Notebookcheck Logo

Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 review - Wieldy entry-level tablet with GPS, LTE and 4 years of update

Affordable and compact. The Galaxy Tab A9 is a compact tablet with long software support for people on a budget. During our review, the €170 (US$160) Samsung tablet surprised us with a bright display and offers a comprehensive set of features. But read on to find out whom this tablet isn’t for.
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Tablet review

With the Tab A9, Samsung has revised its tablet lineup for consumers on a budget. The successor to the Tab A8 not only has become slightly smaller (8.7 inch diagonal screen size) but also carries a lighter price tag. The recommended retail price of the Galaxy Tab A9 starts at €179 (US$159), meaning the base configuration is around €50 (US$70) cheaper than its immediate predecessor. Tab A8 owners who don’t want to downsize can still look at the new Plus model for a 10.1-inch alternative in the Galaxy universe.

This time around, Samsung has also kept younger users in mind. The Tab A9 Kids Edition comes with a protective case and a stylus and features a modified One UI to simplify tablet use for children and help parents monitor their kids’ digital activities more easily. However, the Kids Edition is not yet available in Germany. 

Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 (Galaxy Tab A9 Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio G99 8 x 2 - 2.2 GHz, Cortex-A76 / A55
Graphics adapter
Memory
4 GB 
Display
8.70 inch 5:3, 1340 x 800 pixel 179 PPI, Capacitive touchscreen, LCD TFT, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash, 64 GB 
, 45 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: 3.5 mm audio jack, Card Reader: microSD up to 1 TB (FAT, FAT32, exFAT), Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, proximity, compass, OTG, Miracast
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.3, LTE version: 4G (B1/​B3/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B28), 3G (B1/​B2/​B4/​B5/​B8), 2G (B2/​B3/​B5/​B8), GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8 x 211 x 124.7 ( = 0.31 x 8.31 x 4.91 in)
Battery
5100 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 13
Camera
Primary Camera: 8 MPix (AF, f/2.0), camera2 API: Level 3
Secondary Camera: 2 MPix (Fix focus, f/2.2)
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: On-screen, USB cable, info material, One UI 5.1, 24 Months Warranty, GNSS: GPS (L1), GLONASS (L1), Beidou (B1), Galileo (E1), SBAS, A-GPS (LTE version), widevine L1, fanless
Weight
332 g ( = 11.71 oz / 0.73 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
179 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Comparison with possible competitors

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Best Price
84.1 %
02/2024
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2
332 g8 mm8.70"1340x800
79.5 %
05/2023
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300
320 g9 mm8.00"1280x800
82.2 %
02/2023
Nokia T10
T606, Mali-G57 MP1
375 g9 mm8.00"1280x800
80.4 %
01/2023
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
MT8169A, Mali-G52 MP2
337 g9.7 mm8.00"1280x800
81 %
02/2022
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
T618, Mali-G52 MP2
508 g6.9 mm10.50"1920x1200

Case - Samsung tablet with metal body

Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 in silver
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 in silver
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 in black
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 in black

In terms of aesthetic, the similarity between the Galaxy Tab A9 and its predecessors is unmistakeable. The design strongly resembles a Galaxy Tab A7 Lite or Tab A8 with a modified camera module on the back. That said, the bezels around the 8.7-inch TFT panel have slimmed down considerably. The 81.7% screen-to-body ratio is appealing for a device in this price bracket and is much more efficient than what's found on a Nokia T10 (72.4%), for example. 

Though the Galaxy Tab A9 is highly affordable, no sacrifice had to be made in the feel of the device thanks to its slim metal chassis. The Samsung tablet is also nice and light at just 332 g (0.71 lb), allowing you to hold it in one hand effortlessly. The chassis is available in three colourways (Graphite, Silver and Navy). Owing to the matt surface, fingerprints aren’t a huge problem, but they are still clearly visible.

The Galaxy Tab A9 has impressive workmanship. Moreover, the compact dimensions make the device feel sturdy and stiff.

Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review

Size comparison

246.8 mm / 9.72 inch 161.9 mm / 6.37 inch 6.9 mm / 0.2717 inch 508 g1.12 lbs211 mm / 8.31 inch 124.7 mm / 4.91 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 332 g0.732 lbs208 mm / 8.19 inch 123.2 mm / 4.85 inch 9 mm / 0.3543 inch 375 g0.827 lbs202 mm / 7.95 inch 137 mm / 5.39 inch 9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch 337 g0.743 lbs198 mm / 7.8 inch 120 mm / 4.72 inch 9 mm / 0.3543 inch 320 g0.705 lbs210 mm / 8.27 inch 148 mm / 5.83 inch 1 mm / 0.03937 inch 2.9 g0.00639 lbs

Specifications - Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 with 3.5 mm audio jack

As far as specs go, the Galaxy Tab A9 definitely offers interesting features for mobile use. The device comes with a 3.5 mm audio jack, Bluetooth 5.3 and a 4G dual SIM option including eSIM support. There are a total of four models available:

Galaxy Tab A9 Wifi | 64 GB | 4 GB RAM | €179.00

Galaxy Tab A9 LTE | 64 GB | 4 GB RAM | €219.00

Galaxy Tab A9 Wifi | 128 GB | 8 GB RAM | €229.00

Galaxy Tab A9 LTE | 128 GB | 8 GB RAM | €269.00

Our Wi-Fi-only variant has 64 GB of internal storage. But after subtracting the space used for the operating system, only about 43 GB of usable storage is available. If you need more space for videos or photos, you can make use of accessories (e.g. thumb drives) via USB OTG or insert a microSD card into the hybrid slot. An external storage device can be used to store media files (videos or music) but not applications.

As you might expect, Samsung has only given the Galaxy Tab 9 a sluggish USB 2.0 port that doesn’t allow for high data transfer speeds or video output via a cable. During our copy test performed with a M.2 SSD drive (Samsung 980 Pro), transfer speed was around 29 MB/s. The device supports exFAT as well as NTFS (preferred by Microsoft systems). However, the latter can only be used for read operations.

Left side (Buttons: on/off, volume, microphone)
Left side (Buttons: on/off, volume, microphone)
Right side (Card slots)
Right side (Card slots)
Bottom (Speaker, USB port, microphone)
Bottom (Speaker, USB port, microphone)
Top (Speaker)
Top (Speaker)

microSD card reader

The Tab A9’s storage capacity can be expanded to up to 1 TB using micro SD cards in conjunction with exFAT support. The exFAT file format lets you save files larger than 4 GB on the storage media.

During our JPEG copy test, the tablet achieved highly satisfactory transfer rates with our reference card, though the Galaxy tablet didn’t quite take full advantage of the potential of the Angelbird AV Pro 60. The Tab A9 likewise had a great showing in Cross Platform Disk Test.

SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
49.18 MB/s +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
48.7 MB/s
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Angelbird V60)
29.6 MB/s -39%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Angelbird V60)
26.3 MB/s -46%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Angelbird V60)
20.6 MB/s -58%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø38.8 (29.5-49.9)
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø33.7 (16.9-41.5)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø76.3 (41.4-80.6)
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø68.1 (13.8-75.1)

Software - Galaxy Tab with long update support

During the review period, Samsung overlayed Android 13 with their One UI 5.1, complete with security updates dated August 2023. One major advantage of this entry-level tablet is the relatively long product care offered by Samsung. In this price bracket, no other manufacturers provide two generations of UI and Android OS upgrades as well as four years of security updates rolled out on a quarterly basis. That said, considering the last security patches were dated Q3 2023, Samsung doesn’t seem to always deliver on their promises.

Even though the Tab A9 doesn’t have access to Samsung’s DeX user interface, the in-house Knox Vault platform is supported. This means the entry-level tablet can make use of Samsung’s Security and Privacy Dashboard and encrypt contents before they are sent. The Galaxy Tab A9 is also integrated into the company’s ecosystem and thus offers wireless connectivity between Samsung Galaxy devices.

Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review

Connectivity and GNSS - Samsung tablet with GPS

The built-in Wi-Fi module in the Tab A9 supports IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n/ac standards and thus operates only on the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz frequency bands. In our home network, it is possible to hit over 350 MBit/s with the Wi-Fi 5 standard and our reference router (Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000) – decent transfer rates for this price range. The speed on offer is anything but high. That said, send and receive speeds are very consistent.

Our review unit doesn’t have cellular capability. Though an LTE version is available, the Helio G99 doesn’t support the newer 5G standard.

Networking
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
368 (359min - 369max) MBit/s
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
349 (337min - 355max) MBit/s -5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
325 (163min - 328max) MBit/s -12%
Nokia T10
304 (279min - 315max) MBit/s -17%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
301 (281min - 315max) MBit/s -18%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
374 (360min - 392max) MBit/s +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
372 (189min - 388max) MBit/s
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
367 (347min - 379max) MBit/s -1%
Nokia T10
357 (333min - 367max) MBit/s -4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
349 (178min - 357max) MBit/s -6%
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mediatek Helio G99, ARM Mali-G57 MP2; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø367 (359-369)
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø300 (281-315)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mediatek Helio G99, ARM Mali-G57 MP2; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø366 (189-388)
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø367 (347-379)
Positioning in building
Positioning in building
Positioning outdoors
Positioning outdoors

Fortunately, all variants of the Tab A9 can be used for navigation purposes because even the Wi-Fi version is equipped with a GPS module. Positioning is done using the satellite systems GPS, Galileo, Beidou and GLONASS – all in single band. It can be accurate down to two metres outdoors.

In our realistic test, we went on a bike ride with the tablet and took a Garmin Venu 2 along for comparison purposes. The A9's positional accuracy was surprising high for an entry-level tablet. There are a few discrepancies between the recorded path and the actual route, though they are only minimal. Those looking for a large GPS device for driving are probably going to get slightly better results with the 4G version that has A-GPS.

Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 vs. Garmin Venu 2
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 vs. Garmin Venu 2

Camera - single camera setup

Selfie taken with the Galaxy Tab A9
Selfie taken with the Galaxy Tab A9

On the front, the Tab A9 has a low-resolution 2 MP camera with fixed focus above the display. This means you shouldn’t expect much from the front cam apart from using it for video calls. Selfies look very soft, and exposure also doesn’t work reliably. Due to the low resolution, detail reproduction isn’t a strong suit of entry-level tablet.

The rear 8MP camera has autofocus at its disposal, which isn’t a given in this price bracket and may sometimes even be missing on tablets in the upper mid-range. However, its image sharpness is more adequate for taking pictures of documents and notes in everyday use. Photos lack vibrancy and are low in contrast; colours occasionally look washed out.

The rear camera lets you take 1080p videos at 30 fps, whereas the selfie camera only has an HD option.

1x
1x
2x
2x
4x
4x
10x (max)
10x (max)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review

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 2Low lightZoom 5x

We analysed the colour reproduction of the Tab A9’s camera under controlled lighting conditions by using actual reference colours for comparison. Other than some visible brightening, the 8MP camera doesn’t reveal any noteworthy deviations from the ColorChecker Passport. The Samsung device only showed a few outliers in colour accuracy (>10).

ColorChecker
6.4 ∆E
9.6 ∆E
9.8 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
11.1 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
11 ∆E
6.4 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
9.8 ∆E
13.6 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
5.5 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
11.1 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
7.8 ∆E
6.1 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy Tab A9: 8.55 ∆E min: 4.82 - max: 13.62 ∆E
ColorChecker
29.6 ∆E
55.1 ∆E
39.8 ∆E
34.8 ∆E
45.6 ∆E
62.4 ∆E
53.7 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
44.2 ∆E
29 ∆E
65.1 ∆E
64.1 ∆E
31.5 ∆E
47.7 ∆E
37.8 ∆E
76.8 ∆E
44.6 ∆E
42 ∆E
94.3 ∆E
71.4 ∆E
52.5 ∆E
36.9 ∆E
23.8 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy Tab A9: 47.17 ∆E min: 13.35 - max: 94.33 ∆E

Accessories and warranty - Charger not included

Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review

For accessories, Samsung has only included a USB cable (Type C to C), a small tool to open the card slot, and documentation. If you want a case, you can get the optional Book Cover (RRP: €43, or around US$46) with adjustable angle. Samsung also doesn’t offer any screen protector for the Tab A9 despite the fact that no protective film is preinstalled on the 8.7-inch device out of the box.

Samsung provides a 24-month warranty on the budget tablet in Germany. You can also add the Care+ insurance package with a term of 12 to 24 months (RRP: starting from €24, or US$26). Warranty terms and conditions may vary depending on region.

Input devices and operation - Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 with Face unlock

The Tab A9’s capacitive touchscreen detects finger inputs without any perceptible delays – compatibility with the S Pen isn’t available. The TFT panel on board only supports a 60Hz refresh rate. As a result, animations and scrolling are less smooth and feel somewhat choppier than on a competing tablet capable of 90Hz, such as the Redmi Pad SE

Biometric security is provided using face recognition via the front camera, but it uses a 2D method that is not secure. The unlocking process works reliably in good lighting conditions. The registration of face data is limited to one user. The tablet doesn’t have any fingerprint reader.

Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 tablet review

Display - Galaxy Tab A9 with an LCD panel

Visualisation of subpixel in a typical RGB matrix
Visualisation of subpixel in a typical RGB matrix

The Galaxy Tab A9’s screen measures 8.7 inch diagonally and has a resolution of 1,340 x 800 pixels, equivalent to a pixel density of 179 PPI. The TFT display thus doesn’t make contents look very sharp and isn’t going cause people who are really particular about screens to jump for joy.

The Samsung tablet cuts a better figure in the brightness department. In our measurement, the TFT panel hit a peak brightness off 486 cd/m² when producing a completely white image. The APL 18 measurement, which is more representative of day-to-day use, didn’t yield a considerable increase in brightness, but this is normal for a tablet with LCD technology.

We didn’t detect any screen flicker (PWM) on the Tab A9. That said, weaknesses typical of LCDs (shadows, uneven backlight at the edges) are relatively pronounced on the Samsung device. Even in daylight, effects of backlight bleed are already noticeable on a dark background (see video footage on the Tab A9).

457
cd/m²
468
cd/m²
458
cd/m²
455
cd/m²
486
cd/m²
470
cd/m²
446
cd/m²
460
cd/m²
459
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 486 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 462.1 cd/m² Minimum: 5.72 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 486 cd/m²
Contrast: 1389:1 (Black: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.2 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 5.7 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
81.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.12
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
LCD TFT, 1340x800, 8.70
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
IPS, 1280x800, 8.00
Nokia T10
IPS, 1280x800, 8.00
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
LCD, 1280x800, 8.00
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
TFT-LCD, 1920x1200, 10.50
Screen
16%
-16%
1%
-30%
Brightness middle
486
410
-16%
446
-8%
388
-20%
368
-24%
Brightness
462
380
-18%
429
-7%
364
-21%
346
-25%
Brightness Distribution
92
86
-7%
94
2%
90
-2%
91
-1%
Black Level *
0.35
0.16
54%
0.65
-86%
0.36
-3%
0.61
-74%
Contrast
1389
2563
85%
686
-51%
1078
-22%
603
-57%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
6.2
4.6
26%
4.87
21%
4.38
29%
6.9
-11%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
10.4
9.03
13%
9.85
5%
10.7
-3%
11.4
-10%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
5.7
6.3
-11%
5.7
-0%
2.9
49%
7.7
-35%
Gamma
2.12 104%
2.519 87%
2.189 101%
2.232 99%
2.16 102%
CCT
7911 82%
7707 84%
7781 84%
6221 104%
8547 76%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

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

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18196 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

We evaluated the colour calibration of the IPS panel using the CalMan analysis software. The Delta E values we measured for the sRGB gamut reveal an acceptable amount of deviation in both colours and greyscale reproduction for a tablet of this price. However, the Tab A9 doesn’t fall within the target level (Delta E < 3). Consequently, you will readily notice the difference between the displayed and reference colours, especially for white and red shades. The greyscale also carries a light blue tint, but we aren't really bothered by it.

The TFT panel’s black level of 0,35 cd/m² yields a great contrast ratio of around 1,400:1. The entry-level tablet is limited in terms of colour profiles. The Tab A9’s One UI only offers one colour mode out of the box. And you can’t even adjust the colour temperature.

Colour accuracy (Target gamut: sRGB; profile: factory default)
Colour accuracy (Target gamut: sRGB; profile: factory default)
Colour accuracy (Target gamut: sRGB; profile: factory default)
Colour accuracy (Target gamut: sRGB; profile: factory default)
Greyscale (Target gamut: sRGB; profile: factory default)
Greyscale (Target gamut: sRGB; profile: factory default)
Colour saturation (Target gamut: sRGB; profile: factory default)
Colour saturation (Target gamut: sRGB; profile: factory default)

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
34.71 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 19.91 ms rise
↘ 14.8 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 91 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
52.61 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 24.38 ms rise
↘ 28.23 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 88 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (34 ms).

The Tab A9 doesn’t give off a confident impression outdoors, since even on a cloudy day, reflections on the glass surface can visibly limit the display’s readability. Though the brightness on offer is sufficient for use within your own four walls.

The viewing angle of the TFT panel is compelling. There is also only a moderate amount of the typical brightness roll-off when the display is viewed from a sharp angle.

Performance - Samsung tablet with Mediatek SoC

Under the hood of the Galaxy Tab A9 is a MediaTek Helio G99 with two Cortex-A76 performance cores. Measured against competing compact tablets, the chipset released in 2022 performed well in our CPU test, delivering great single- and multi-core scores in Geekbench. However, those interested in the Samsung tablet shouldn’t be misled by these results, because the performance is still be considered very low. In tablets with a 10-inch screen or larger, the Helio G99 is quite a common SoC in this price range.

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Average of class Tablet (140 - 1892, n=64, last 2 years)
678 Points +20%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
565 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (490 - 576, n=10)
545 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
365 Points -35%
Nokia T10
310 Points -45%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
140 Points -75%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Points -100%
Multi-Core
Average of class Tablet (312 - 8524, n=64, last 2 years)
2429 Points +23%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
1981 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (1670 - 1981, n=10)
1826 Points -8%
Nokia T10
1256 Points -37%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
1229 Points -38%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
488 Points -75%
Geekbench 6.2
Single-Core
Average of class Tablet (185 - 2107, n=39, last 2 years)
796 Points +8%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
738 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (710 - 738, n=4)
728 Points -1%
Multi-Core
Average of class Tablet (493 - 5652, n=39, last 2 years)
2251 Points +9%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
2065 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (1864 - 2065, n=4)
1998 Points -3%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (8973 - 11027, n=10)
9716 Points +7%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
9083 Points
Average of class Tablet (3195 - 17267, n=60, last 2 years)
8491 Points -7%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
7447 Points -18%
Nokia T10
6916 Points -24%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
5028 Points -45%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
4766 Points -48%
CrossMark - Overall
Average of class Tablet (172 - 1585, n=49, last 2 years)
678 Points +18%
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (526 - 602, n=6)
574 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
573 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
361 Points -37%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
198 Points -65%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Points -100%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Average of class Tablet (444 - 8886, n=49, last 2 years)
3536 Points +13%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
3120 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (2855 - 3120, n=6)
3012 Points -3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
1839 Points -41%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
979 Points -69%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
444 Points -86%
System
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
6776 Points
Average of class Tablet (1103 - 14097, n=49, last 2 years)
6324 Points -7%
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (5261 - 6776, n=6)
6253 Points -8%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
4729 Points -30%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
2793 Points -59%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
1641 Points -76%
Memory
Average of class Tablet (916 - 8890, n=49, last 2 years)
4207 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
4152 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (3454 - 4152, n=6)
3758 Points -9%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
1236 Points -70%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
1154 Points -72%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
970 Points -77%
Graphics
Average of class Tablet (580 - 31738, n=49, last 2 years)
6459 Points +141%
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (2683 - 3002, n=6)
2799 Points +4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
2683 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
2001 Points -25%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
1182 Points -56%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
580 Points -78%
Web
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
1273 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (1201 - 1325, n=6)
1261 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
1246 Points -2%
Average of class Tablet (10 - 1907, n=49, last 2 years)
1191 Points -6%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
836 Points -34%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
10 Points -99%
AImark - Score v3.x
Average of class Tablet (84 - 156427, n=36, last 2 years)
5710 Points +481%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
982 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (877 - 982, n=5)
910 Points -7%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
84 Points -91%
UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (6453 - 9695, n=5)
8814 Points +37%
Average of class Tablet (1662 - 44323, n=46, last 2 years)
8783 Points +36%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
6453 Points
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
3028 Points -53%
Antutu v10 - Total Score
Average of class Tablet (164396 - 1936538, n=16, last 2 years)
401789 Points +5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
383511 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
383511 Points 0%

Legend

 
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mediatek Helio G99, ARM Mali-G57 MP2, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
 
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Nokia T10 UNISOC T606, ARM Mali-G57 MP1, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022 MediaTek MT8169A, ARM Mali-G52 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 UNISOC T618, ARM Mali-G52 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash

In 3DMark graphics tests, the performance differentials become even more obvious between the Mali-G57 MP2 in the Tab A9 and the GPUs in other competing tablets. There is sometimes a gap of more than 60% between the Samsung tablet and a Nokia T10 in the GFXBench measurements. Especially regarding on-screen scores, the Galaxy Tab had a great showing thanks to the low resolution.

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
345 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
179 Points -48%
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
110 Points -68%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
330 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
184 Points -44%
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
114 Points -65%
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1225 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
708 Points -42%
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
411 Points -66%
3DMark / Wild Life Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1256 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
712 Points -43%
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
412 Points -67%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
Points -100%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2543 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1463 Points -42%
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
976 Points -62%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
883 Points -65%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3908 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1284 Points -67%
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
826 Points -79%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
784 Points -80%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3102 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2865 Points -8%
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2676 Points -14%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1863 Points -40%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
59 fps
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
41 fps -31%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
39 fps -34%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
21 fps -64%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
63 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
41 fps -35%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
29 fps -54%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
15 fps -76%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
58 fps
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
29 fps -50%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
25 fps -57%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
13 fps -78%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
40 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
26 fps -35%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
16 fps -60%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
7.3 fps -82%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
50 fps
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
21 fps -58%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
15 fps -70%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
10 fps -80%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
25 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
15 fps -40%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
9.8 fps -61%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
5 fps -80%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
27 fps
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
11 fps -59%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
9.2 fps -66%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
4.1 fps -85%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
15 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
9.7 fps -35%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
3.8 fps -75%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2.2 fps -85%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
18 fps
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
7.1 fps -61%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
6.6 fps -63%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
6 fps -67%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
3.1 fps -83%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5.6 fps
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
4.1 fps -27%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
3.6 fps -36%
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2 fps -64%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
0.9 fps -84%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
26 fps
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
12 fps -54%
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
11 fps -58%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
9.9 fps -62%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
5 fps -81%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
14 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
10 fps -29%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, MT8169A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
7.7 fps -45%
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
5.5 fps -61%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2.5 fps -82%
GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2.4 fps
Nokia T10
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash
0.84 fps -65%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
0.4 fps -83%

The Tab A9 delivers solid browser speeds, but system hang-ups can creep in frequently during day-to-day use. Moreover, complex page contents may take a long time to load. The Samsung device once again came out top in our comparison during the browser benchmarks. 

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Tablet (19.9 - 236, n=56, last 2 years)
85.8 Points +20%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 (Chrome 212)
71.728 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (46.9 - 71.7, n=5)
58 Points -19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 (Chrome 94.0.4606.85)
43.98 Points -39%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022 (Silk Browser 106)
23.534 Points -67%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) (Chrome 112)
20.317 Points -72%
WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Average of class Tablet (21 - 227, n=53, last 2 years)
84.6 Points +4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 (Chrome 212)
81 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (39 - 81, n=5)
58.2 Points -28%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022 (Silk Browser 106)
25 Points -69%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) (Chrome 112)
24 Points -70%
WebXPRT 3 - Overall
Average of class Tablet (34 - 342, n=41, last 2 years)
121.7 Points +9%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 (Chrome 212)
112 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (80 - 112, n=5)
91.2 Points -19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 (Chrome 94.0.4606.85)
75 Points -33%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) (Chrome 112)
39 Points -65%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022 (Silk Browser 106)
34 Points -70%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Tablet (14.7 - 376, n=49, last 2 years)
79.3 runs/min +30%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 (Chrome 212)
61.2 runs/min
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (24.1 - 61.2, n=5)
39 runs/min -36%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 (Chrome 94.0.4606.85)
33.35 runs/min -46%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022 (Silk Browser 106)
15.76 runs/min -74%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) (Chome 112)
14.71 runs/min -76%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Tablet (2672 - 74614, n=68, last 2 years)
23080 Points +4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 (Chrome 212)
22187 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (17228 - 25005, n=10)
19884 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 (Chrome 94.0.4606.85)
10787 Points -51%
Nokia T10 (Chrome 109)
9871 Points -56%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022 (Silk Browser 106)
5843 Points -74%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) (Chrome 112)
5041 Points -77%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022 (Silk Browser 106)
9435.4 ms * -391%
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) (Chrome 112)
9310.1 ms * -384%
Average of class Tablet (451 - 34733, n=56, last 2 years)
3176 ms * -65%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 (Chrome 94.0.4606.85)
3060 ms * -59%
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (1922 - 2444, n=5)
2215 ms * -15%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 (Chrome 212)
1922.1 ms *

* ... smaller is better

The Tab A9’s internal storage is really fast for a tablet in this price bracket. Though Samsung hasn’t provided the exact specifications, based on AndroBench scores, it likely uses the UFS 2.2 standard. The eMMC flash in the competitors is the slowest storage technology currently used in smartphones and tablets.

Samsung Galaxy Tab A9Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)Nokia T10Amazon Fire HD 8 2022Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022Average 64 GB UFS 2.2 FlashAverage of class Tablet
AndroBench 3-5
-67%
-57%
-76%
-66%
1%
7%
Sequential Read 256KB
916.45
269.6
-71%
273.5
-70%
270.37
-70%
255.1
-72%
758 ?(485 - 940, n=17)
-17%
836 ?(163 - 3414, n=63, last 2 years)
-9%
Sequential Write 256KB
398.32
190.5
-52%
191.5
-52%
113.44
-72%
101.1
-75%
400 ?(120.6 - 519, n=17)
0%
530 ?(78.2 - 2528, n=63, last 2 years)
33%
Random Read 4KB
182.74
67
-63%
71.4
-61%
39.46
-78%
68.3
-63%
154.9 ?(88.5 - 220, n=17)
-15%
164.2 ?(18.4 - 451, n=63, last 2 years)
-10%
Random Write 4KB
128.92
23.9
-81%
71.5
-45%
19.81
-85%
57.5
-55%
176.3 ?(95.4 - 216, n=17)
37%
148.8 ?(8.23 - 503, n=63, last 2 years)
15%

Gaming - Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 can do 60 fps

To be able to better evaluate the graphics performance of the Mali-G57 MP2 in everyday use, we took a closer look at two games from the PlayStore with the help of the GameBench app. Really demanding games, such as Genshin Impact, can’t run smoothly on the Galaxy Tab A9. We measured an average frame rate of 37 fps at low graphics settings, though with severe frame drops. Once the settings are bumped up, we got an average of 22 fps with lots of visual artefacts.

Things look a little different with lighter gaming. The Tab A9 delivered 30 fps in PUBG Mobile at HD settings, but the highest graphics settings (UHD) can’t be selected on the entry-level device. The same is true for the optional 90 fps mode. Nevertheless, 40 fps is possible on the A9 at the lowest settings.

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Genshin Impact
Genshin Impact
051015202530354045505560Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9; Genshin Impact; lowest 120 fps: Ø36.9 (18-61)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9; Genshin Impact; highest 120 fps: Ø21.6 (1-50)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9; PUBG Mobile; Smooth: Ø39.8 (34-41)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9; PUBG Mobile; HD: Ø29.9 (20-31)

Emissions - Hardly any throttling

Temperature

The Galaxy Tab A9’s chassis hardly gets warm in everyday use. Even under heavy load, such as during Burnout Benchmark, our measurements yielded an average temperature of just 33°C (91.4°F). We used 3Dmark’s battery test to assess the cooling performance of the tablet’s internals. The Wild Life Stress Test ran effortlessly with a stability of over 98%. Consequently, we weren’t able bring the Tab A9 to any significant throttling even under sustained load.

Max. Load
 34.5 °C
94 F
32.1 °C
90 F
32.8 °C
91 F
 
 36.1 °C
97 F
34.3 °C
94 F
31.3 °C
88 F
 
 35 °C
95 F
32.5 °C
91 F
31.1 °C
88 F
 
Maximum: 36.1 °C = 97 F
Average: 33.3 °C = 92 F
32.2 °C
90 F
34.2 °C
94 F
32.7 °C
91 F
32.3 °C
90 F
33.3 °C
92 F
35.5 °C
96 F
31.6 °C
89 F
33.2 °C
92 F
34.3 °C
94 F
Maximum: 35.5 °C = 96 F
Average: 33.3 °C = 92 F
Room Temperature 20.3 °C = 69 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.3 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 30 °C / 86 F for the devices in the class Tablet.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.1 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F, ranging from 20.7 to 53.2 °C for the class Tablet.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 35.5 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 33.3 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

01234567Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø7.53 (7.52-7.56)
Nokia T10 Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 32 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø2.49 (2.46-2.54)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø4.26 (4.25-4.27)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø2.07 (2.05-2.09)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.7.2: Ø1.096 (1.091-1.101)
3DMark
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
99.2 (1.091min - 1.101max) % +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
98.1 (2.05min - 2.09max) %
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
99.6 (4.25min - 4.27max) % 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
99.5 (7.52min - 7.56max) %
Nokia T10
96.8 (2.46min - 2.54max) % -3%

Legend

 
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mediatek Helio G99, ARM Mali-G57 MP2, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
 
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Nokia T10 UNISOC T606, ARM Mali-G57 MP1, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022 MediaTek MT8169A, ARM Mali-G52 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 UNISOC T618, ARM Mali-G52 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Speakers

The Galaxy Tab A9 is equipped with two speakers rated at one watt each. The Dolby Atmos-certified system delivers passable stereo audio and also gets sufficiently loud at 86 dB. Highs are fairly linear on the Samsung tablet, but playing back pink noise revealed a sharply ascending trend in the mids. Bass is non-existent in the sound profile.

You will get better playback quality by using the 3.5 mm audio jack or Bluetooth to connect to wireless speakers or headphones. Based on our measurement, the noise level from the audio output isn’t perfect, but is highly satisfactory with an SNR of 78.5 dBFS – especially considering the price. In terms of Bluetooth codecs, the Galaxy tablet only supports SBC, AAC, aptX, aptX HD and LDAC. This means, besides the obligatory SBC support, you should be able to find an appropriate codec for most headphones. Even so, the device doesn’t really offer a wide range of codecs.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2028.637.42525.930.63123.431.94027.328.75036.236.16325.421.58016.622.510016.925.512514.724.516013.140.320015.141.925014.350.331511.652.14001055.85009.162.263011.164.18009.168100011.871.112501575.2160011.378.420001276.1250012.376.7315012.776.3400012.675.7500013.176.2630013.473.5800013.565.61000013.565.71250013.6581600013.641.1SPL24.786.6N0.663.3median 13.1median 65.6Delta1.313.235.228.921.72018.622.421.720.43233.625.724.527.419.624.318.316.326.518.944.817.547.812.352.715.758.911.660.311.869.712.472.111.671.412.577.213.176.712.576.213.172.212.870.312.868.512.976.313.379.413.480.313.774.613.768.814.463.613.751.725.287.40.771.6median 13.1median 70.31.511.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy Tab A9Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.9% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 69% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 70% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 50% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 45% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Power management - Galaxy Tab A9 gets little wrong

Power consumption

The Galaxy Tab 9 boasts a 5,100 mAh battery that can charge at up to 15 watts via the USB-C interface. We were able to fully recharge the tablet using a power bank (PD 3.0, max. 100 watts) in roughly 2.5 hours.

The tablet's power usage is varied at idle, ranging from a very low 0.7 watts to a rather notable 3 watts. Under load, the Tab A9 consumes more power than a Lenovo Tab M8. That said, it’s not fully possible to draw a direct comparison with slightly older reviews because we recently switch to another benchmark tool (Burnout Benchmark) for our load tests.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.02 / 0.08 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.7 / 2.94 / 3.03 Watt
Load midlight 7.49 / 8.02 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
5100 mAh
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
5100 mAh
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
4850 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
7040 mAh
Power Consumption
5%
28%
-38%
Idle Minimum *
0.7
1.7
-143%
1.2
-71%
1.19
-70%
Idle Average *
2.94
1.9
35%
1.4
52%
4.63
-57%
Idle Maximum *
3.03
2.4
21%
1.7
44%
4.68
-54%
Load Average *
7.49
3
60%
2.5
67%
7.27
3%
Load Maximum *
8.02
3.9
51%
4.3
46%
9.17
-14%

* ... smaller is better

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

00.20.50.711.21.51.722.22.52.733.23.53.744.24.54.7Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mediatek Helio G99: Ø3.04 (1.429-4.98)
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761: Ø3.55 (2.98-3.72)

Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

00.20.40.60.70.91.11.31.51.71.822.22.42.62.82.93.13.33.5Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mediatek Helio G99; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø2.88 (2.65-3.09)
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø3.33 (3.09-3.68)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 Mediatek Helio G99; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.459 (1.412-1.55)
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4) Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø2 (1.949-2.38)

Battery life

In our realistic Wi-Fi web surfing test, the Galaxy Tab A9 gave up only after running continuously for almost 14 hours with display brightness adjusted to 150 cd/m². The Samsung device also had an excellent showing in our video test, lasting over 19 hours.

Even with intensive use, you are easily able to get through an entire day with the Tab A9.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
32h 11min
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 121)
14h 17min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
19h 18min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 34min
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9
5100 mAh
Lenovo Tab M8 (Gen 4)
5100 mAh
Nokia T10
5250 mAh
Amazon Fire HD 8 2022
4850 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
7040 mAh
Battery Runtime
-2%
15%
9%
-16%
Reader / Idle
1931
2223
15%
1973
2%
H.264
1158
998
-14%
824
-29%
WiFi v1.3
857
929
8%
984
15%
935
9%
679
-21%
Load
274
229
-16%
230
-16%

Pros

+ bright display (for the price)
+ accurate location service
+ great fit and finish
+ solid SoC
+ long update support
+ fast storage

Cons

- slow to charge (power adapter not included)
- no fingerprint scanner
- only 60Hz refresh rate
- only one colour profile
- few BT codecs

Verdict on the Samsung Galaxy Tab A9

Review: Samsung Galaxy Tab A9.
Review: Samsung Galaxy Tab A9.

The Galaxy Tab A9 stands out from the entry-level crowd through its lightweight and compact design, meaning there is a very limited pool of alternatives that can compete with the device. The Lenovo Tab M8 is an example of a worthy competitor. However, this entry-level tablet from the Chinese manufacturer still uses a weaker SoC than the Helio G99 in the Galaxy Tab A9.

With the Galaxy Tab 9, Samsung has created a solid overall package in a wieldy form factor.

One major advantage of the Galaxy Tab A9 is the fairly long update support. Samsung promises to provide four years of security updates and (in theory) patches on a quarterly basis. Its affordable price notwithstanding, we would have liked to see more customisation for the display’s colour calibration in the One UI – much like what you get in mid-range Samsung offerings. In addition, the max refresh rate of 60Hz and the lack of a fingerprint sensor also negatively impact everyday use.

Unfortunately, the Tab A9 also doesn’t support the Samsung’s own S Pen. As a result, it is less suitable for users looking to get a compact tablet for writing memos and taking notes. Those who are going to miss having stylus functionality on the Samsung tablet can look at the Lenovo Tab M10 Plus for a possible alternative in the entry-level segment, though this comes at the cost of a compact design.

Price and availability

The Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 is available with a starting RRP of €179 (US$159). You may even be able to get it for less from online retailers like Amazon.

Samsung Galaxy Tab A9 - 02/08/2024 v7
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
83 / 98 → 84%
Keyboard
69%
Pointing Device
90 / 40-88 → 100%
Connectivity
40%
Weight
86%
Battery
91 / 92 → 99%
Display
82%
Games Performance
27%
Application Performance
73 / 91 → 80%
Temperature
92%
Noise
100%
Audio
71%
Camera
41%
Average
73%
84%