparison

158 mm / 6.22 inch 73 mm / 2.87 inch 9.9 mm / 0.3898 inch 193 g0.4255 lbs158.7 mm / 6.25 inch 75.8 mm / 2.98 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 169 g0.3726 lbs157.5 mm / 6.2 inch 74.8 mm / 2.94 inch 8.2 mm / 0.3228 inch 185 g0.4079 lbs157.5 mm / 6.2 inch 74.67 mm / 2.94 inch 7.61 mm / 0.2996 inch 173 g0.3814 lbs155 mm / 6.1 inch 73.88 mm / 2.91 inch 7.65 mm / 0.3012 inch 174 g0.3836 lbs149.9 mm / 5.9 inch 70.4 mm / 2.77 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 157 g0.3461 lbs147.7 mm / 5.81 inch 68.7 mm / 2.7 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 163 g0.3594 lbs143.6 mm / 5.65 inch 70.9 mm / 2.79 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 177 g0.3902 lbs140.9 mm / 5.55 inch 72.97 mm / 2.87 inch 7.5 mm / 0.2953 inch 176 g0.388 lbs

Connectivity

Samsung currently only sells the S10 with 8 GB of RAM, which is 4 GB less than the most expensive Galaxy S10+ models, but it should be plenty for most people. The S10 comes with a maximum of 512 GB UFS 2.1 storage too, which is only half of what the most expensive Galaxy S10+ has. Both devices have a USB 3.1 Gen.1 Type-C port though, that not only provides fast data transmission but also support for wired image output to external screens via HDMI or DisplayPort. The S10 supports the Samsung DeX desktop mode too, and USB On-The-Go (OTG) for connecting external peripherals such as a keyboard and mouse.

The S10 supports all modern microSD file systems including exFAT, but we could only format our microSD card as external storage, which means that we could only save apps and data to internal storage by default. However, there is an option to enable the latter for microSD cards, which is hidden within Developer options.

Samsung also includes practically every sensor going into the S10. There is still a heart rate sensor next to the rear-facing cameras with which it has also equipped the Galaxy S9. There is also support for dual-audio Bluetooth 5.0 and many audio codecs, but Samsung continues to ignore aptX HD. There is NFC and MST functionality too for use with services such as Google Pay and Samsung Pay. In short, the S10 is suitably equipped for a flagship smartphone, although there is no radio receiver or IR blaster, which may frustrate some people.

One of the highlights of the S10 and the S10+ is their ultrasound in-screen fingerprint readers. We have seen in-screen fingerprint sensors before with the OnePlus 6T and the Huawei Mate 20 Pro, but the ultrasonic one in the S10 and S10+ should provide improved security, faster recognition and works better at night. Alternatively, you could use 2D facial recognition, but this is not as secure as using a fingerprint. Samsung has removed the Iris scanner with which it had equipped its Galaxy S9 series, but there is still the option to set a password, pattern or PIN.

Topside: Card slot, Microphone
Topside: Card slot, Microphone
Underside: Speaker, Microphone, USB 3.1 Type-C, Headphone jack
Underside: Speaker, Microphone, USB 3.1 Type-C, Headphone jack
Left-hand side: Bixby button, Volume rocker
Left-hand side: Bixby button, Volume rocker
Right-hand side: Power button
Right-hand side: Power button

Software

The Galaxy S10 ships with One UI, which is a Samsung customised version of Android 9.0 Pie. One UI looks tidier, cleaner and feels faster than Samsung Experience, which it replaced in late 2018.

Bixby remains a focus of One UI, and now supports more languages, including German along with a new option to set routines. Like Google Assistant, Bixby can now also learn from your habits and provide advice on when to take a break or the optimal route based on current traffic information.

Samsung has also announced that it will make the Bixby button configurable via a software update. The company refers to this as “Bixby Key Customization”, although we could not test this at the time of writing, we suspect that Samsung will roll it out soon via an OTA update. The feature should make its way to the Galaxy S8 and S9 series too.

The DUOS model also has a dual-messenger feature that allows you to create a duplicate of an app so that you can have a dedicated app for each SIM card.

The Galaxy S10 does not support multiple user accounts, but it can backup contacts, data and message history to a microSD card or external storage when connected to a computer. You cannot save data to a NAS like you can with the Mate 20 Pro though.

Samsung includes plenty of bloatware, including its Galaxy Store. Our review unit has a few Microsoft apps pre-installed too, which can only be disabled. Most of the pre-installed apps cannot be uninstalled.

Default home screen
Default home screen
Quick Settings
Quick Settings
A look at the list of pre-installed Samsung apps
A look at the list of pre-installed Samsung apps
The new Bixby routines
The new Bixby routines

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

Communication & GPS

The S10 and Galaxy S10+ are the first smartphones to support the new Wi-Fi 6 standard. The Wi-Fi Alliance has decided to change the classification with the new ax standard, so IEEE 802.11-ax has become Wi-Fi 6. The Wi-Fi module supports VHT80 and can connect to 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz networks. Samsung claims that the device can achieve up to 1.2 GBit/s download speeds, which is impressively fast. However, the Mate 20 Pro could theoretically achieve up to 1.7 GBit/s with VHT160 despite supporting up to the older Wi-Fi 5, or 802.11 ac, standard.

Both the S10 and the Mate 20 Pro smartphones are too fast for our current reference router, the Linksys EA8500. Our review unit achieved excellent transfer speeds in the iperf3 Client Wi-Fi tests that we conduct, but they fall short of some other flagships such as the LG V40 ThinQ and even the Galaxy S9. It appears then that Samsung has some optimising to do with the S10’s new Wi-Fi module, but we doubt whether most people would notice the difference between the transfer speeds in our comparison tables during daily use. In short, the S10 should always maintain a fast Wi-Fi connection without any connection issues or performance dropouts.

The S10 supports almost all 2G and 3G frequencies and utilises LTE Cat. 20 for fast connections over LTE. However, our review unit supports surprisingly few LTE bands. While you should have no issues with connecting to LTE networks on intercontinental trips, the S10 does not support enough LTE bands for it to be considered a global smartphone. If you decide to buy an S10 or Galaxy S10+ on a trip to Asia or America, we would recommend first checking whether that regional variant supports all LTE bands that your home country uses because it may not do so.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 9
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
678 (min: 549, max: 725) MBit/s ∼100% +6%
LG V40 ThinQ
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
677 (min: 655, max: 698) MBit/s ∼100% +6%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
652 MBit/s ∼96% +2%
Apple iPhone XS
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, Apple 512 GB (iPhone Xs)
650 MBit/s ∼96% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Mali-G76 MP12, 9820, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
639 (min: 612, max: 683) MBit/s ∼94%
Huawei P20 Pro
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
635 MBit/s ∼94% -1%
OnePlus 6T
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
629 (min: 621, max: 638) MBit/s ∼93% -2%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
624 (min: 593, max: 636) MBit/s ∼92% -2%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Adreno 540, 835, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
278 MBit/s ∼41% -56%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=351)
219 MBit/s ∼32% -66%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone XS
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, Apple 512 GB (iPhone Xs)
587 MBit/s ∼100% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Mali-G76 MP12, 9820, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
579 (min: 558, max: 592) MBit/s ∼99%
LG V40 ThinQ
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
554 (min: 492, max: 579) MBit/s ∼94% -4%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Adreno 540, 835, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
550 MBit/s ∼94% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
534 (min: 430, max: 578) MBit/s ∼91% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
519 MBit/s ∼88% -10%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
484 (min: 382, max: 499) MBit/s ∼82% -16%
OnePlus 6T
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
474 (min: 241, max: 497) MBit/s ∼81% -18%
Huawei P20 Pro
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
437 MBit/s ∼74% -25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=351)
210 MBit/s ∼36% -64%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø639 (612-683)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø579 (558-592)
GPS test: Outdoors
GPS test: Outdoors
GPS test: Inside
GPS test: Inside
GPS test: GNSS
GPS test: GNSS

The S10 uses BeiDou, GLONASS, and GPS for location services just like the Galaxy S10+. Unfortunately, it does not support SBAS or dual-GPS as the Mate 20 Pro does, which can improve location accuracy. Our review unit found a satellite fix quickly and accurately both indoors and outdoors. The device achieved a sat fix with up to 6 metres (~19.7 ft) accuracy outdoors and 8 metres (~26 ft) indoors, but generally took a few seconds to pinpoint our location having found a satellite to which it could connect.

We subjected our review unit to a short bike ride to test its location accuracy against our reference navigation device, the Garmin Edge 500. Our review unit recorded us having cycled a 30-metre (~98 ft) longer route than the Garmin did over a 9.22 km (~5.7 mi) bike ride, which represents around a 1% variance. Overall, the S10 performed exceptionally well considering that it does not support dual-GPS and even tracked our route a touch better than the Garmin could at certain points. In short, the S10 is accurate enough for all general navigation tasks such as cycling, driving or walking.

GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 – Cycling around a lake
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 – Cycling around a lake
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Loop
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy S10 - Overview
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy S10 - Overview
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy S10 – Cycling around a lake
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy S10 – Cycling around a lake
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy S10 - Loop
GPS test: Samsung Galaxy S10 - Loop

Telephone Features and Call Quality

The S10 has the same suite of telephony apps as the Galaxy S10+. The phone app in One UI has been updated, with Samsung re-adding the places tab that it had previously removed. The tab lists nearby shops and restaurants along with corresponding coupons. The rest of the app functions and operates just as other Phone apps do.

The S10 supports Wi-Fi calls too like its predecessor and the Galaxy S10+, but you first must enable the option, which is found in the Phone app within its settings. Confusingly, while the device also supports voice over LTE (VoLTE), Samsung has buried the corresponding option to enable it in the Mobile Networks sub-menu, which can be found under Connections in the main Settings menu. You must also install a separate app for the S10 to work with Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) as Samsung does pre-install the native Google app, just as with the Galaxy S10+.

Our review unit has excellent call quality over its earpiece, especially when VoLTE is activated. The device also performed well over 2G and 3G networks during our tests, but the call sounds noisier than it does over LTE. The S10 filters ambient noise just as well as the Galaxy S10+, with most calls being free from background noise. However, we occasionally noticed background noise seeping into some calls, so the S10 falls just short of some flagships, but it offers the same experience as the Galaxy S10+.

Samsung includes the same headphones with the S10 as it does with the Galaxy S10+. The headphones are good enough for making or receiving calls, but the microphone cannot filter out wind noise, which means that calls can sometimes be dominated by whooshing sounds on a windy day.

Samsung currently sells the S10 in single or dual-SIM variants, the latter of which also carries the company’s DUOS branding. There is no eSIM version. The DUOS version supports dual VoLTE and has a hybrid second SIM slot, which means that you must choose between dual-SIM functionality or microSD card expansion; you cannot have both.

Cameras

Taking a selfie with an AR sticker
Taking a selfie with an AR sticker

The S10 has the same cameras as the Galaxy S10+ except for the latter’s second front-facing camera. The front-facing camera is a 10 MP sensor that supports dual-pixel autofocus. Photos look bright and are generally decent, although selfies lack the same level of detail that our Galaxy S10+ review unit could produce. Presumably, the difference in quality is because of the secondary front-facing in the Galaxy S10+.

The S10 has more video features to offer than the Galaxy S9. The S10 can record in UHD with a 16:9 aspect ratio but enabling this resolution does disable all video effects that are available at different resolutions and aspect ratios. Full HD videos are better stabilised than those shot at UHD too, although they still blur easily even at this resolution. Samsung’s AR Emojis and AR stickers make a return too as we have demonstrated in the selfie on the right. 

The S10 has the same rear-facing sensors as the Galaxy S10+. Please see our corresponding review for our full thoughts on the three cameras with which Samsung has equipped its flagship S10 models.

In summary, the new super wide-angle sensor is useful, especially for taking panoramic shots, albeit only in good ambient light. The sensor struggles in low-light and distorts most details. While photos taken with the S10 have a higher dynamic range and look better in low light than the Honor View 20 or the LG V40 ThinQ, our review unit does not have as good optics as the Mate 20 Pro or Pixel 3 XL. The S10 performs comparatively better with its videography capabilities, but the bottom line is that Samsung has been resting on its laurels since the Galaxy S7. The S10 is the third consecutive generation of Galaxy S smartphones to have no major camera innovations. Samsung now appears to be following the crowd rather than leading it.

Photo taken with the ultra-wide-angle lens
Photo taken with the standard lens
Photo taken with the telephoto lens

The same scene photographed with all three rear-facing cameras. From left to right: Ultra-wide-angle, Standard, Telephoto

Image Comparison

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

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images
Our test chart photographed with the standard camera
Our test chart in detail
Our test chart photographed with the ultra-wide-angle lens
Our test chart photographed with the telephoto lens
ColorChecker Passport: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour

Accessories & Warranty

Samsung broadly includes the same accessories with the S10 as it does with the Galaxy S10+ and the Galaxy S9. Our review unit has a modular power supply (9 V, 1.67 A/5 V, 2 A), a USB Type-A to Type-C cable, two USB On-The-Go (OTG) adapters, a set of AKG headphones and a SIM tool. The OTG adapters are Type-A to Type-C and micro USB to Type-C, for reference, while Samsung also includes numerous warranty and safety instructions along with a quick guide. The black version comes with all-black accessories too.

The S10 comes with 24 months manufacturer’s warranty, 12 months for the battery and six months for the accessories that are included in the box. It is worth keeping in mind that Samsung continues to include liquid damage as a warranty exclusion. We asked Samsung's German executives about this limitation at last year’s Samsung Service Center Day, to which they assured us no intact Galaxy S had been rejected for a warranty repair because of liquid damage, and customer services should waive the exclusion as a gesture of goodwill if the exclusion could potentially be applied. While the S10 is IP68 water resistant, previous drops could damage the water-resistant seal around the case to the point that the device becomes liquid damaged when subsequently dropped in water.

However, Samsung could not guarantee that it would carry out a warranty repair if the device becomes liquid damaged because a third-party repairer fails to reseal the device correctly. Hence, we would recommend contacting Samsung first if you need your device repaired as you could end up voiding your warranty.

Samsung continues to sell its Care+ additional warranty package, which currently costs €149 (~$169) and covers your smartphone from accidental damage including, but not limited to, breaking the screen and liquid damage. Samsung limits the additional coverage to two claims within the service period, each of which are subject to a €79 (~$90) excess fee.

Please see our Guarantees, Return policies and Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices & Operation

The S10 has a Corning Gorilla Glass 5 back, and a Gorilla Glass 6 front just like the Galaxy S10+. The latter is noticeably slipperier than the former though, which is not necessarily a good thing when trying to move your finger across the screen. The underlying capacitive touchscreen recognises up to ten touches simultaneously and recognised inputs accurately throughout our tests without hesitation.

A big feature of the S10 and the Galaxy S10+ is its ultrasonic fingerprint scanner, which worked perfectly during our tests with both devices. The sensor remains practically invisible in most light, although we could catch a glimpse of it in bright direct sunlight with a white image being displayed onscreen. Even so, its slight visibility should not present an issue in daily use.

Samsung continues to pre-installs its keyboard as the default keyboard. The company has made some minor changes compared to the one that it included with Samsung Experience. The keyboard now can make word suggestions, spelling corrections and supports swipe gestures along with other features such as multiple language support. You can download a different keyboard from places such as the Google Play Store should you prefer a different layout though.

Samsung markets One UI as being more suited to one-handed use than Samsung Experience, and while we can reach most of the UI with one-hand, we often struggled to reach elements at the top of the display, but not to the same extent as we did with the Galaxy S10+. The power button’s placement is more ergonomic than on the Galaxy S10+ too, but it is still higher up the frame than we would have liked.

However, those who are left-handed may still struggle to reach the power button with their index finger without holding the S10 at an uncomfortable angle. The same applies to the volume rocker too, but Samsung has made sure that the Bixby button remains easy to reach regardless of the hand that you use to hold your phone. The craftsmanship and fit of the buttons is excellent though, while all three buttons have precise pressure points and crisp strokes.

Samsung has done away with the Iris scanner that it included in the Galaxy S9, but the S10 retains the 2D facial recognition that we have seen previously with many Android smartphones. The technology is not as secure as 3D facial scanners though and cannot replace a fingerprint, password, pattern or PIN entirely.

Display

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array around the front-facing camera

The S10 has a Curved Dynamic AMOLED display just like its larger sibling. However, it is 0.3-inches smaller at 6.1-inches and operates natively at 3,040x1,440. This means that the S10 has a higher pixel density than the Galaxy S10+, although we doubt that most people would notice the difference. Moreover, Samsung sets the display to Full HD, or 2,280x1,080, by default. This is listed as FHD+ in Settings, and it seems as though Samsung has done this to preserve battery life. You can also set the display to 1,520x720, or HD+, to consume even less battery as you can with the Galaxy S9. The S10 supports HDR 10+ too just like its predecessor, which Samsung describes as a “video enhancer” in One UI.

The S10 has a subtly rounded display just like the Galaxy S9 and Galaxy S10+. Samsung includes the edge lighting notifications that we have seen before too and has incorporated a system-wide night mode in One UI that Samsung Experience lacked. One UI also introduces new gesture controls instead of traditional onscreen navigation buttons, but Samsung enables the latter by default.

The device supports an always-on-display too, which we did not find intrusive during our tests thanks to our review unit’s low minimum brightness. X-Rite i1Pro 2 measures this at 1.67 cd/m², which is marginally higher than the minimum brightness of the panel in the Galaxy S10+ that we tested.

The use of pulse-width modulation (PWM) to control screen brightness may cause issues for some people though. The display in our review unit flickers at 240 Hz, which is a typical frequency for OLED panels, although it could cause eye strain and headaches for those who are PWM sensitive.

Our review unit achieved an average maximum brightness of 705 cd/m² according to X-Rite i1Pro 2 and is 98% evenly lit, which is brighter and more evenly lit than all our comparison devices and even the Galaxy S10+. Our values are significantly less than what DisplayMate achieved in their S10 tests though, in which their device averaged over 800 nits. It is worth noting that we only achieved our values with the ambient light sensor activated. Switching it off reduces the average maximum brightness to a disappointing 327 cd/m².

By contrast, the APL50 test, which evenly distributes light and dark areas across the display, reports that our review unit reaches an average maximum brightness of 907 cd/m². Moreover, the APL25 test reports an average maximum brightness of 958 cd/m². APL10 recorded a maximum value of 978 cd/m², which is still way off the record-breaking 1,215 cd/m² that DisplayMate produced in the APL1 test with their S10.

It is worth noting that the S10 and all our comparison devices have AMOLED or OLED displays, which can individually switch off pixels to create a perfect black value. This also helps the devices achieve a theoretically infinite contrast ratio, which makes colours look more vibrant than they would on an IPS display.

709
cd/m²
698
cd/m²
708
cd/m²
702
cd/m²
701
cd/m²
702
cd/m²
713
cd/m²
707
cd/m²
705
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 713 cd/m² Average: 705 cd/m² Minimum: 1.67 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 98 %
Center on Battery: 701 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.7 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 1.4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.4
98.1% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.1
Samsung Galaxy S10
OLED, 3040x1440, 6.1
Samsung Galaxy S9
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 5.8
Apple iPhone XS
OLED, 2436x1125, 5.8
OnePlus 6T
Optic AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.41
LG V40 ThinQ
OLED, 3120x1440, 6.4
Sony Xperia XZ3
OLED, 2880x1440, 6
Huawei P20 Pro
OLED, 2240x1080, 6.1
Screen
10%
12%
-5%
4%
-62%
15%
Brightness middle
701
529
-25%
639
-9%
437
-38%
567
-19%
543
-23%
569
-19%
Brightness
705
527
-25%
637
-10%
442
-37%
559
-21%
542
-23%
578
-18%
Brightness Distribution
98
96
-2%
94
-4%
95
-3%
89
-9%
92
-6%
95
-3%
Black Level *
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.7
1.4
62%
1
73%
2.21
40%
3.3
11%
6.6
-78%
1.3
65%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
10.3
4
61%
2.2
79%
4.27
59%
6.1
41%
11
-7%
2.1
80%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.4
1.6
-14%
2.2
-57%
2.1
-50%
1.1
21%
4.7
-236%
1.6
-14%
Gamma
2.1 105%
2.16 102%
1.9 116%
2.307 95%
2.46 89%
1.835 120%
2.31 95%
CCT
6553 99%
6358 102%
6364 102%
6353 102%
6495 100%
6817 95%
6401 102%

* ... 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 240.4 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 240.4 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 240.4 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9802 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Our settings for an optimised white balance

We checked the colour accuracy of our review unit’s display using a photo spectrometer and CalMAN software. Firstly, we should point out that Samsung has reduced the screen customisation options in One UI compared to the ones in Samsung Experience. The company differentiates between display modes by “Vivid” and “Natural”, of which it sets the latter as the default with the S10. This surprised us because Samsung set our Galaxy S10+ to Vivid, for some reason, which uses a wider colour space.

The S10 has underwhelming colour accuracy just like its bigger sibling too. The “Natural” mode uses the sRGB colour space and generally looks colour accurate, although grey tones look too warm for our liking and the white balance is off. By contrast, the “Vivid” mode uses the wider DCI-P3 colour space, but it offers worse colour accuracy than the “Natural” mode, with colours generally reproduced more coolly than they should be.

Fortunately, you can tweak the white balance to compensate for the poorly calibrated white balance. It is worth noting that Samsung only allows this to be done in the “Vivid” mode, for some reason. We have included our re-calibrated display settings in the screenshot above.

CalMAN: Greyscale – Natural profile: sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Greyscale – Natural profile: sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Mixed Colours – Natural profile: sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Mixed Colours – Natural profile: sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Space – Natural profile: sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Space – Natural profile: sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation – Natural profile: sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation – Natural profile: sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Greyscale – Adaptive profile (Standard): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Greyscale – Adaptive profile (Standard): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Mixed Colours – Adaptive profile (Standard): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Mixed Colours – Adaptive profile (Standard): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Space – Adaptive profile (Standard): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Space – Adaptive profile (Standard): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation – Adaptive profile (Standard): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation – Adaptive profile (Standard): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Greyscale – Adaptive profile (Adjusted): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Greyscale – Adaptive profile (Adjusted): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Mixed Colours – Adaptive profile (Adjusted): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Mixed Colours – Adaptive profile (Adjusted): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Space – Adaptive profile (Adjusted): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Space – Adaptive profile (Adjusted): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation – Adaptive profile (Adjusted): DCI-P3 target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation – Adaptive profile (Adjusted): DCI-P3 target colour space

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
4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.5 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
5.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2.8 ms rise
↘ 2.8 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (40.7 ms).

The S10 is easy to use outdoors thanks to its high maximum brightness and contrast ratio. Moreover, the screen has a comparatively low-reflective finish, and the ambient light sensor quickly adjusts the display luminosity to changing light conditions. In short, you should have no problems with using the S10 outside even on bright summer days.

Using the Samsung Galaxy S10 outside in the shade
Using the Samsung Galaxy S10 outside under direct sunlight

The S10 also has stable viewing angles thanks to its AMOLED panel. We noticed no colour distortions, but there is minimal loss of brightness at acute viewing angles. There is no strong colour tint though, so you should be able to read the S10 from almost any angle. Only strong reflections will stop you from being able to read the S10’s display.

Viewing Angles
Viewing Angles

Performance

Samsung has equipped our review unit with its Exynos 9820 SoC as it has done with the European versions of the Galaxy S10+ and Galaxy S10e. It is worth noting that the Samsung equips the US variants with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 SoC instead. The S10 comes with either 128 GB or 512 GB of UFS 2.1 flash storage, although there is no 1 TB version as there is with the Galaxy S10+. Both S10 models come with 8 GB of LPDDR4x RAM.

The Exynos 9820 SoC is manufactured on an 8 nm FinFET Lower Power Plus (LPP) process integrates two Mongoose cores that can clock up to 2.7 GHz along with two Cortex A75 cores and four Cortex A55 cores that can clock at up to 2.5 GHz and 1.9 GHz respectively. The Exynos 9820 also integrates an ARM Mali-G76 MP12 GPU, which has two more clusters than the ARM Mali-G76 MP10 found in the HiSilicon Kirin 980, which powers devices such as the Mate 20 Pro.

The S10 performed almost as well in the synthetic benchmarks as the Galaxy S10+, although the former throttles sooner than the latter, as we shall cover in greater depth in our Temperature section. Please see our Galaxy S10+ review of our performance analysis of the Exynos 9820.

Geekbench 4.3
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
10128 Points ∼75%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
6219 Points ∼46% -39%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7482 Points ∼55% -26%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
8025 Points ∼59% -21%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
7865 Points ∼58% -22%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
13341 Points ∼99% +32%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
13519 Points ∼100% +33%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
13194 Points ∼98% +30%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (10128 - 10177, n=2)
10153 Points ∼75% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 21070, n=241)
4641 Points ∼34% -54%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
10162 Points ∼88%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
8786 Points ∼76% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10999 Points ∼95% +8%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
11598 Points ∼100% +14%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
6756 Points ∼58% -34%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
6701 Points ∼58% -34%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8995 Points ∼78% -11%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8687 Points ∼75% -15%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
7934 Points ∼68% -22%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (10162 - 10259, n=2)
10211 Points ∼88% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1634 - 11598, n=293)
4448 Points ∼38% -56%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4499 Points ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
3688 Points ∼76% -18%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3523 Points ∼73% -22%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
4824 Points ∼100% +7%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
1922 Points ∼40% -57%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
1952 Points ∼40% -57%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2384 Points ∼49% -47%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2397 Points ∼50% -47%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
2272 Points ∼47% -49%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (4499 - 4505, n=2)
4502 Points ∼93% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (590 - 4824, n=294)
1305 Points ∼27% -71%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
7595 Points ∼84%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
5291 Points ∼59% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9035 Points ∼100% +19%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
6982 Points ∼77% -8%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
7193 Points ∼80% -5%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8487 Points ∼94% +12%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8141 Points ∼90% +7%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (7595 - 7812, n=2)
7704 Points ∼85% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2828 - 9868, n=304)
4773 Points ∼53% -37%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
9750 Points ∼85%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
5736 Points ∼50% -41%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10985 Points ∼96% +13%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
8115 Points ∼71% -17%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
7925 Points ∼69% -19%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
10590 Points ∼92% +9%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
10361 Points ∼90% +6%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
11474 Points ∼100% +18%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (9750 - 9793, n=2)
9772 Points ∼85% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3977 - 13531, n=472)
5201 Points ∼45% -47%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
2981 Points ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
2590 Points ∼69% -13%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3754 Points ∼100% +26%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
2998 Points ∼80% +1%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
2942 Points ∼78% -1%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
2382 Points ∼63% -20%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3681 Points ∼98% +23%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2809 Points ∼75% -6%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3764 Points ∼100% +26%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (2925 - 2981, n=2)
2953 Points ∼78% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (939 - 4439, n=319)
1771 Points ∼47% -41%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
5358 Points ∼76%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
3697 Points ∼52% -31%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7076 Points ∼100% +32%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
5139 Points ∼73% -4%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
3109 Points ∼44% -42%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
4187 Points ∼59% -22%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
5877 Points ∼83% +10%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4133 Points ∼58% -23%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
5810 Points ∼82% +8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (5358 - 5371, n=2)
5365 Points ∼76% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (138 - 8206, n=319)
1521 Points ∼21% -72%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4551 Points ∼77%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
3376 Points ∼57% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5913 Points ∼100% +30%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
4436 Points ∼75% -3%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
3070 Points ∼52% -33%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3584 Points ∼61% -21%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
5189 Points ∼88% +14%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3741 Points ∼63% -18%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
5184 Points ∼88% +14%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (4529 - 4551, n=2)
4540 Points ∼77% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (170 - 5913, n=322)
1415 Points ∼24% -69%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
2650 Points ∼70%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3788 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
2952 Points ∼78%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
2940 Points ∼78%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
2119 Points ∼56%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3374 Points ∼89%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2871 Points ∼76%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3672 Points ∼97%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
 
3087 Points ∼81%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4493, n=335)
1744 Points ∼46%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
4843 Points ∼32%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10291 Points ∼69%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
14951 Points ∼100%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
3503 Points ∼23%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
4514 Points ∼30%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8397 Points ∼56%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6024 Points ∼40%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
8369 Points ∼56%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
 
4449 Points ∼30%
Average of class Smartphone
  (131 - 14951, n=335)
2096 Points ∼14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
4091 Points ∼52%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7449 Points ∼95%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
7856 Points ∼100%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
3360 Points ∼43%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3608 Points ∼46%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6310 Points ∼80%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4842 Points ∼62%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
6517 Points ∼83%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
 
4052 Points ∼52%
Average of class Smartphone
  (159 - 7856, n=336)
1774 Points ∼23%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
2854 Points ∼76%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
2486 Points ∼66% -13%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3758 Points ∼100% +32%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
2960 Points ∼79% +4%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
2926 Points ∼78% +3%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
2946 Points ∼78% +3%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3537 Points ∼94% +24%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2740 Points ∼73% -4%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3703 Points ∼99% +30%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (2854 - 2977, n=2)
2916 Points ∼78% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (918 - 4216, n=395)
1704 Points ∼45% -40%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
5176 Points ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
3553 Points ∼56% -31%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6355 Points ∼100% +23%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
3712 Points ∼58% -28%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
3017 Points ∼47% -42%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3926 Points ∼62% -24%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
5241 Points ∼82% +1%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4275 Points ∼67% -17%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
5092 Points ∼80% -2%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (5176 - 5186, n=2)
5181 Points ∼82% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (150 - 6355, n=397)
1244 Points ∼20% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4383 Points ∼80%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
3244 Points ∼59% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5509 Points ∼100% +26%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
3514 Points ∼64% -20%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
2996 Points ∼54% -32%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3656 Points ∼66% -17%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4734 Points ∼86% +8%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3802 Points ∼69% -13%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
4700 Points ∼85% +7%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (4383 - 4452, n=2)
4418 Points ∼80% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (184 - 5509, n=405)
1190 Points ∼22% -73%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
2600 Points ∼72%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3614 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
2885 Points ∼80%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
2287 Points ∼63%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3483 Points ∼96%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2731 Points ∼76%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3603 Points ∼100%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
 
2875 Points ∼80%
Average of class Smartphone
  (512 - 4215, n=429)
1603 Points ∼44%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
4569 Points ∼46%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9963 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
3335 Points ∼33%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
4511 Points ∼45%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8272 Points ∼83%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6439 Points ∼65%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
8014 Points ∼80%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
 
5303 Points ∼53%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 9963, n=429)
1693 Points ∼17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
3911 Points ∼55%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7166 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
3223 Points ∼45%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3709 Points ∼52%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6336 Points ∼88%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4947 Points ∼69%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
6300 Points ∼88%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
 
4465 Points ∼62%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 7166, n=437)
1448 Points ∼20%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
31297 Points ∼85%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
26851 Points ∼73% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
25339 Points ∼69% -19%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
27400 Points ∼74% -12%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
22441 Points ∼61% -28%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
21407 Points ∼58% -32%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
35022 Points ∼95% +12%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
30418 Points ∼83% -3%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
36794 Points ∼100% +18%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (31297 - 32302, n=2)
31800 Points ∼86% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3958 - 37475, n=588)
13273 Points ∼36% -58%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
71292 Points ∼45%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
48433 Points ∼30% -32%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
106534 Points ∼67% +49%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
160199 Points ∼100% +125%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
33472 Points ∼21% -53%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
58018 Points ∼36% -19%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
84998 Points ∼53% +19%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
79818 Points ∼50% +12%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
83927 Points ∼52% +18%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (70318 - 71292, n=2)
70805 Points ∼44% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1152 - 162695, n=588)
18995 Points ∼12% -73%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
55524 Points ∼72%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
41093 Points ∼53% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
62225 Points ∼81% +12%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
77128 Points ∼100% +39%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
30176 Points ∼39% -46%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
42040 Points ∼55% -24%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
64534 Points ∼84% +16%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
58651 Points ∼76% +6%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
65330 Points ∼85% +18%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (55524 - 55740, n=2)
55632 Points ∼72% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2915 - 77599, n=589)
15910 Points ∼21% -71%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
143 fps ∼57%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
144 fps ∼57% +1%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
167 fps ∼67% +17%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
251 fps ∼100% +76%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
121 fps ∼48% -15%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
106 fps ∼42% -26%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
152 fps ∼61% +6%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
105 fps ∼42% -27%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
152 fps ∼61% +6%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (96 - 143, n=2)
120 fps ∼48% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.1 - 251, n=612)
33 fps ∼13% -77%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
60 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
60 fps ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
60 fps ∼100% 0%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (58 - 60, n=2)
59 fps ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6.9 - 120, n=615)
26 fps ∼43% -57%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
85 fps ∼74%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
73 fps ∼63% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
100 fps ∼87% +18%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
115 fps ∼100% +35%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
61 fps ∼53% -28%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
54 fps ∼47% -36%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
59 fps ∼51% -31%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
59 fps ∼51% -31%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
83 fps ∼72% -2%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (67 - 85, n=2)
76 fps ∼66% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.2 - 132, n=533)
17.8 fps ∼15% -79%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
53 fps ∼88%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
45 fps ∼75% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼100% +13%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +13%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
54 fps ∼90% +2%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
37 fps ∼62% -30%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
59 fps ∼98% +11%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
33 fps ∼55% -38%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
50 fps ∼83% -6%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (53 - 53, n=2)
53 fps ∼88% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.1 - 115, n=537)
16.8 fps ∼28% -68%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
53 fps ∼77%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
46 fps ∼67% -13%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
69 fps ∼100% +30%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
62 fps ∼90% +17%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
39 fps ∼57% -26%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
41 fps ∼59% -23%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
59 fps ∼86% +11%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
41 fps ∼59% -23%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
57 fps ∼83% +8%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (53 - 67, n=2)
60 fps ∼87% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.6 - 88, n=394)
15.1 fps ∼22% -72%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
30 fps ∼52%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
24 fps ∼41% -20%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
58 fps ∼100% +93%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
48 fps ∼83% +60%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
36 fps ∼62% +20%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
24 fps ∼41% -20%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
53 fps ∼91% +77%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
21 fps ∼36% -30%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
31 fps ∼53% +3%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (30 - 37, n=2)
33.5 fps ∼58% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.5 - 110, n=397)
14.5 fps ∼25% -52%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
16 fps ∼46%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
35 fps ∼100% +119%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
14 fps ∼40% -12%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
22 fps ∼63% +38%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
12 fps ∼34% -25%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
14 fps ∼40% -12%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (16 - 16, n=2)
16 fps ∼46% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 59, n=98)
9.3 fps ∼27% -42%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
17 fps ∼77%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
22 fps ∼100% +29%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
8.6 fps ∼39% -49%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
14 fps ∼64% -18%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
12 fps ∼55% -29%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
14 fps ∼64% -18%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (17 - 17, n=2)
17 fps ∼77% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 31, n=98)
6.47 fps ∼29% -62%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
25 fps ∼61%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
41 fps ∼100% +64%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
23 fps ∼56% -8%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
34 fps ∼83% +36%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
16 fps ∼39% -36%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
21 fps ∼51% -16%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (25 - 26, n=2)
25.5 fps ∼62% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 59, n=98)
14 fps ∼34% -44%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
44 fps ∼92%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
48 fps ∼100% +9%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
23 fps ∼48% -48%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
37 fps ∼77% -16%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
30 fps ∼63% -32%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
37 fps ∼77% -16%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (44 - 46, n=2)
45 fps ∼94% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.77 - 63, n=97)
15.4 fps ∼32% -65%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
35 fps ∼83%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
28 fps ∼67% -20%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
42 fps ∼100% +20%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
38 fps ∼90% +9%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
23 fps ∼55% -34%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
26 fps ∼62% -26%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
35 fps ∼83% 0%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
26 fps ∼62% -26%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
35 fps ∼83% 0%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (35 - 43, n=2)
39 fps ∼93% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9 - 54, n=324)
10.2 fps ∼24% -71%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
23 fps ∼61%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
14 fps ∼37% -39%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
38 fps ∼100% +65%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
31 fps ∼82% +35%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
22 fps ∼58% -4%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
15 fps ∼39% -35%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
31 fps ∼82% +35%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
13 fps ∼34% -43%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
19 fps ∼50% -17%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (23 - 23, n=2)
23 fps ∼61% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 58, n=327)
9.26 fps ∼24% -60%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
33.04 (min: 9.22, max: 75.78) fps ∼88%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
37.41 fps ∼100% +13%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
24.45 (min: 9.63, max: 65.63) fps ∼65% -26%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
35.34 fps ∼94% +7%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (32.3 - 33, n=2)
32.7 fps ∼87% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7.98 - 651, n=44)
30.7 fps ∼82% -7%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
27.16 (min: 8.36, max: 61.33) fps ∼84%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
32.2 fps ∼100% +19%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
10.52 (min: 5, max: 27.66) fps ∼33% -61%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
29.68 fps ∼92% +9%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (27.2 - 27.2, n=2)
27.2 fps ∼84% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10.1 - 606, n=40)
27.8 fps ∼86% +2%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
38.35 (min: 8.77, max: 77.53) fps ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
35.63 fps ∼93% -7%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
11.8 (min: 5.55, max: 28.23) fps ∼31% -69%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
32.86 fps ∼86% -14%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (38.4 - 38.5, n=2)
38.4 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (11.4 - 739, n=39)
34.2 fps ∼89% -11%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
328111 Points ∼88%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
243861 Points ∼65% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
374820 Points ∼100% +14%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
348178 Points ∼93% +6%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
207959 Points ∼55% -37%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
209729 Points ∼56% -36%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
294488 Points ∼79% -10%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
270884 Points ∼72% -17%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
292268 Points ∼78% -11%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (328111 - 333277, n=2)
330694 Points ∼88% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (41483 - 374820, n=217)
123485 Points ∼33% -62%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
269219 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
217950 Points ∼80% -19%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
257246 Points ∼95% -4%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
179709 Points ∼66% -33%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
185487 Points ∼68% -31%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
228939 Points ∼84% -15%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
229374 Points ∼85% -15%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
226853 Points ∼84% -16%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (269219 - 273655, n=2)
271437 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (23275 - 273655, n=431)
80811 Points ∼30% -70%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4964 Score ∼100%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
1980 Score ∼40%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4716 Score ∼95%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
 
4967 Score ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1029 - 5025, n=45)
1894 Score ∼38%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
1385 Points ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
1099 Points ∼64% -21%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1378 Points ∼81% -1%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
1711 Points ∼100% +24%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
1273 Points ∼74% -8%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
1202 Points ∼70% -13%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
1398 Points ∼82% +1%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
1228 Points ∼72% -11%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
1390 Points ∼81% 0%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (1383 - 1385, n=2)
1384 Points ∼81% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1731, n=545)
717 Points ∼42% -48%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
7361 Points ∼46%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
6373 Points ∼40% -13%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9270 Points ∼58% +26%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
15875 Points ∼100% +116%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
3725 Points ∼23% -49%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
6084 Points ∼38% -17%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
7969 Points ∼50% +8%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6726 Points ∼42% -9%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
7989 Points ∼50% +9%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (7361 - 8401, n=2)
7881 Points ∼50% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 15969, n=545)
1831 Points ∼12% -75%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4570 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
2669 Points ∼58% -42%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4031 Points ∼88% -12%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
4169 Points ∼91% -9%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
4050 Points ∼89% -11%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3162 Points ∼69% -31%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4344 Points ∼95% -5%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2910 Points ∼64% -36%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
2317 Points ∼51% -49%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (4306 - 4570, n=2)
4438 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 6283, n=545)
1339 Points ∼29% -71%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
7476 Points ∼61%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
6234 Points ∼51% -17%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8441 Points ∼69% +13%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
12202 Points ∼100% +63%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
5965 Points ∼49% -20%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
5888 Points ∼48% -21%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8156 Points ∼67% +9%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6717 Points ∼55% -10%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
8135 Points ∼67% +9%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (7476 - 8344, n=2)
7910 Points ∼65% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 12202, n=545)
2684 Points ∼22% -64%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4320 Points ∼71%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
3285 Points ∼54% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4595 Points ∼75% +6%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
6097 Points ∼100% +41%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
3271 Points ∼54% -24%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3416 Points ∼56% -21%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4458 Points ∼73% +3%
LG V40 ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3565 Points ∼58% -17%
Sony Xperia XZ3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3804 Points ∼62% -12%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (4320 - 4520, n=2)
4420 Points ∼72% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (150 - 6097, n=549)
1332 Points ∼22% -69%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
1927 Points ∼74%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 4096
1436 Points ∼55% -25%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1415 Points ∼54% -27%
Apple iPhone XS
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 4096
2606 Points ∼100% +35%
Huawei P20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 970, Mali-G72 MP12, 6144
887 Points ∼34% -54%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
1201 Points ∼46% -38%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
  (1927 - 1928, n=2)
1928 Points ∼74% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (36.3 - 2754, n=83)
719 Points ∼28% -63%

The S10 also performed well in the browser benchmarks, which we conducted with version 9.0 of the Samsung Browser 9.0. However, our review unit could not outperform our Snapdragon 845 powered comparison devices or the iPhone XS with its Apple A12 Bionic SoC. The S10 did outperform the Galaxy S10+ by a few percent in most browser benchmarks though, which is rather surprising.

Web browsing feels smooth when using the pre-installed Samsung Browser and even more complex pages are displayed quickly without any errors.

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone XS (Safari Mobile 12.0)
272.3 Points ∼100% +224%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
110.54 Points ∼41% +32%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820 (84 - 91.8, n=2)
87.9 Points ∼32% +5%
Sony Xperia XZ3 (Chrome 70)
87.883 Points ∼32% +5%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
86.123 Points ∼32% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0)
84.005 Points ∼31%
LG V40 ThinQ (Chrome 71)
82.61 Points ∼30% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
67.721 Points ∼25% -19%
Nokia 8 Sirocco (Chrome 66)
62.157 Points ∼23% -26%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
58.255 Points ∼21% -31%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 273, n=470)
37.8 Points ∼14% -55%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone XS (Safari Mobile 12.0)
43280 Points ∼100% +113%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
24534 Points ∼57% +21%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820 (20286 - 20849, n=2)
20568 Points ∼48% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0)
20286 Points ∼47%
Sony Xperia XZ3 (Chrome 70)
16982 Points ∼39% -16%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
16824 Points ∼39% -17%
LG V40 ThinQ (Chrome 71)
15906 Points ∼37% -22%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
15233 Points ∼35% -25%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
11584 Points ∼27% -43%
Nokia 8 Sirocco (Chrome 66)
11544 Points ∼27% -43%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=606)
5871 Points ∼14% -71%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=625)
11133 ms * ∼100% -479%
Nokia 8 Sirocco (Chrome 66)
4812.6 ms * ∼43% -150%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
3852.2 ms * ∼35% -100%
LG V40 ThinQ (Chrome 71)
2361 ms * ∼21% -23%
Sony Xperia XZ3 (Chrome 70)
2295 ms * ∼21% -19%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
2281.6 ms * ∼20% -19%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
2077.8 ms * ∼19% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0)
1924.2 ms * ∼17%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820 (1857 - 1924, n=2)
1890 ms * ∼17% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
1873.2 ms * ∼17% +3%
Apple iPhone XS (Safari Mobile 12.0)
609.1 ms * ∼5% +68%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone XS (Safari Mobile 12.0)
159 Points ∼100%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820
115 Points ∼72%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
108 Points ∼68%
Sony Xperia XZ3 (Chrome 70)
98 Points ∼62%
LG V40 ThinQ (Chrome 71)
94 Points ∼59%
Nokia 8 Sirocco (Chrome 66)
77 Points ∼48%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
69 Points ∼43%
Average of class Smartphone (24 - 161, n=85)
64.8 Points ∼41%
Samsung Galaxy S9
63 Points ∼40%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone XS (Safari Mobile 12.0)
345 Points ∼100% +6%
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0)
325 Points ∼94%
Average Samsung Exynos 9820 (314 - 325, n=2)
320 Points ∼93% -2%
LG V40 ThinQ (Chrome 71)
267 Points ∼77% -18%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
260 Points ∼75% -20%
Sony Xperia XZ3 (Chrome 70)
238 Points ∼69% -27%
Nokia 8 Sirocco (Chrome 66)
204 Points ∼59% -37%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
182 Points ∼53% -44%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
163 Points ∼47% -50%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 362, n=309)
117 Points ∼34% -64%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Points ∼0% -100%

* ... smaller is better

Our review unit has 128 GB of UFS 2.1 flash storage, which is double the amount that our Galaxy S9 review unit had. Incidentally, Samsung has done away with the 64 GB and 256 GB storage options that it offered with the Galaxy S9. The storage with which Samsung has equipped our review unit achieved almost identical transfer speeds in AndroBench 3-5 as the Galaxy S9. The UFS 2.1 storage is still fast by flagship standards, but the Mate 20 Pro achieved much faster random 4 KB write speeds than our review unit.

We tested the speed of the S10’s microSD card reader with a Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 as we do with almost all the devices that we review. Again, while our review unit performed comparatively well in AndroBench 3-5, its transfer speeds are practically the same as what the Galaxy S9 managed. Hence, it appears that Samsung has equipped the S10 with the same microSD card reader that it used in the Galaxy S9.

Samsung Galaxy S10Samsung Galaxy S9Huawei P20 ProNokia 8 SiroccoLG V40 ThinQSony Xperia XZ3OnePlus 6TAverage 128 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
0%
141%
-2%
-2%
-23%
-4%
45%
-44%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
64.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
67.18 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
4%
63.13 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-3%
30.4 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-53%
64.9 (51.3 - 72.4, n=10)
0%
47.1 (19.2 - 87.1, n=357)
-27%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
77.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
79.22 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
84.88 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
9%
34.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-56%
80.5 (73.7 - 85.4, n=10)
3%
65.3 (29.8 - 96.5, n=357)
-16%
Random Write 4KB
24.44
23.07
-6%
160.49
557%
22.4
-8%
23.36
-4%
22.22
-9%
22
-10%
90.2 (19.5 - 250, n=24)
269%
18.3 (0.14 - 250, n=654)
-25%
Random Read 4KB
137.4
131
-5%
144.33
5%
140.7
2%
130.13
-5%
135.67
-1%
138.5
1%
140 (117 - 158, n=24)
2%
41.5 (1.59 - 173, n=654)
-70%
Sequential Write 256KB
193.24
206.94
7%
196.69
2%
211.6
10%
203.92
6%
196.14
2%
204.4
6%
200 (183 - 212, n=24)
3%
86.5 (2.99 - 388, n=654)
-55%
Sequential Read 256KB
831.94
815.43
-2%
831.82
0%
737.5
-11%
689.59
-17%
680.98
-18%
735.3
-12%
759 (427 - 912, n=24)
-9%
242 (12.1 - 912, n=654)
-71%

Games

The Galaxy S10 is a great gaming smartphone, but you will need your charger on hand during long gaming sessions as complex titles eat through its battery comparatively quickly. 

Our review unit handled modern games such as "PUBG Mobile" with ease, as most recent flagships do. We recorded framerates using GameBench, which demonstrates that "Dead Trigger 2" constantly runs at between 59 and 60 FPS, although framerates occasionally dropped to 45 FPS in "Arena of Valor". "PUBG Mobile" does not run as smoothly at any graphics setting though, with our review unit only averaging 39.1 FPS at HD graphics. This will still feel smooth when playing and is on par with the framerates that other recent flagships achieve.

The stereo speakers sound particularly good when gaming. The sensors and touchscreen worked perfectly during our gaming tests too.

PUBG Mobile
Arena of Valor
PUBG Mobile
0102030405060Tooltip
; Smooth; 0.11.0: Ø57.1 (20-60)
; Balanced; 0.11.0: Ø38.7 (19-41)
; HD; 0.11.0: Ø39.1 (11-42)
Arena of Valor
0102030405060Tooltip
; 1.27.1.2: Ø59.7 (45-60)
Dead Trigger 2
0102030405060Tooltip
; 1.5.5: Ø59.7 (59-60)