Samsung could have saved itself this smartphone - Samsung Galaxy S26+ review

Name: Samsung Galaxy S26+
Brand: Samsung

Unintentionally good.

The fact that a Galaxy S26 Plus was not actually planned for the 2026 lineup is evident in many aspects of the Samsung phone. Is the affordable flagship phone still a good choice in the upper class, thanks to the new Exynos 2600? We answer this question in our test report.
Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, ✓ Anton Avdyushkin (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy) Published 04/13/2026 🇩🇪
5G Smartphone Wi-Fi 7 Touchscreen

Verdict on the Samsung Galaxy S26+

In many ways, the Galaxy S26+ shows that it was only launched late in development as a replacement for the Galaxy S26 Edge, which was canceled at the last minute. It is therefore not surprising that upgrades to the Galaxy S25+ are very limited. Improvements to the Galaxy S26+ are few and far between and can only be seen in the chipset, as software advantages will be offset by future updates to the predecessor.

Test device courtesy of Samsung Germany

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

For the 2026 version, we would have liked to see at least one feature from the Ultra models to give it more of a reason to exist. Be it the frosted Gorilla Amour glass of the last generation or a stylus input for the large OLED screen.

What remains is a really good smartphone, but in some areas, such as battery or the cameras, it no longer looks quite up to date for the price range. The competition from China, such as the Vivo X300 Pro or Oppo Find X9 Pro, clearly has the edge here.

Pros

+ high-quality case

+ long updates

+ transparency in environmental data

+ high performance

+ bright 1440p panel

+ good sound

Cons

- SoC throttles under load

- camera is not state-of-the-art

- PWM dimming only with 480 Hz

- smaller battery

- UFS 4.0 only

Price and availability of the Samsung Galaxy S26 Plus

The Galaxy S26+ can be purchased from the Samsung Online Store and online retailers, including Amazon.de, for an RRP starting at €1,249.

$999.99
Samsung Galaxy S26+, Unlocked Android Smartphone, 256GB, Powerful Processor, Galaxy AI, Immersive Viewing, Durable Battery, 2026, US 1 Year Warranty, Black
$1,124.99
Samsung Galaxy S26+, Unlocked Android Smartphone, 512GB, Powerful Processor, Galaxy AI, Immersive Viewing, Durable Battery, 2026, US 1 Year Warranty, Black
$759.99
Samsung Galaxy S26, Unlocked Android Smartphone, 256GB, Powerful Processor, Galaxy AI, Immersive Viewing, Durable Battery, 2026, US 1 Year Warranty, Black

Verdict on the Samsung Galaxy S26+
Specifications of the Samsung Galaxy S26+
Case - Waterproof Samsung phone with IP rating
Features - Android phone with USB 3.2
Software - Long updates for the Galaxy cell phone
Communication and GNSS - Android phone with 5G & WiFi 7
Phone functions and voice quality - Galaxy S26 Plus with eSIM
Camera - No upgrades for the Samsung phone
Accessories and warranty - Android phone without power supply unit
Input devices and operation - Galaxy S26 Plus with ultrasonic sensor
Display - Large OLED screen with PWM dimming, but ...
Performance - New Samsung chipset in the Galaxy phone
Emissions - Samsung phone with hotspot
Battery life - Galaxy S26 Plus still with "mini battery"
Notebookcheck overall rating
Possible alternatives in comparison

The Galaxy S26+ is the affordable flagship phone of the current S series with a large and sharp OLED screen. With the new Exynos 2600, Samsung once again has its own high-end chipset in its portfolio. We will also take a closer look at how Samsung's Exynos 2200 and Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 SoC compare in this test. If you prefer something a little smaller, our Galaxy S26 is available here.

Specifications of the Samsung Galaxy S26+

Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Galaxy S26 Series)

Processor

Samsung Exynos 2600 10c/10t, 1 x 3.8 GHz ARM C1-Ultra, 3 x 3.3 GHz ARM C1-Pro, 6 x 2.8 GHz ARM C1-Pro

Graphics adapter

Samsung Xclipse 960

Memory

12 GB

, LPDDR5x

Display

6.70 inch 19.5:9, 3120 x 1440 pixel 513 PPI, capacitive Touchscreen, LTPO-AMOLED, Gorilla Glass Victus 2, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz

Storage

256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash, 256 GB

, 220 GB free

Connections

1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer, DeX, UWB, Miracast, OTG

Networking

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/ Wi-Fi 6E 6 GHz be = Wi-Fi 7), Bluetooth 6.0, G (850/900/1800/1900), 3G (B1/B2/B4/B5/B8), 4G (B1/B2/B3/B4/B5/B7/B8/B12/B13/B17/B18/B19/B20/B25/B26/B28/B32/B38/B39/B40/B41/B66), 5G (n1/n2/n3/n5/n7/n8/n12/n20/n25/n26/n28/n38/n40/n41/n66/n75/n77/n78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 7.3 x 158.4 x 75.8 ( = 0.29 x 6.24 x 2.98 in)

Battery

4900 mAh Lithium-Ion

Charging

wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge

Operating System

Android 16

Camera

Primary Camera: 50 MPix (f/1.8, 24 mm, 1/1.56", OIS) + 10 MPix (f/2.4, 67 mm, telephoto, 1/3.94", OIS, 3x optical) + 12 MPix (f/2.2, 13 mm, ultrawide, 1/2.55"), camera2API: level 3
Secondary Camera: 12 MPix (f/2.2, 23 mm, PDAF)

Additional features

Speakers: Stereo, USB cable, info material, One UI 8.5, 24 Months Warranty, IP68; HDR: HDR10, HDR10+, HLG; GNSS: GPS (L1, L5), Glonass (L1), BeiDou (B1, B1C, B2a), Galileo (E1, E5a), QZSS (L1, L5); Head SAR 0.775 W/kg, Body SAR 1.221 W/kg; Bluetooth Codecs: AAC, aptX, LDAC, SSC, SBC, fanless, waterproof

Released

02/25/2026

Weight

190 g ( = 6.7 oz / 0.42 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)

Price

1249 Euro

Links

Samsung homepage
Samsung notebook section

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

[+] Add to comparison

» Compare devices

Case - Waterproof Samsung phone with IP rating

Visually, the Galaxy S26+ hardly differs from its predecessor. The dimensions and weight are identical. The build quality is very good.

The IP68-certified body feels high-quality and has very thin edges around the 6.7-inch OLED panel, thanks to the efficient display surface ratio of almost 91%.

Samsung has once again opted for Gorilla Glass Victus 2 as the protective glass instead of a frosted Gorilla Armor used for the Ultra models.

Size comparison

Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra OnePlus 15 Motorola Signature Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Galaxy S25+ DIN A6 ❌

Features - Android phone with USB 3.2

Samsung has equipped its top-of-the-range phone very well. On board are a UWB chip, Samsung DeX, NFC, and a fast USB port (3.2 Gen. 1). The OTG-capable port supports wired image output.

With a Samsung Portable SSD T7, the Galaxy S26+ achieves a high data throughput of 391 MB/s. Connected data carriers can be formatted with exFAT or NTFS (only reading).

Software - Long updates for the Galaxy cell phone

Samsung delivers the Galaxy S26+ with One UI 8.5 based on Android 16 and guarantees software updates for seven years. According to the manufacturer, security patches will be rolled out monthly.

Sustainability

Samsung strives for transparency in its smartphone division and also provides environmentally relevant data, such as the proportion of recycled materials or carbon emissions, for the Galaxy S26+.

Recycled materials are also used for the product packaging. Plastic is not used. In the EPREL database, the Samsung upper class is listed only under the reparability class "C".

Communication and GNSS - Android phone with 5G & WiFi 7

The Galaxy S26+ comes with a wide range of frequencies for all modern mobile communication standards. Fast Wi-Fi 7 is available for WLAN connections, including the 6 GHz band, enabling very high transmission rates at peak times in combination with our Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 reference router.

Networking
Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	887 (min: 479) MBit/s ∼81%
iperf3 receive AXE11000	914 (min: 876) MBit/s ∼60%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1799 (min: 955) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1645 (min: 1513) MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Wi-Fi 7
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	1094 (min: 655) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000	1154 (min: 1048) MBit/s ∼76%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1311 (min: 984) MBit/s ∼73%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1204 (min: 1187) MBit/s ∼73%
OnePlus 15 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	536 (min: 375) MBit/s ∼30%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1401 (min: 1217) MBit/s ∼85%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	989 (min: 488) MBit/s ∼90%
iperf3 receive AXE11000	946 (min: 814) MBit/s ∼63%
Motorola Signature 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	772 (min: 566) MBit/s ∼71%
iperf3 receive AXE11000	1513 (min: 1099) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	897 (min: 688) MBit/s ∼50%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1489 (min: 1425) MBit/s ∼91%
Average 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	956 (min: 595) MBit/s ∼87%
iperf3 receive AXE11000	1053 (min: 459) MBit/s ∼70%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1257 (min: 508) MBit/s ∼70%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1468 (min: 719) MBit/s ∼89%
Average of class Smartphone
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	691 (min: 52.5) MBit/s ∼63%
iperf3 receive AXE11000	734 (min: 52.2) MBit/s ∼49%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1274 (min: 508) MBit/s ∼71%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1394 (min: 451) MBit/s ∼85%

Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1767 (955-1834)

Motorola Signature 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz: Ø897 (688-1087)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1644 (1513-1679)

Motorola Signature 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz: Ø1489 (1425-1525)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø872 (479-913)

Motorola Signature 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 transmit AXE11000: Ø772 (566-870)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø912 (876-933)

Motorola Signature 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 receive AXE11000: Ø1513 (1099-1637)

Dual-band connectivity in global satellite networks is available for positioning with the Galaxy S26+. The Satfix is highly accurate both indoors and outdoors.

We compare the Samsung phone with a Garmin Venu 2 on a bike ride. The deviations from our route are small in the test and, in some cases, better than those of our reference smartwatch.

Phone functions and voice quality - Galaxy S26 Plus with eSIM

The Galaxy S26+ offers dual SIM with two NanoSIM cards as well as dual eSIM or a combination of both worlds. The voice quality of the Samsung phone is very good.

Camera - No upgrades for the Samsung phone

In view of the fact that the Galaxy S25+ already has a similar camera setup to its predecessor, the unchanged triple camera of the Galaxy S26+ is somewhat sobering. Nevertheless, beautiful photos are possible with the Samsung phone in daylight, although the artificial sharpening bothers us. Image details and sharpness are not at their best, especially in low light. However, the Galaxy S26+ has exceptionally well-tuned color reproduction.

At 12 MP and 10 MP, both the ultra-wide angle and the telephoto lens are not particularly high-resolution and do not allow pixel binning, but deliver solid to good results in good lighting conditions. Looking at a Vivo X300 Pro or Oppo Find X9 Pro, the Plus model of the S26 series, with its rather small image sensors, no longer really seems up to date.

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.

Wide-angle Wide-angle Low Light Zoom 5x Ultra wide-angle

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

Accessories and warranty - Android phone without power supply unit

The Galaxy S26+ is only supplied with a USB-C cable and a SIM tool. A suitable power adapter and cases are available for purchase in the Samsung store.

The Warranty in Europe is 24 months and can be extended with the Care+ insurance package. This costs between 139 and 179 euros, depending on the scope of insurance.

Input devices and operation - Galaxy S26 Plus with ultrasonic sensor

The touchscreen responds quickly and precisely to inputs, while pen input, as with the Ultra model, is still not offered. The linear vibration motor provides crisp feedback and can be adjusted to your own needs in the settings.

An ultrasonic fingerprint sensor is installed for biometric security and works reliably and quickly. Alternatively, a rather insecure 2D face recognition can be used via the front camera.

Display - Large OLED screen with PWM dimming, but ...

The 6.7-inch AMOLED display of the Plus model remains unchanged in 2026, but this is not a problem given the appealing starting point. The high resolution (QHD+) enables a razor-sharp display of over 500 ppi, and the refresh rate can be dynamically adjusted between 1 and 120 Hz using LTPO technology.

The brightness offered is very good in both the APL18 measurement and HDR playback, but not at the top level. Unfortunately, the 240-Hz panel still exhibits relatively low flicker, and Samsung has also dispensed with high-frequency PWM dimming. The frequency here is only 480 Hz, while Chinese manufacturers offer almost 4,000 Hz. The Galaxy phone is therefore not ideal for sensitive people with PWM complaints.


1412 cd/m²	1398 cd/m²	1364 cd/m²
1404 cd/m²	1384 cd/m²	1338 cd/m²
1396 cd/m²	1372 cd/m²	1345 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3

Maximum: 1412 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 1379.2 cd/m² Minimum: 0.95 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 1384 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 2.8 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.74}
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 2.2 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø4.99}
99.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.05
CCT: 6514 K

	Samsung Galaxy S26+ LTPO-AMOLED, 3120x1440, 6.7"	Samsung Galaxy S25+ Dynamic AMOLED 2X, 3120x1440, 6.7"	OnePlus 15 AMOLED, 2772x1272, 6.8"	Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra AMOLED, 2608x1200, 6.9"	Motorola Signature AMOLED, 2780x1264, 6.8"
Screen		3%	12%	26%	14%
Brightness middle (cd/m²)	1384	1371 -1%	1114 -20%	1771 28%	1561 13%
Brightness (cd/m²)	1379	1370 -1%	1109 -20%	1773 29%	1547 12%
Brightness Distribution (%)	95	96 1%	97 2%	99 4%	99 4%
Black Level * (cd/m²)
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	2.8	2.7 4%	1.33 52%	1.3 54%	1.46 48%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	4.5	4.2 7%	2.42 46%	2.8 38%	3.63 19%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	2.2	2 9%	1.9 14%	2.1 5%	2.5 -14%
Gamma	2.05 ^107%	2.03 ^108%	2.273 ^97%	2.25 ^98%	2.144 ^103%
CCT	6514 ^100%	6450 ^101%	6708 ^97%	6452 ^101%	6612 ^98%

* ... smaller is better

Display: APL18 Peak Brightness | HDR Peak Brightness

Display / APL18 Peak Brightness
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	3519 cd/m² +28%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	2751 cd/m²
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	2695 cd/m² -2%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2120 cd/m² -23%

Display / HDR Peak Brightness
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	4542 cd/m² +58%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	3458 cd/m² +20%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	2900 cd/m² +1%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	2875 cd/m²

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM detected

240 Hz
Amplitude: 15.27 %
Secondary Frequency: 480 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 240 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 240 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 7914 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

maximum manual display brightness — 100 %

Measurement series with fixed zoom level and different brightness settings (The amplitude curve at minimum brightness looks flat, but this is due to the scaling. The info box shows the enlarged version of the amplitude at minimum brightness)

The same applies to the color display as to the brightness. Samsung's high-end phone performs neither poorly nor particularly well here. We get the best color representation in the "Natural" screen mode, in which deviations remain easily recognizable to the naked eye.

Color display (screen mode: natural, target color space: sRGB)

Color space (screen mode: natural, target color space: sRGB)

Grayscale (screen mode: Natural, target color space: sRGB)

Display Response Times

ℹ

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
1.18 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 0.6195 ms rise
1.18 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 0.561 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 0.1 (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 (20 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
3.79 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 2.137 ms rise
3.79 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 1.648 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 14 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (31.3 ms).

The large OLED panel with stable viewing angles is impressive outdoors. Display content remains clearly visible even in direct sunlight. However, the Ultra models with their anti-reflective coating are visibly easier to read.

Performance - New Samsung chipset in the Galaxy phone

When it comes to the chipset, Samsung falls back into old patterns. While the Galaxy S26 Ultra is also based on the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, the European Plus model comes with the company's own Exynos 2600. The Samsung SoC is manufactured using the 2 nm GaA process and has 10 cores. At its heart is an ARM C1-Ultra with 3.8 GHz.

This means that the Galaxy S26+ performs well behind the single-core representatives; the Exynos 2600 is still fast, although it only has a notable advantage over the Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy of the predecessor in the multi-core tests. The Exynos 2600 performs very well in Geekbench AI.

Geekbench 6.6
Single-Core
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	3676 Points +15%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	3511 Points +9%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	3498 Points +9%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	3209 Points
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	3136 Points -2%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (3060 - 3209, n=2)	3135 Points -2%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	2908 Points -9%
Average of class Smartphone (196 - 3883, n=194, last 2 years)	1803 Points -44%
Multi-Core
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	11034 Points
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	11004 Points 0%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (10388 - 11034, n=2)	10711 Points -3%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	10645 Points -4%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	10378 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	10029 Points -9%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	9678 Points -12%
Average of class Smartphone (830 - 11811, n=194, last 2 years)	5349 Points -52%

PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	24396 Points +28%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	20673 Points +8%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	19802 Points +4%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (19076 - 19914, n=2)	19495 Points +2%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	19076 Points
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	18445 Points -3%
Average of class Smartphone (4507 - 28557, n=159, last 2 years)	15094 Points -21%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	13977 Points -27%

CrossMark - Overall
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	2598 Points +24%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	2309 Points +10%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (2098 - 2257, n=2)	2178 Points +4%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	2098 Points
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	1698 Points -19%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	1289 Points -39%
Average of class Smartphone (376 - 2856, n=105, last 2 years)	1202 Points -43%

BaseMark OS II
Overall
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	14678 Points +29%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	13223 Points +16%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	13002 Points +14%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (11422 - 12515, n=2)	11969 Points +5%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	11422 Points
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	10756 Points -6%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	10533 Points -8%
Average of class Smartphone (1885 - 16690, n=127, last 2 years)	7817 Points -32%
System
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	20996 Points +65%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	19202 Points +51%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	17481 Points +37%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	15554 Points +22%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	15456 Points +21%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (12733 - 14913, n=2)	13823 Points +9%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	12733 Points
Average of class Smartphone (4117 - 21153, n=127, last 2 years)	11525 Points -9%
Memory
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	18501 Points +38%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	16264 Points +22%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	15236 Points +14%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (13372 - 16455, n=2)	14914 Points +12%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	13372 Points
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	10713 Points -20%
Average of class Smartphone (2760 - 24052, n=127, last 2 years)	8914 Points -33%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	8243 Points -38%
Graphics
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	52659 Points +23%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	51530 Points +21%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	48863 Points +14%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	45691 Points +7%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	42732 Points
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (42333 - 42732, n=2)	42533 Points 0%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	37773 Points -12%
Average of class Smartphone (1046 - 384996, n=127, last 2 years)	26937 Points -37%
Web
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	2353 Points +1%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (2321 - 2361, n=2)	2341 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	2321 Points
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	2319 Points 0%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	2221 Points -4%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	2109 Points -9%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	1968 Points -15%
Average of class Smartphone (1062 - 2587, n=127, last 2 years)	1729 Points -26%

UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	23141 Points +5%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	22665 Points +3%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	22592 Points +2%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (22076 - 22393, n=2)	22235 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	22076 Points
Average of class Smartphone (3769 - 81594, n=116, last 2 years)	20239 Points -8%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	19236 Points -13%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	16866 Points -24%

AImark - Score v3.x
Average of class Smartphone (293 - 307528, n=94, last 2 years)	17247 Points +763%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (1998 - 2079, n=2)	2039 Points +2%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	1998 Points
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	1915 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy, Adreno 830, 12288	1891 Points -5%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	Points -100%

Geekbench AI
Single Precision NPU 1.7
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	756 Points
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (753 - 756, n=2)	755 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone (80 - 5210, n=91, last 2 years)	721 Points -5%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	655 Points -13%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	559 Points -26%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	409 Points -46%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	192 Points -75%
Half Precision NPU 1.7
Average of class Smartphone (80 - 36297, n=91, last 2 years)	2945 Points +284%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	767 Points
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (759 - 767, n=2)	763 Points -1%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	561 Points -27%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	502 Points -35%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	410 Points -47%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	176 Points -77%
Quantized NPU 1.7
Average of class Smartphone (133 - 49889, n=91, last 2 years)	4327 Points +167%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (1621 - 1623, n=2)	1622 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	1621 Points
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	1285 Points -21%
OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	1023 Points -37%
Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 16384	895 Points -45%
Oppo Find X9 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 16384	436 Points -73%

The integrated Samsung Xclipse 960 is used for graphics calculations. The Galaxy S26+ achieves extremely high scores in the 3DMark test. The GPU also impresses with top results in the GFXBench.

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	7232 Points
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	7198 Points 0%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6985 Points -3%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6959 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	6885 Points -5%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	5533 Points -23%

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	7206 Points
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	7167 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	7029 Points -2%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	7021 Points -3%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6969 Points -3%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	5613 Points -22%

3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	30621 Points +14%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	26896 Points
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	26616 Points -1%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	25978 Points -3%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	25885 Points -4%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	21167 Points -21%

3DMark / Solar Bay Score
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	14788 Points +7%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	13785 Points
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	13036 Points -5%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	12546 Points -9%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	12400 Points -10%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	9725 Points -29%

3DMark / Solar Bay Unlimited Score
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	14635 Points +7%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	13696 Points
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	12747 Points -7%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	12559 Points -8%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	12242 Points -11%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	9698 Points -29%

3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Unlimited Score
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3212 Points
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	3198 Points 0%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2886 Points -10%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2704 Points -16%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	2525 Points -21%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2032 Points -37%

3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Score
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3265 Points
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	3211 Points -2%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2871 Points -12%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2736 Points -16%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	2698 Points -17%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2078 Points -36%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	954 fps +38%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	762 fps +11%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	697 fps +1%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	689 fps
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	684 fps -1%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	579 fps -16%

GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	606 fps +38%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	458 fps +4%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	450 fps +3%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	439 fps
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	359 fps -18%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	341 fps -22%

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	369 fps +7%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	344 fps
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	343 fps 0%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	340 fps -1%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	283 fps -18%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	283 fps -18%

GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	104 fps -13%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	221 fps
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	205 fps -7%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	199 fps -10%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	198 fps -10%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	178 fps -19%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	167 fps -24%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps +13%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps +13%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	106 fps
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	105 fps -1%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -43%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -43%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	119 fps
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	114 fps -4%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	109 fps -8%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	107 fps -10%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	95 fps -20%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	92 fps -23%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	313 fps
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	296 fps -5%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	287 fps -8%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	286 fps -9%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	240 fps -23%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	233 fps -26%

GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	56 fps
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	52 fps -7%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	50 fps -11%
Oppo Find X9 Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	48 fps -14%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	44 fps -21%
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	42 fps -25%

Jetstream 2 | Speedometer 3 | Octane V2 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1 | WebXPRT 5

Jetstream 2
2.0 Total Score
Samsung Galaxy S25+ (Chrome 133.0.6943.137)	334.386 Points +19%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	281.459 Points
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (273 - 281, n=2)	277 Points -2%
Motorola Signature (Chrome 145)	180.603 Points -36%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143)	165.891 Points -41%
Average of class Smartphone (59.7 - 423, n=125, last 2 years)	156.2 Points -45%
OnePlus 15 (Chrome 142)	146.211 Points -48%
2.2 Total Score
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	354.246 Points
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (n=1)	354 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2 - 480, n=73, last 2 years)	219 Points -38%
Motorola Signature (Chrome 145)	165.391 Points -53%

Speedometer 3 - Score 3.0
Samsung Galaxy S25+ (Chrome 133.0.6943.137)	29 runs/min +7%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (27.1 - 28.3, n=2)	27.7 runs/min +2%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	27.1 runs/min
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143)	25.1 runs/min -7%
OnePlus 15 (Chrome 142)	21.3 runs/min -21%
Motorola Signature (Chrome 145)	19.2 runs/min -29%
Average of class Smartphone (3.06 - 45.5, n=109, last 2 years)	14.9 runs/min -45%

Octane V2 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy S25+ (Chrome 133.0.6943.137)	98817 Points +16%
OnePlus 15 (Chrome 142)	98523 Points +16%
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (85043 - 92374, n=2)	88709 Points +4%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	85043 Points
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143)	58421 Points -31%
Average of class Smartphone (2800 - 126661, n=163, last 2 years)	50223 Points -41%
Motorola Signature (Chrome 145)	39707 Points -53%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Average of class Smartphone (257 - 28190, n=136, last 2 years)	1091 ms * -181%
Motorola Signature (Chrome 145)	816.8 ms * -111%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143)	522.8 ms * -35%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ (Chrome 133.0.6943.137)	388.7 ms * -0%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	387.8 ms *
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (374 - 388, n=2)	381 ms * +2%
OnePlus 15 (Chrome 142)	315.6 ms * +19%

WebXPRT 5 - Overall
Average Samsung Exynos 2600 (91 - 95, n=2)	93 Points +2%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	91 Points
Average of class Smartphone (23 - 95, n=8, last 2 years)	61.5 Points -32%

* ... smaller is better

	Samsung Galaxy S26+	Samsung Galaxy S25+	OnePlus 15	Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra	Motorola Signature	Average 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	Average of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5		50%	54%	115%	130%	55%	24%
Sequential Read 256KB (MB/s)	3574.74	4057.35 14%	3962.2 11%	4064.33 14%	4049.69 13%	3626 ?(1493 - 4384, n=53) 1%	2202 ?(270 - 4370, n=176, last 2 years) -38%
Sequential Write 256KB (MB/s)	2543.31	3311.02 30%	3741.2 47%	3987.65 57%	3774.28 48%	2659 ?(555 - 3484, n=53) 5%	1877 ?(103.2 - 4113, n=176, last 2 years) -26%
Random Read 4KB (MB/s)	419.84	294.51 -30%	352.6 -16%	575.86 37%	613.85 46%	382 ?(218 - 513, n=53) -9%	301 ?(47.6 - 614, n=176, last 2 years) -28%
Random Write 4KB (MB/s)	122.63	351.16 186%	334.4 173%	551.82 350%	628.08 412%	396 ?(50.7 - 989, n=53) 223%	355 ?(9.4 - 1071, n=176, last 2 years) 189%

Emissions - Samsung phone with hotspot

Temperature

Under constant load, we measured surface temperatures of over 47 °C in places. Not low, but also not critically high. The cooling performance is similarly efficient as in the predecessor; in the 3DMark stress tests, we achieved a moderate throttling of up to 40 percent. However, the Galay S26+ can sometimes maintain maximum performance for longer.

Max. Load

Idle


46.3 °C 115 F	44.5 °C 112 F	41.9 °C 107 F
47.5 °C 118 F	43.7 °C 111 F	40.7 °C 105 F
45.9 °C 115 F	45.1 °C 113 F	36.5 °C 98 F

Maximum: 47.5 °C = 118 F
Average: 43.6 °C = 110 F


40.6 °C 105 F	44.8 °C 113 F	46.9 °C 116 F
39.7 °C 103 F	41.7 °C 107 F	46.9 °C 116 F
37 °C 99 F	40.9 °C 106 F	45.6 °C 114 F

Maximum: 46.9 °C = 116 F
Average: 42.7 °C = 109 F

Room Temperature 20.9 °C = 70 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260

(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 43.6 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 32.9 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 47.5 °C / 118 F, compared to the average of 35.2 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 247 °C for the class Smartphone.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 46.9 °C / 116 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.7 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Stress Tests

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	66.6 % +10%
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	61.9 % +2%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	60.7 %
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	53.4 % -12%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	59.6 %
OnePlus 15 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	52 % -13%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	51.3 % -14%
Solar Bay Stress Test Stability
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	65.3 % +8%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	60.6 %
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	58.9 % -3%
Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability
Motorola Signature Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	67.4 % +6%
Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	66.5 % +5%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	63.6 %

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.14.3: Ø29.2 (25.6-42.9)

Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø23.5 (19.9-38.9)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø110.7 (95.2-156.9)

Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø84.2 (71.3-133.4)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø150 (129.5-161.9)

Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø114.4 (89.3-165.7)

Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Solar Bay Unlimited Stress Test Stability; 1.0.11.1: Ø26.8 (23-41.1)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Solar Bay Stress Test Stability; 1.0.17.4: Ø34.5 (28.6-47.1)

Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Solar Bay Stress Test Stability; 1.0.11.1: Ø24.9 (21.4-36.3)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 1.0.6.2: Ø17.3 (15-23.7)

Samsung Galaxy S25+ Adreno 830, SD 8 Elite f. Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 1.1.1.3: Ø12 (10.9-16.3)

Speaker

One of the Plus model's strengths is its good speakers. Our pink noise measurement shows a fairly even frequency response for the mids and highs - only the super tweeters dip a little. A hint of bass is also perceptible.

Alternatively, audio can also be output via the USB-C port, and the Galaxy S26+ is also able to start an Auracast broadcast.

Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 35%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 20% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 76% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%

Samsung Galaxy S25+ audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.3% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.8% 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 11%, average was 35%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 29% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%

Battery life - Galaxy S26 Plus still with "mini battery"

Power consumption

The power consumption is inconspicuous, the Galaxy S26+ consumes a similar amount of power as its predecessor with the Snapdragon chipset.

The 4,900 mAh battery, which can be charged with 45 watts wired and 15 watts wirelessly, is neither particularly large nor can be charged really quickly. When fully discharged, the Samsung phone needs just over an hour with a Xiaomi power bank.

Power Consumption

Off / Standby	0.11 / 0.26 Watt
Idle	0.56 / 1.28 / 1.31 Watt
Load	12.38 / 16.9 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy

	Samsung Galaxy S26+ 4900 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S25+ 4900 mAh	OnePlus 15 7300 mAh	Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra 6500 mAh	Motorola Signature 5200 mAh	Average Samsung Exynos 2600	Average of class Smartphone
Power Consumption		7%	-17%	3%	-16%	9%	-3%
Idle Minimum * (Watt)	0.56	0.45 20%	1.2 -114%	0.87 -55%	0.8 -43%	0.505 ?(0.45 - 0.56, n=2) 10%	0.87 ?(0.4 - 1.65, n=143, last 2 years) -55%
Idle Average * (Watt)	1.28	1.09 15%	1.4 -9%	1.29 -1%	1.3 -2%	1.015 ?(0.75 - 1.28, n=2) 21%	1.453 ?(0.7 - 4.36, n=143, last 2 years) -14%
Idle Maximum * (Watt)	1.31	1.13 14%	1.8 -37%	1.33 -2%	1.7 -30%	1.12 ?(0.93 - 1.31, n=2) 15%	1.641 ?(0.75 - 4.46, n=143, last 2 years) -25%
Load Average * (Watt)	12.38	14.41 -16%	6.7 46%	8.84 29%	11.8 5%	12.4 ?(12.4 - 12.4, n=2) -0%	6.75 ?(2.9 - 14.9, n=113, last 2 years) 45%
Load Maximum * (Watt)	16.9	16.37 3%	12.3 27%	9.15 46%	18.7 -11%	16.8 ?(16.8 - 16.9, n=2) 1%	11.3 ?(4.75 - 22, n=113, last 2 years) 33%

* ... smaller is better

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø8.01 (0.734-16.8)

Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø7.19 (0.617-16.3)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.831 (0.778-1.217)

Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.664 (0.631-0.897)

Power consumption: GFXbench (150 cd/m²)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø13.5 (6.35-16.5)

Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø14.4 (9.58-16.3)

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.831 (0.778-1.217)

Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.664 (0.631-0.897)

Battery life

In our practical battery tests, which are carried out with an adjusted display brightness of 150 cd/m², the phone delivers solid runtimes of almost 18 hours in the WLAN test, but the predecessor with Qualcomm SoC lasts around 2 hours longer.

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 146)		17h 45min

Battery runtime - WiFi v1.3
Samsung Galaxy S26+ 4900 mAh	17.8 h
Samsung Galaxy S25+ 4900 mAh	19.8 h
OnePlus 15 7300 mAh	30.7 h
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra 6500 mAh	21.9 h
Motorola Signature 5200 mAh	19.7 h

Notebookcheck overall rating

The Galaxy S26+ is a very good smartphone, but the name "Galaxy S25+ (2026)" would have been more appropriate .

Back to the verdict

Samsung Galaxy S26+ - 04/10/2026 v8
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis

93%

Keyboard

67 / 75 → 89%

Pointing Device

94%

Connectivity

71 / 69 → 100%

Weight

89%

Battery

91%

Display

91%

Games Performance

44 / 55 → 80%

Application Performance

84 / 85 → 98%

AI Performance

47%

Temperature

84%

Noise

100%

Audio

80 / 90 → 88%

Camera

83%

Average

82%

89%

Smartphone - Weighted Average

CO2 Emissions
91.7%

Materials
75%

Packaging
95%

Power Use
95.4%

Repairability
60%

Software Updates
100%

Total Sustainability Score: 86.2%

Possible alternatives in comparison

Image	Model / Review	Price	Weight	Drive	Display
1. 89%	Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600 ⎘ Samsung Xclipse 960 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 256 GB	List Price: 1249€	190 g	256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	6.70" 3120x1440 513 PPI LTPO-AMOLED
2. 88.4%	Samsung Galaxy S25+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 830 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 256 GB	Amazon: List Price: 1149 Euro	190 g	256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	6.70" 3120x1440 513 PPI Dynamic AMOLED 2X
3. 87.1%	OnePlus 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 840 ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB	Amazon: List Price: 999€	215 g	512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6.78" 2772x1272 450 PPI AMOLED
4. 88.2%	Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 840 ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB	Amazon: List Price: 900€	220 g	512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6.90" 2608x1200 416 PPI AMOLED
5. 87.9%	Motorola Signature Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 829 ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB	List Price: 1000 Euro	186 g	512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6.80" 2780x1264 450 PPI AMOLED

Transparency

The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.

This is how Notebookcheck is testing

Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.

Please share our article, every link counts!