Notebookcheck

Samsung Galaxy S20 Smartphone Review – High-Quality Smartphone with Quirks

Compact star system. Samsung's Galaxy S20 is the latest update to one of the most famous smartphone series. Compact size and powerful performance are a given, but the latest Galaxy smartphone is also supposed to come with an improved camera and longer battery life. Find out in our extensive review whether or not Samsung managed to pull it off.
Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Andrea Grüblinger (translated by Finn D. Boerne),
Samsung Galaxy S20

Like every year Samsung’s update to its Galaxy S series was highly anticipated. Following the current trend there are now more models available servicing a wide array of needs and wants.

In this review, we take a look at the smallest and most affordable Galaxy S series smartphone, the Samsung Galaxy S20, which is available as a 4G and a 5G model:

  • Samsung Galaxy S20 4G 128GB storage / 8 GB RAM: $849
  • Samsung Galaxy S20 5G 128 GB storage / 12 GB RAM: $999

Like last year Samsung is hoping to take the lead in regards to performance, photo, and video quality with its high-end smartphones. The main 64 MP camera (108 MP are only available on the Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G) supports 8K video, a 3x hybrid-optical zoom, and supposedly offers a great low-light performance to boot.

However, Samsung’s competitors have leveled up considerably in the past few years, and it is getting increasingly harder for Samsung to fight them all off at the same time. Time to find out how the Galaxy S20 performed in our test.

Samsung Galaxy S20 (Galaxy S20 Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
, DDR5
Display
6.2 inch 20:9, 3200 x 1440 pixel 566 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, AMOLED, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash, 128 GB 
, 108 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, Audio Connections: audio over USB-C, Card Reader: microSD up to 1 TB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, barometer
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM (850, 900, 1,800, 1,900); UMTS (1, 2, 4, 5, 8); LTE (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.9 x 151.7 x 69.1 ( = 0.31 x 5.97 x 2.72 in)
Battery
4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 64 MPix f/​2.0, phase detection AF, OIS, videos @4320p/​24fps (camera 1); 12 MP, f/​1.8, phase detection AF (dual-pixel), OIS, LED flash(camera 2); 12.0MP, f/​2.2, wide-angle lens (camera 3)
Secondary Camera: 10 MPix f/​2.2, phase detection AF (dual-pixel), videos @2160p/​30fps
Additional features
Speakers: hybrid stereo speakers, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, power supply, USB cable, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, LTE Cat 20/​18 (2000 Mbps (download), 210 Mbps (upload); SAR: 0.279 W/​kg (head SAR), 1.525 W/​kg (body SAR); eSIM; IP68-certified; A-GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou, Galileo, fanless, waterproof
Weight
163 g ( = 5.75 oz / 0.36 pounds), Power Supply: 49 g ( = 1.73 oz / 0.11 pounds)
Price
899 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Comparison Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
88 %
03/2020
Samsung Galaxy S20
Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11
163 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.2"3200x1440
87 %
09/2019
Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU
194 g64 GB SSD6.1"1792x828
87 %
03/2019
Samsung Galaxy S10
Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12
157 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.1"3040x1440
86 %
10/2019
OnePlus 7T
SD 855+, Adreno 640
190 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.55"2400x1080
89 %
12/2019
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16
198 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.53"2400x1176
83 %
12/2019
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
SD 730G, Adreno 618
208 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.47"2340x1080

Case – Slim and Protected from the Elements

The Galaxy S20 is a slim smartphone with a 20:9 aspect ratio display. As such, it is easy for people with smaller hands to use due to its great reachability all the way into the corners. The device is very comfortable to hold in hand.

The case itself is made of glass and metal. Depending on color its glossy rear cover can be iridescent. Our gray review model was timeless yet at the same time modern thanks to its slim bezels.

When knocking on the rear cover the Galaxy S20 sounds hollow on the inside, and we were able to flex the rear cover slightly, both of which does not bode well for subjective quality. We were even able to make out a very quiet creaking noise in some areas. The transition between metal and glass can be felt on both sides. Maybe Samsung should have been a little bit more meticulous in designing the case. Nevertheless, the Galaxy S20 feels like the expensive premium device it aspires to be.

As before, the device is IP68-certified against ingress of dust and water, and it can be submerged in up to almost 5 feet of fresh water for up to 30 minutes.

Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Galaxy S20

Size Comparison

160.94 mm / 6.34 inch 74.44 mm / 2.93 inch 8.13 mm / 0.3201 inch 190 g0.4189 lbs157.8 mm / 6.21 inch 74.2 mm / 2.92 inch 9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch 208 g0.4586 lbs158.1 mm / 6.22 inch 73.1 mm / 2.88 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 198 g0.4365 lbs151.7 mm / 5.97 inch 69.1 mm / 2.72 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 163 g0.3594 lbs150.9 mm / 5.94 inch 75.7 mm / 2.98 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 194 g0.4277 lbs149.9 mm / 5.9 inch 70.4 mm / 2.77 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 157 g0.3461 lbs

Connectivity – Samsung Smartphone with fast Storage

All Galaxy S20 models come with 128 GB of fast UFS 3.0 storage. The only S20-series device with more storage is the S20 Ultra 5G with up to 512 GB. In return, the S20 can be expanded via microSD cards of up to 1 TB in size. Unfortunately, by doing so you have to sacrifice the secondary SIM slot and therefore the S20’s dual SIM capabilities.

Bluetooth 5.0 and NFS are expected of a high-end smartphone, and the S20 also supports ANT+ for monitoring external sensors such as heartrate monitors on your wrist or a tire pressure monitor system on your bicycle. It can also be used to operate TV sets.

Right: volume rocker, standby button
Right: volume rocker, standby button
Left: no connectivity
Left: no connectivity
Top: SIM tray, microphone
Top: SIM tray, microphone
Bottom: speaker, USB-C port, microphone
Bottom: speaker, USB-C port, microphone

Software – Up-To-Date OneUI 2.1

Samsung’s own in-house OneUI is installed in its latest incarnation, version 2.1 based on Android 10. Security patches were as of March 1 on our review unit, and thus up to date.

The S20 comes with a few preloaded third-party applications that cannot necessarily be uninstalled completely but in some cases only disabled. While this takes up storage space it is most likely not going to be a big deal considering the S20’s spacious 128 GB thereof. However, we would have certainly preferred the possibility to uninstall these undesired applications once and for all.

In addition to third-party software Samsung also includes a few in-house applications, such as Samsung Health or Samsung AR Zone for augmented reality applications. These include but are not limited to looking at furniture in your apartment or measuring distances. It also allows for some fun selfies.

Software Samsung Galaxy S20
Software Samsung Galaxy S20
Software Samsung Galaxy S20

Communication and GPS – Could be more Accurate

As expected, the S20 supports Wi-Fi 6 including HE80, MIMO, and 1024-QAM. It does not support 160 MHz channels, and thus not the maximum performance theoretically possible. Nevertheless, the Galaxy S20 remains one of the fastest devices among current high-end smartphones. It manages an average of more than 800 Mbps RX/TX and was only outperformed by the Huawei Mate 30 Pro. We can also see a noticeable improvement compared to its own predecessor. All tests are performed using our Netgear Nighthawk AX12 reference router.

Subjective performance was superb overall. Images are loaded almost instantaneously, and at a distance of almost 33 ft with three walls between the phone and the router reception remained very stable at between 50 and 75% signal strength. Websites loaded just as quickly as when standing right next to the router.

Supported LTE speeds are up to 2 Gbps downstream and up to 210 Mbps upstream, with a total of 22 supported LTE frequencies. This should easily cover most inhabited places on earth, and turns the S20 into a very well-suited travel companion.

As mentioned before the S20 is also available with 5G support. On the outside, the 4G and 5G models are absolutely identical, and the only internal difference apart from the 5G modem are 4 GB of extra RAM. The European 5G model, equipped with Samsung’s Exynos 990, is limited to Sub6 support. In other words: slower yet more reliable 5G. The faster short-range mmWave 5G technology is only supported on Qualcomm Snapdragon-equipped SKUs of the Samsung Galaxy S20, such as, for example, the US model.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1010 (min: 912, max: 1092) MBit/s ∼100% +22%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
533 (min: 468, max: 602) MBit/s ∼53% -36%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
827 (min: 791, max: 846) MBit/s ∼82%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Mali-G76 MP12, Exynos 9820, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
639 (min: 612, max: 683) MBit/s ∼63% -23%
Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 64 GB SSD
563 (min: 490, max: 597) MBit/s ∼56% -32%
OnePlus 7T
Adreno 640, SD 855+, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
430 (min: 374, max: 485) MBit/s ∼43% -48%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
331 (min: 317, max: 341) MBit/s ∼33% -60%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1368, n=534)
256 MBit/s ∼25% -69%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
966 (min: 923, max: 995) MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
637 (min: 584, max: 715) MBit/s ∼66% -28%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
882 (min: 847, max: 902) MBit/s ∼91%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Mali-G76 MP12, Exynos 9820, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
579 (min: 558, max: 592) MBit/s ∼60% -34%
Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 64 GB SSD
529 (min: 204, max: 603) MBit/s ∼55% -40%
OnePlus 7T
Adreno 640, SD 855+, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
422 (min: 238, max: 447) MBit/s ∼44% -52%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
327 (min: 321, max: 333) MBit/s ∼34% -63%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1544, n=534)
242 MBit/s ∼25% -73%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900910Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø830 (791-846)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø882 (847-902)
GPS test outdoors
GPS test outdoors

To our surprise, the S20’s GPS module took several seconds to obtain GPS lock outdoors. On our bicycle tour the device performed very well at first, accurately recording the track and only cutting the occasional corner here and there. However, things quickly went downhill as soon as we entered narrow old-town streets and alleys. GPS accuracy faltered and decreased rapidly, and the recorded track when crossing the bridge was completely off. Unless Samsung improves GPS accuracy with an update in the near future, the S20’s usefulness as satnav is limited to those cases where utmost accuracy is of no importance whatsoever.

GPS Samsung Galaxy S20 – overview
GPS Samsung Galaxy S20 – overview
GPS Samsung Galaxy S20 – turnaround
GPS Samsung Galaxy S20 – turnaround
GPS Samsung Galaxy S20 – bridge
GPS Samsung Galaxy S20 – bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – turnaround
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – turnaround
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge

Telephony and Call Quality – Clear Speech with the Galaxy S20

Samsung’s own telephony app offers similar features as Google’s default app. The main difference is a slightly different layout and a design akin to that of Samsung’s OneUI. At the end of the day, it is a matter of taste.

What is not open to interpretation is the S20’s superb voice quality. When talking with somebody on the phone the transmitted voice can get very loud and remains very clear at all times. Only on maximum volume did we notice a very minor din. The opposite is also true: our own voice was recorded and transmitted very clearly. Voice transmission was also very good on speakerphone both ways regardless of how loud or quiet we were speaking ourselves.

As expected, the S20 supports all modern telephone features, such as VoLTE and VoWiFi.

Cameras – Three Lenses and 8K Video

Front-facing camera normal mode
Front-facing camera normal mode
Front-facing camera wide-angle mode
Front-facing camera wide-angle mode

A true 2020 high-end smartphone requires at least four backward facing lenses. In case of the S20 series, this requires the S20+ model as the more basic S20 is limited to just three lenses. The bottom lens features a 64 MP sensor for high-resolution photos. The middle lens is the one selected by default, and it offers a 12 MP sensor. Both these lenses support optical image stabilization and are supported by the LED flash located above the wide-angle lens.

Accordingly, there is no telephoto lens. Samsung promises a 3x hybrid-optical zoom, which is better than a purely digital zoom but nowhere near a real optical zoom. At least it is adjustable in very fine 0.1x steps, unlike on Samsung’s more affordable smartphones.

During our first camera tests we encountered autofocus issues with objects close-by, such as were reported by other users as well. During our review period Samsung released patch G980FXXU1ATCH, which addressed these autofocus issues very well as can be seen by looking at the flower photo before and after applying the patch. Once installed the camera took crisp photos rich in detail and color.

We also very much liked the landscape photo. Colors are popping, it is rich in detail, and there are almost no artifacts in the sky. In low-light situations the S20 handled contrasts very well and managed to brighten up the scene considerably. Sharpness was on point, and light sources did not suffer from glare. Overall a great low-light performance.

Videos can now be recorded in 8K, aka 7680 x 4320 pixels. The camera software attempts to stabilize the recording resulting in occasional duplicate outlines and a minor shake around edges. Overall, we found this effect to be somewhat odd, and fortunately it can be turned off completely. That said the fact that some effects and features, such as continuous autofocus, are not available when recording in 4K or [email protected] is not worthy of a high-end smartphone.

All things considered, video quality was excellent. Lighting was adequate and quickly adjusted to sudden changes in brightness, and details were captured very well overall.

The front-facing camera supports a normal and a wide-angle mode, although the photo is cropped when using the former. After all, the camera is limited to just one lens. Photos are crisp and well-lit.

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
Galaxy S20 with patch G980FXXU1ATCH applied
Galaxy S20 with patch G980FXXU1ATCH applied
Wide-angle lens photo
Wide-angle lens photo
Standard lens photo
Standard lens photo
3x hybrid-optical zoom photo
3x hybrid-optical zoom photo
Maximum digital zoom photo
Maximum digital zoom photo

In our lab we were able to test the main camera under controlled and normalized conditions for better comparability. Even with minimum light the S20’s camera still managed to capture details albeit at a significantly reduced sharpness. It did very well in bright light.

ColorChecker
20.8 ∆E
31 ∆E
24.4 ∆E
24.8 ∆E
27.1 ∆E
36.5 ∆E
29.7 ∆E
21.5 ∆E
20.4 ∆E
19.4 ∆E
32.5 ∆E
35.3 ∆E
20.3 ∆E
29.9 ∆E
19.5 ∆E
32.3 ∆E
24.9 ∆E
31.1 ∆E
34.8 ∆E
33.7 ∆E
34 ∆E
27.1 ∆E
20.4 ∆E
12.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy S20: 26.85 ∆E min: 12.77 - max: 36.45 ∆E
ColorChecker
11.3 ∆E
10.3 ∆E
10 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
9.7 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
11.6 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
11.1 ∆E
9.2 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
11.8 ∆E
11.4 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
3.1 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy S20: 8.75 ∆E min: 3.08 - max: 13.83 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty – Wide Range of Accessories

Unlike their European cousins S20 smartphones purchased in the US are limited to just 12 months of warranty. For $12 per month you can choose to add Samsung Premium Care, which extends the manufacturer warranty and includes up to three repairs or replacements for accidental damage.

Samsung USA also offers a trade-in program for eligible smartphones that will pay up to $600, 0% APR financing for 24 or 36 months, or Samsung Upgrade with Samsung Finance allowing you to upgrade to a new Galaxy device every 12 months.

Included in the box are a 25 W USB-C charger with Super Fast Charging, a USB-C cable, a SIM tool, and a wired headset. Additional chargers can be purchased starting at $35 in Samsung’s online shop, which also carries a selection of protective covers starting at $30 for the silicone cover all the way up to $65 for the LED wallet cover or $55 for the LED back cover with notification LED features.

Samsung Galaxy S20 cases
Samsung Galaxy S20 cases

Input Devices and Handling – Smooth thanks to 120 Hz

The Galaxy S20’s touch screen is very accurate and feels very smooth and responsive thanks to its 120 Hz refresh rate. For example, a small gesture performed at the very top of the display is enough to lower the quick settings drop-down menu onto the display. We did not experience any slowdowns or lag during the entire review period. As already observed with other 120 Hz smartphones the difference might seem small and insignificant at first but will become glaringly obvious once you return to using a regular 60 Hz smartphone. If desired you can disable the 120 Hz mode in the S20’s settings.

As before, the in-display fingerprint reader is integrated into the display. It can be easily located with the display turned off, and worked very fast and reliably. The S20 also supports face recognition to unlock, and the display lights up if necessary to provide additional light in order to improve face detection in low-light environments. You can choose between a faster and less secure or a slower and more secure mode.

All physical buttons are located on the right-hand side and offer adequate tactile feedback. They feel very premium and offer clear and precise accentuation points.

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

Display – Very Bright S20 Display

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

For the first time ever a Samsung high-end device is available with a 120 Hz display. Like on TV sets it offers a much smoother visual experience with the added benefit of a more responsive touchscreen input experience.

At 3200 x 1440 pixels the resolution is fairly high, however not high enough to display native 4K content. As expected, the display is based on AMOLED technology with its familiar excellent deep blacks.

Like other smartphones made by Samsung the S20 supports a dynamic brightness boost feature. It cannot be enabled manually but increases brightness automatically based on the ambient light sensor’s readings. Compared to its predecessor, boost brightness was increased slightly and now registers at 740 nits on average. Among its high-end brethren the S20 is therefore the brightest contender.

743
cd/m²
731
cd/m²
737
cd/m²
750
cd/m²
745
cd/m²
747
cd/m²
741
cd/m²
731
cd/m²
739
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 750 cd/m² Average: 740.4 cd/m² Minimum: 1.6 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 97 %
Center on Battery: 745 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.67 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.9
ΔE Greyscale 2 | 0.64-98 Ø6.1
99.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.092
Samsung Galaxy S20
AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.2
Apple iPhone 11
IPS, 1792x828, 6.1
Samsung Galaxy S10
OLED, 3040x1440, 6.1
OnePlus 7T
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.55
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
OLED, 2400x1176, 6.53
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.47
Screen
23%
-25%
-24%
-14%
-44%
Brightness middle
745
679
-9%
701
-6%
693
-7%
592
-21%
625
-16%
Brightness
740
671
-9%
705
-5%
703
-5%
605
-18%
607
-18%
Brightness Distribution
97
93
-4%
98
1%
96
-1%
96
-1%
89
-8%
Black Level *
0.68
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.67
0.8
70%
3.7
-39%
3.42
-28%
2.5
6%
4.38
-64%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
4.52
2.4
47%
10.3
-128%
6.12
-35%
5.5
-22%
6.83
-51%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2
1.1
45%
1.4
30%
3.3
-65%
2.6
-30%
4.1
-105%
Gamma
2.092 105%
2.24 98%
2.1 105%
2.265 97%
2.16 102%
2.251 98%
CCT
6240 104%
6610 98%
6553 99%
6799 96%
6173 105%
7251 90%
Contrast
999

* ... 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 242.7 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 242.7 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 242.7 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 50 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18284 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

Preconfigured color presets include “lively” and “natural”, with “lively” enabled by default. It offers intensely popping colors at the expense of color accuracy. Color temperature can be further adjusted manually.

In our tests using CalMAN and a spectrophotometer we noticed a blue tint in both color presets. Color accuracy was significantly better in “natural”, and comparatively good in direct comparison with other high-end smartphones. If you need to assess prepress color accuracy on your smartphone’s display this is the preset to choose. On the other hand, the “lively” preset is great when watching videos or looking at photos on the display as it offers much more intense colors. It also offers a higher RGB color space coverage, which is important when watching videos.

As expected of an AMOLED display, we noticed the usual unavoidable-by-design PWM flickering. Display response times were very low, which is great news for gamers.

CalMAN grayscale - lively
CalMAN grayscale - lively
CalMAN color accuracy – lively
CalMAN color accuracy – lively
CalMAN sRGB color space – lively
CalMAN sRGB color space – lively
CalMAN AdobeRGB color space – lively
CalMAN AdobeRGB color space – lively
CalMAN DCI P3 color space – lively
CalMAN DCI P3 color space – lively
CalMAN saturation – lively
CalMAN saturation – lively
CalMAN grayscale – natural
CalMAN grayscale – natural
CalMAN color accuracy – natural
CalMAN color accuracy – natural
CalMAN sRGB color space – natural
CalMAN sRGB color space – natural
CalMAN AdobeRGB color space – natural
CalMAN AdobeRGB color space – natural
CalMAN DCI P3 color space – natural
CalMAN DCI P3 color space – natural
CalMAN saturation – natural
CalMAN saturation – natural

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 3 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. » 5 % 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
11 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6 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. » 9 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.3 ms).

The panel’s high boost brightness is hugely beneficial in bright environments as it allows the display to remain readable outdoors. The ambient light sensor was quick to react and its brightness adjustments were mostly appropriate.

Thanks to AMOLED technology viewing angles were superb, and the display remained well readable even from the sides.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Outdoors
Outdoors

Performance – Exynos is only Second Choice

European models of Samsung’s Galaxy S20 are equipped with Samsung’s in-house Exynos 990 high-end SoC. Variants sold outside of Europe can also be had with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 instead, which offers a substantial improvement over the former. See here for a comparison between the two. Long story short, the Exynos SoC is based on an older CPU core design, and cannot keep up with the crème de la crème of high-end smartphones in PC Mark and other benchmarks despite its very fast storage.

Things are just as bleak regarding GPU performance. While the S20 does manage to outperform the Snapdragon 855+-based OnePlus 7T it does so with an almost insignificant margin.

Subjectively, the S20 remains a very fast and powerful smartphone, and the real-world implications and differences between the phones are practically negligible. It feels very fast, smooth, and responsive thanks to its 120 Hz display, and subjective performance is not an issue at all. Nevertheless, we do have to take the fact that the S20 could have been even better into consideration, as can be seen on other high-end phones or even Samsung’s own Snapdragon-equipped SKU of the Galaxy S20.

While performing our benchmarks Samsung released a new patch for the S20, which promised performance improvements in its release notes. We ran a few randomly selected benchmarks a second time but were unable to notice any differences in the results.

Geekbench 5.1
Vulkan Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3670 Points ∼91%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4043 Points ∼100% +10%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
920 Points ∼23% -75%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (3670 - 3804, n=2)
3737 Points ∼92% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (118 - 4043, n=52)
1730 Points ∼43% -53%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
2731 Points ∼89%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3062 Points ∼100% +12%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
1727 Points ∼56% -37%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (2731 - 2899, n=3)
2815 Points ∼92% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (782 - 3531, n=64)
2046 Points ∼67% -25%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
903 Points ∼97%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
781 Points ∼84% -14%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
543 Points ∼58% -40%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (903 - 944, n=3)
929 Points ∼100% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (145 - 1342, n=64)
584 Points ∼63% -35%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
10431 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
7595 Points ∼73% -27%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8702 Points ∼83% -17%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
10322 Points ∼99% -1%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
7558 Points ∼72% -28%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (10255 - 10583, n=3)
10423 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 12879, n=466)
5703 Points ∼55% -45%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
14708 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
9750 Points ∼66% -34%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10286 Points ∼70% -30%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
13947 Points ∼95% -5%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
9052 Points ∼62% -38%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (14307 - 14760, n=3)
14592 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 15193, n=627)
6221 Points ∼42% -58%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3112 Points ∼80%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
3489 Points ∼90% +12%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3870 Points ∼100% +24%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2768 Points ∼72% -11%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (3112 - 3230, n=3)
3181 Points ∼82% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4057, n=128)
2622 Points ∼68% -16%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6315 Points ∼80%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6640 Points ∼84% +5%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6369 Points ∼80% +1%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2153 Points ∼27% -66%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (6315 - 8783, n=3)
7919 Points ∼100% +25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 8783, n=128)
2877 Points ∼36% -54%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
5139 Points ∼87%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5530 Points ∼93% +8%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5570 Points ∼94% +8%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2265 Points ∼38% -56%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (5139 - 6355, n=3)
5925 Points ∼100% +15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6618, n=128)
2583 Points ∼44% -50%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4063 Points ∼73%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3219 Points ∼58% -21%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
2981 Points ∼53% -27%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4635 Points ∼83% +14%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5576 Points ∼100% +37%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3188 Points ∼57% -22%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (4063 - 4495, n=3)
4335 Points ∼78% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5728, n=472)
2126 Points ∼38% -48%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8106 Points ∼92%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
8119 Points ∼92% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
5358 Points ∼61% -34%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
7977 Points ∼90% -2%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6657 Points ∼75% -18%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2425 Points ∼28% -70%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (8106 - 9190, n=3)
8818 Points ∼100% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 9542, n=472)
2003 Points ∼23% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6638 Points ∼93%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
6067 Points ∼85% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4551 Points ∼63% -31%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6875 Points ∼96% +4%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6382 Points ∼89% -4%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2561 Points ∼36% -61%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (6638 - 7459, n=3)
7170 Points ∼100% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8154, n=473)
1857 Points ∼26% -72%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3935 Points ∼77%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3411 Points ∼66% -13%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4517 Points ∼88% +15%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5133 Points ∼100% +30%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3193 Points ∼62% -19%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (3935 - 4455, n=3)
4275 Points ∼83% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5718, n=502)
2036 Points ∼40% -48%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
11301 Points ∼63%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
17853 Points ∼100% +58%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
11433 Points ∼64% +1%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7970 Points ∼45% -29%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3646 Points ∼20% -68%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (9470 - 11301, n=3)
10081 Points ∼56% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=502)
2657 Points ∼15% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
7981 Points ∼87%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
9199 Points ∼100% +15%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8531 Points ∼93% +7%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7098 Points ∼77% -11%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3535 Points ∼38% -56%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (7563 - 7981, n=3)
7707 Points ∼84% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=502)
2231 Points ∼24% -72%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3963 Points ∼81%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
2429 Points ∼49% -39%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
2854 Points ∼58% -28%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4492 Points ∼92% +13%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4909 Points ∼100% +24%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3171 Points ∼65% -20%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (3963 - 4267, n=3)
4137 Points ∼84% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=552)
2016 Points ∼41% -49%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8411 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
5726 Points ∼68% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
5176 Points ∼62% -38%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
7150 Points ∼85% -15%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6478 Points ∼77% -23%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2237 Points ∼27% -73%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (8257 - 8469, n=3)
8379 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 8469, n=552)
1671 Points ∼20% -80%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6732 Points ∼99%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
4400 Points ∼65% -35%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4383 Points ∼64% -35%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6319 Points ∼93% -6%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6048 Points ∼89% -10%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2394 Points ∼35% -64%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (6732 - 6896, n=3)
6821 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7305, n=553)
1596 Points ∼23% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4015 Points ∼82%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4377 Points ∼89% +9%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4900 Points ∼100% +22%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3191 Points ∼65% -21%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (3889 - 4124, n=3)
4009 Points ∼82% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5054, n=594)
1881 Points ∼38% -53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6388 Points ∼59%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10781 Points ∼100% +69%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7671 Points ∼71% +20%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3498 Points ∼32% -45%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (6388 - 11488, n=3)
8089 Points ∼75% +27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12494, n=593)
2180 Points ∼20% -66%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
5646 Points ∼69%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8136 Points ∼100% +44%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6815 Points ∼84% +21%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3425 Points ∼42% -39%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (5646 - 8010, n=3)
6451 Points ∼79% +14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9492, n=596)
1880 Points ∼23% -67%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
199 fps ∼62%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
322 fps ∼100% +62%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
143 fps ∼44% -28%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
185 fps ∼57% -7%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
152 fps ∼47% -24%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
84 fps ∼26% -58%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (199 - 200, n=3)
199 fps ∼62% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=754)
42.5 fps ∼13% -79%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
60 fps ∼75%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼75% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
60 fps ∼75% 0%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
59 fps ∼74% -2%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60 fps ∼75% 0%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
60 fps ∼75% 0%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (60 - 119, n=3)
79.7 fps ∼100% +33%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=763)
29.9 fps ∼38% -50%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
108 fps ∼62%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
175 fps ∼100% +62%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
85 fps ∼49% -21%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
112 fps ∼64% +4%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
106 fps ∼61% -2%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
41 fps ∼23% -62%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (100 - 126, n=3)
111 fps ∼63% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=659)
25 fps ∼14% -77%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
60 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
53 fps ∼88% -12%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
59 fps ∼98% -2%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
38 fps ∼63% -37%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (59 - 60, n=3)
59.7 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=667)
21.2 fps ∼35% -65%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
85 fps ∼73%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
117 fps ∼100% +38%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
53 fps ∼45% -38%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
79 fps ∼68% -7%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
56 fps ∼48% -34%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
30 fps ∼26% -65%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (72 - 85, n=3)
80.7 fps ∼69% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=522)
20.1 fps ∼17% -76%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
59 fps ∼81%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼82% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
30 fps ∼41% -49%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
58 fps ∼79% -2%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
73 fps ∼100% +24%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
27 fps ∼37% -54%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (58 - 59, n=3)
58.7 fps ∼80% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=524)
18.5 fps ∼25% -69%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
22 fps ∼37%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +173%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
16 fps ∼27% -27%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
27 fps ∼45% +23%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
26 fps ∼43% +18%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
10 fps ∼17% -55%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (22 - 33, n=3)
29.3 fps ∼49% +33%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=264)
10.9 fps ∼18% -50%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
20 fps ∼61%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
33 fps ∼100% +65%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
17 fps ∼52% -15%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
18 fps ∼55% -10%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
19 fps ∼58% -5%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
10 fps ∼30% -50%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (20 - 22, n=3)
21.3 fps ∼65% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 68, n=262)
7.71 fps ∼23% -61%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
50 fps ∼83%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +20%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
25 fps ∼42% -50%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
41 fps ∼68% -18%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
40 fps ∼67% -20%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
16 fps ∼27% -68%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (50 - 52, n=3)
51 fps ∼85% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=268)
16.2 fps ∼27% -68%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
54 fps ∼62%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
87 fps ∼100% +61%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
44 fps ∼51% -19%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
47 fps ∼54% -13%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
49 fps ∼56% -9%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
18 fps ∼21% -67%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (54 - 58, n=3)
56 fps ∼64% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 165, n=267)
18.2 fps ∼21% -66%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
50 fps ∼68%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
73 fps ∼100% +46%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
35 fps ∼48% -30%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
47 fps ∼64% -6%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
41 fps ∼56% -18%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
17 fps ∼23% -66%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (50 - 51, n=3)
50.3 fps ∼69% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=447)
13.7 fps ∼19% -73%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
43 fps ∼72%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +40%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
23 fps ∼38% -47%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
41 fps ∼68% -5%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
34 fps ∼57% -21%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
15 fps ∼25% -65%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (43 - 45, n=3)
44 fps ∼73% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=451)
12.1 fps ∼20% -72%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
504192 Points ∼100%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
483224 Points ∼96% -4%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
266417 Points ∼53% -47%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (296746 - 504192, n=3)
433215 Points ∼86% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 607937, n=75)
309805 Points ∼61% -39%
Basemark GPU 1.1
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
84.06 fps ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
33.04 (min: 9.22, max: 75.78) fps ∼39% -61%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
29.22 (min: 4.07, max: 95.16) fps ∼34% -65%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
17.2 fps ∼20% -80%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (84.1 - 85.6, n=2)
84.8 fps ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7.73 - 85.6, n=73)
19.2 fps ∼23% -77%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
42.32 fps ∼80%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
27.16 (min: 8.36, max: 61.33) fps ∼52% -36%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
31.12 (min: 11.09, max: 63.1) fps ∼59% -26%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
14.01 fps ∼27% -67%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (42.3 - 63, n=2)
52.7 fps ∼100% +25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.57 - 63, n=63)
16.1 fps ∼31% -62%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
71.58 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
38.35 (min: 8.77, max: 77.53) fps ∼54% -46%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
33.9 (min: 9.36, max: 74.72) fps ∼47% -53%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
15.63 fps ∼22% -78%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (71.5 - 71.6, n=2)
71.5 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.88 - 71.6, n=61)
20.1 fps ∼28% -72%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4786 Score ∼96%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4997 Score ∼100% +4%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2036 Score ∼41% -57%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (4607 - 4957, n=3)
4783 Score ∼96% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 7649, n=80)
2601 Score ∼52% -46%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
1274 Points ∼86%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
1385 Points ∼93% +9%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
1485 Points ∼100% +17%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
1462 Points ∼98% +15%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
1237 Points ∼83% -3%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (1270 - 1378, n=3)
1307 Points ∼88% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=690)
795 Points ∼54% -38%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
10703 Points ∼99%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
7361 Points ∼68% -31%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10611 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
10112 Points ∼94% -6%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3878 Points ∼36% -64%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (10703 - 10803, n=3)
10762 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=690)
2337 Points ∼22% -78%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4271 Points ∼70%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4570 Points ∼75% +7%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4869 Points ∼79% +14%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6130 Points ∼100% +44%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
4281 Points ∼70% 0%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (3775 - 4497, n=3)
4181 Points ∼68% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8398, n=690)
1727 Points ∼28% -60%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8843 Points ∼95%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
7476 Points ∼80% -15%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8988 Points ∼97% +2%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
9309 Points ∼100% +5%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
6445 Points ∼69% -27%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (8843 - 9478, n=3)
9201 Points ∼99% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=690)
3274 Points ∼35% -63%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4764 Points ∼88%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4320 Points ∼80% -9%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5124 Points ∼95% +8%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5389 Points ∼100% +13%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3392 Points ∼63% -29%
Average Samsung Exynos 990
  (4764 - 4915, n=3)
4819 Points ∼89% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6149, n=690)
1658 Points ∼31% -65%

When browsing the web there are striking performance differences between the S20 and other high-end smartphones, and unfortunately the S20 fell behind by a significant margin. Even the much cheaper OnePlus 7T performed noticeably better. Translated into everyday real-world experience this results in slightly longer loading times for images on websites or complex HTML5 contents. This may not have been a big deal after all, but it was noticeable for sure.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
132.886 Points ∼100% +147%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78)
65.88 Points ∼50% +22%
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76)
65.295 Points ∼49% +21%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
53.863 Points ∼41%
Average Samsung Exynos 990 (50.6 - 53.9, n=3)
52.1 Points ∼39% -3%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
46.038 Points ∼35% -15%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 140, n=154)
39.1 Points ∼29% -27%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
293.36 Points ∼100% +214%
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76)
120.83 Points ∼41% +29%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78)
115.49 Points ∼39% +24%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
93.499 Points ∼32%
Average Samsung Exynos 990 (89.3 - 93.5, n=3)
90.8 Points ∼31% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0)
84.005 Points ∼29% -10%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
79.228 Points ∼27% -15%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=585)
45.2 Points ∼15% -52%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
157 runs/min ∼100% +209%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78)
74.1 runs/min ∼47% +46%
OnePlus 7T (Chome 76)
69.1 runs/min ∼44% +36%
Average Samsung Exynos 990 (50.8 - 63.7, n=3)
59.1 runs/min ∼38% +16%
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0)
54 runs/min ∼34% +6%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chome 80)
50.8 runs/min ∼32%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
43.3 runs/min ∼28% -15%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 158, n=141)
42.5 runs/min ∼27% -16%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
184 Points ∼100% +90%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78)
119 Points ∼65% +23%
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76)
100 Points ∼54% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
97 Points ∼53%
Average Samsung Exynos 990 (86 - 97, n=3)
89.7 Points ∼49% -8%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
77 Points ∼42% -21%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=217)
69 Points ∼38% -29%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
48819 Points ∼100% +169%
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76)
25353 Points ∼52% +40%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78)
23568 Points ∼48% +30%
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0)
20286 Points ∼42% +12%
Average Samsung Exynos 990 (18094 - 19122, n=3)
18459 Points ∼38% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
18162 Points ∼37%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
16241 Points ∼33% -11%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=748)
7455 Points ∼15% -59%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (550 - 59466, n=773)
10073 ms * ∼100% -301%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
2769.8 ms * ∼27% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
2511.2 ms * ∼25%
Average Samsung Exynos 990 (2345 - 2511, n=3)
2448 ms * ∼24% +3%
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76)
2021.4 ms * ∼20% +20%
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78)
1962.5 ms * ∼19% +22%
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0)
1924.2 ms * ∼19% +23%
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
572.8 ms * ∼6% +77%

* ... smaller is better

In our SD card benchmarks performed with our usual Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 reference card, the Galaxy S20’s performance was slightly lower than expected yet still fast enough to not become noticeable in real-world situations. In return, its internal UFS 3.0 storage is impressive and very clearly leaves older high-end smartphones behind.

Samsung Galaxy S20Samsung Galaxy S10OnePlus 7THuawei Mate 30 ProXiaomi Mi Note 10Average 128 GB UFS 3.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-35%
-45%
7%
-57%
-6%
-56%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
57.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
64.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
12%
69.22 (Nano Memory Card)
20%
59.3 (54.5 - 66.4, n=7)
3%
50.4 (1.7 - 87.1, n=492)
-13%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
66.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
77.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
17%
82.49 (Nano Memory Card)
24%
72 (66.3 - 81.6, n=7)
9%
68.5 (8.1 - 96.5, n=492)
3%
Random Write 4KB
228.1
24.44
-89%
29.9
-87%
259.21
14%
118.9
-48%
182 (29.9 - 230, n=9)
-20%
30 (0.14 - 272, n=831)
-87%
Random Read 4KB
205.3
137.4
-33%
170.1
-17%
226.38
10%
106.2
-48%
194 (170 - 207, n=9)
-6%
54.6 (1.59 - 265, n=831)
-73%
Sequential Write 256KB
669.9
193.24
-71%
218.4
-67%
401.79
-40%
243.6
-64%
527 (213 - 697, n=9)
-21%
114 (2.99 - 750, n=831)
-83%
Sequential Read 256KB
1541.7
831.94
-46%
1406
-9%
1780.5
15%
480.5
-69%
1511 (1406 - 1632, n=9)
-2%
315 (12.1 - 1781, n=831)
-80%

Games – Gaming in 60 Hz? No Problem!

In theory, frame rates beyond 60 FPS are possible thanks to the S20’s fast 120 Hz display. Unfortunately, we failed to achieve more than 60 FPS in a single one of our benchmarked games. That said, even the highly demanding Asphalt 9 managed to run at 60 FPS, and PUBG Mobile averaged a stable and acceptable 40 FPS without any lag. Generally speaking, the Galaxy S20’s gaming experience was great, and we had no issues even with demanding titles.

Game controls did their part as well, and both touchscreen and gyroscope worked very reliably.

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Asphalt 9
Asphalt 9
010203040506070Tooltip
; PUBG Mobile; Smooth; 0.17.0: Ø39.4 (35-42)
; PUBG Mobile; HD; 0.17.0: Ø39.6 (32-42)
; Arena of Valor; min; 1.33.1.5: Ø60.1 (59-61)
; Arena of Valor; high HD; 1.33.1.5: Ø60.1 (59-61)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; High Quality; 2.1.2a: Ø57.8 (38-61)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; Standard / low; 2.1.2a: Ø58.5 (40-61)

Emissions – Heavy Throttling

Temperature

GFXBench battery test
GFXBench battery test

Unlike its predecessor, the Galaxy S20 warmed up significantly with a case temperature of up to 46.7 °C (116 °F) after a long period of high load. This became particularly unpleasant when putting the smartphone back into your pocket after playing a game for some time. When idle, the device remained cool to the touch.

We run the GFXBench battery test in order to determine a smartphone’s thermal throttling characteristics under sustained load. Unfortunately, we have to report that the Galaxy S20 performed very similar to last year’s Galaxy S10. The first drop in performance came after only 5 runs (20%) with the second following after 12 iterations (40%) and the third after 21 iterations, at which point no more than a third of the device’s initial performance is still available. For gamers, this is a significant decrease and major restriction.

Max. Load
 45.4 °C
114 F
44.9 °C
113 F
41.2 °C
106 F
 
 46.2 °C
115 F
45.3 °C
114 F
41.6 °C
107 F
 
 46.7 °C
116 F
45.2 °C
113 F
41.1 °C
106 F
 
Maximum: 46.7 °C = 116 F
Average: 44.2 °C = 112 F
37.5 °C
100 F
41.3 °C
106 F
41.4 °C
107 F
38.8 °C
102 F
42.3 °C
108 F
43.3 °C
110 F
37.6 °C
100 F
41.7 °C
107 F
42.2 °C
108 F
Maximum: 43.3 °C = 110 F
Average: 40.7 °C = 105 F
Power Supply (max.)  43.6 °C = 110 F | Room Temperature 21.9 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated); Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 44.2 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 46.7 °C / 116 F, compared to the average of 35.4 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 43.3 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.6 °C / 89 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.

Speakers

Pink Noise
Pink Noise

The S20 features a dedicated speaker at the bottom and uses the earphone speaker for stereo effects. Voices are very clear and comprehensible, and music remained clean and undistorted on medium and high volumes. On maximum volume, high frequencies were more pronounced while low frequencies remained audible and present at the same time to balance things out. Overall, the S20 is not going to become the new gold standard for smartphone speakers but still manages to offer decent high-end sound.

Just like its predecessor the S20 lacks a 3.5-mm headphone jack and requires either USB-C headphones or a USB-C to 3.5-mm dongle. To make matters worse, you cannot use any dongle due to the smartphone’s finicky USB device detection. That said, analog sound is clear and accurate once you get it going, and so is Bluetooth sounds quality.

For a free headset, the included AKG set performed adequately.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2041.341.32537.538312933.54031.633.15033.237.36328.328.88023.325.410023.323.812524.231.216020.540.92001945.825017.650.231516.952.540016.255.450016.463.263018.365.180016.166.7100014.772.7125014.276.6160014.777.2200013.976.2250014.377.4315014.975.8400014.873.8500015.369.4630014.965.280001567.41000015.5691250016.462.6160001662.7SPL72.427.585.9N26.1159.7median 16median 65.2Delta210.739.434.728.327.118.722.126.726.333.235.722.629.221.824.224.423.923.834.918.551.817.151.517.858.915.561.314.164.51468.813.86714.770.815.473.415.275.314.375.514.576.413.977.414.678.714.180.314.377.514.575.214.871.614.866.814.8611555.426.8880.872median 14.8median 68.81.510.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy S20Samsung Galaxy S10
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy S20 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.9% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 29% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 55% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Samsung Galaxy S10 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 9% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 36% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery Life – Galaxy S20 with decent Runtime

Power Consumption

Under load, we recorded a very high power consumption of more than 11 W. Otherwise, the Galaxy S20 was just as undemanding as other high-end smartphones. We did not notice increased or unusually high power consumption levels in standby or when turned off completely, and the device can thus be left unattended in standby for quite a while without draining the battery.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.2 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.9 / 1.5 / 2 Watt
Load midlight 4.8 / 11.5 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy S20
4000 mAh
Apple iPhone 11
3110 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S10
3400 mAh
OnePlus 7T
3800 mAh
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
4500 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
5260 mAh
Average Samsung Exynos 990
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-9%
16%
-2%
11%
4%
-4%
9%
Idle Minimum *
0.9
0.56
38%
0.61
32%
0.9
-0%
0.87
3%
0.7
22%
0.887 (0.76 - 1, n=3)
1%
0.882 (0.2 - 3.4, n=843)
2%
Idle Average *
1.5
2.99
-99%
1.27
15%
1.4
7%
1.75
-17%
1.8
-20%
1.703 (1.5 - 1.91, n=3)
-14%
1.747 (0.6 - 6.2, n=842)
-16%
Idle Maximum *
2
3.02
-51%
1.3
35%
2.9
-45%
1.83
8%
2.2
-10%
2.09 (1.96 - 2.3, n=3)
-5%
2.03 (0.74 - 6.6, n=843)
-2%
Load Average *
4.8
4.17
13%
6.17
-29%
4.7
2%
3.85
20%
5.2
-8%
5.11 (4.72 - 5.8, n=3)
-6%
4.09 (0.8 - 10.8, n=837)
15%
Load Maximum *
11.5
5.44
53%
8.55
26%
8.3
28%
6.64
42%
7.5
35%
11.2 (10.2 - 11.8, n=3)
3%
6.02 (1.2 - 14.2, n=837)
48%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Galaxy smartphones are rarely ever to be found among the top contestants in our battery life rankings, and other manufacturers tend to squeeze out significantly more battery life out of batteries with identical capacity. Speaking of which, the S20’s increased by 600 mAh to a total of now 4,000 mAh, which ended up lasting for a total of 12:06 hours in our Wi-Fi test. This may not be a new all-time high – other smartphones with smaller batteries tend to run much longer – but it is at least an improvement over last year’s Galaxy S10.

Overall, we would consider the Samsung Galaxy S20’s battery life adequate. In normal use cases it should last for 2 days without requiring a top-up. Its competitors are, however, much better in this regard.

Thanks to its 25 W fast charger the S20 only takes 1:30 hours to charge from near empty to full. Wireless charging is supported as well and takes around 2:30 hours.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
35h 05min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
12h 06min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
13h 29min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 39min
Samsung Galaxy S20
4000 mAh
Apple iPhone 11
3110 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S10
3400 mAh
OnePlus 7T
3800 mAh
Huawei Mate 30 Pro
4500 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
5260 mAh
Battery Runtime
22%
-29%
10%
8%
43%
Reader / Idle
2105
2765
31%
1259
-40%
2003
-5%
2174
3%
2134
1%
H.264
809
1147
42%
842
4%
967
20%
1098
36%
1423
76%
WiFi v1.3
726
866
19%
427
-41%
896
23%
823
13%
1127
55%
Load
279
267
-4%
170
-39%
283
1%
219
-22%
387
39%

Pros

+ slim and lightweight case
+ bleeding edge up-to-date software
+ wide LTE band support
+ support for 8K video
+ great and very bright 120 Hz display
+ 60 Hz gaming
+ decent battery life
+ 5G optional

Cons

- no aptX HD
- location services not particularly accurate at times
- many video features only up to FHD/30fps
- Exynos SoC throttles noticeably
- high temperatures under load
- no real telephoto lens

Verdict – Very Good, but not Best of the Best

In review: Samsung Galaxy S20. Review united provided by notebooksbilliger.de
In review: Samsung Galaxy S20. Review united provided by notebooksbilliger.de

It has almost become sort of a tradition for Galaxy S smartphones to be excellent high-end devices that are unable to keep up with their competitors in all aspects of smartphone life. For example, browsing the web Is slower, battery life is shorter, charging takes longer, Wi-Fi performance is lower, and other smartphones offer more storage at the same price point. European customers with Exynos-based S20 devices take an extra hit as those SKUs offer a lower performance than their Snapdragon siblings and a less flexible 5G support to boot.

That said the Samsung Galaxy S20 remains a very good high-end smartphone with a slim and narrow case that people with small hands will very much appreciate. It also offers a modern and almost conservative design as well as a low weight.

Its up-to-date good-looking software is a blast to use, it offers a very wide array of supported LTE frequencies, and a very fast 4G or even 5G modem. Its camera takes great photos, particularly in low light, and the latest patch fixed many of the issues reported by early adopters. Its flexible triple-lens camera with finely adjustable hybrid-optical zoom can be considered run-of-the-mill quality in the high-end smartphone segment, but that did not keep us from really liking it. A lot. The display is once again superb, and can easily outshine all of its competitors with ease, and both brightness and color accuracy have been improved over its predecessor.

We were not particularly fond of its high temperatures under load and the CPU’s heavy thermal throttling. Considering the S20’s significantly improved battery life that is a real pity.

The Samsung Galaxy S20 offers improved battery life, an extremely bright display, and good cameras. Unfortunately, it does also have its unique set of quirks.

All things considered the Samsung Galaxy S20 is a smartphone with a very unique set of flaws and quirks, and will have a hard time keeping up with the likes of Huawei, Apple, or OnePlus. However, if you are not after utmost performance, if you appreciate a flexible camera, and are looking for a compact smartphone the Samsung Galaxy S20 is definitely worthy of your consideration.

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

Samsung Galaxy S20 - 03/30/2020 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
88%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
97%
Connectivity
51 / 70 → 73%
Weight
91%
Battery
89%
Display
90%
Games Performance
56 / 64 → 87%
Application Performance
75 / 86 → 87%
Temperature
84%
Noise
100%
Audio
80 / 90 → 89%
Camera
78%
Average
80%
88%
Smartphone - Weighted Average
Read all 6 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 S20 Smartphone Review – High-Quality Smartphone with Quirks
Florian Schmitt, 2020-03-25 (Update: 2020-04- 7)
Florian Schmitt
Editor of the original article: Florian Schmitt - Managing Editor Mobile
When I was 12, the first computer came into the house and immediately I started tinkering around, taking it apart, getting new parts and replacing them - after all, there always had to be enough power for the current games. When I came to Notebookcheck in 2009, I was passionate about testing gaming notebooks. Since 2012, my attention has been focused on smartphones, tablets and future technologies.