Samsung Galaxy J7 (2016) review: Jump start

Synthetic benchmarks

As we mentioned in the introduction, the Galaxy J7 (2016) comes in two variants - one powered by an Exynos 7870 chipset and the other having a Snapdragon 617 do the math. They both sport eight Cortex-A53 cores running at 1.6GHz, but while the Exynos has them all running at 1.6GHz, the Snapdragon has one cluster of 4 running at that frequency and another one ticking at 1GHz. The GPU is either an Adreno 405 for the Snapdragon variant or a Mali-T830 MP2 for the Exynos one. RAM for both is 2GB.

We have in our possession the Exynos 7870 version made on the 14nm FinFET manufacturing process. This translates in huge power saving compared to the alternative built on the 28nm process.

Let's start things off with GeekBench, which is great at giving us a reliable reading of raw CPU performance. In the multi-core component, the Galaxy J7 (2016) trumps the competition by a considerable margin. However, when it comes to single-core performance, the 1.6GHz Cortex-A53 cores understandably rank lower.

GeekBench 3 (multi-core)

Higher is better

• Samsung Galaxy J7 (2016)
  4140
• Vivo V3Max
  3978
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  3570
• Oppo F1 Plus
  3242
• HTC One A9
  3209
• Moto G Plus
  3093
• Lenovo Vibe K4 Note
  2745
• OnePlus X
  2297

GeekBench 3 (single-core)

Higher is better

• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  1573
• Vivo V3Max
  1238
• Oppo F1 Plus
  857
• Samsung Galaxy J7 (2016)
  745
• Moto G Plus
  724
• Lenovo Vibe K4 Note
  628

AnTuTu 6 is a compound benchmark and the Galaxy J7 (2016) ranks in the middle by being let down by the low CPU clock and underpowered GPU. In comparison, the Snapdragon 652 and even the older Snapdragon 617 score better here.

AnTuTu 6

Higher is better

• Vivo V3Max
  76170
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  75051
• HTC One A9
  60324
• Oppo F1 Plus
  51299
• Samsung Galaxy J7 (2016)
  49094
• Moto G Plus
  45690
• Lenovo Vibe K4 Note
  38359

Moving on to the GPU benchmarks, the Mali T830-MP2 isn't much of a powerhouse either. It managed 9.5 fps on the GFX 3.0 Manhattan onscreen test helped by its 720p resolution and just 4.9 fps on the 1080p offscreen.

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  14
• Vivo V3Max
  14
• OnePlus X
  9.9
• Oppo F1 Plus
  7
• Moto G Plus
  6.6
• HTC One A9
  6.4
• Samsung Galaxy J7 (2016)
  4.9
• Lenovo Vibe K4 Note
  4.2

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  14
• Vivo V3Max
  14
• OnePlus X
  10
• Samsung Galaxy J7 (2016)
  9.5
• Moto G Plus
  7
• Oppo F1 Plus
  7
• HTC One A9
  6.7
• Lenovo Vibe K4 Note
  4.2

Basemark X

Higher is better

• Vivo V3Max
  15430
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  14732
• OnePlus X
  10572
• Moto G Plus
  6769
• HTC One A9
  6617
• Oppo F1 Plus
  6204
• Samsung Galaxy J7 (2016)
  5383
• Lenovo Vibe K4 Note
  4072

In the other GPU-intensive test Basemark X, the Galaxy J7 (2016) is out trumped by the One F1 Plus, which packs an updated Mali-T860MP2 and only manages to beat the Lenovo Vibe K4 Note, which has the older generation Mali GPU.

Basemark X (medium)

Higher is better

• Vivo V3Max
  26128
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  23376
• Oppo F1 Plus
  14843
• HTC One A9
  12250
• Samsung Galaxy J7 (2016)
  11199
• Lenovo Vibe K4 Note
  8403

Basemark OS II

Higher is better

• Vivo V3Max
  1465
• OnePlus X
  1290
• Oppo F1 Plus
  1114
• HTC One A9
  1072
• Samsung Galaxy J7 (2016)
  999

Basemark OS 2.0

Higher is better

• Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (S650)
  1537
• OnePlus X
  1213
• Oppo F1 Plus
  1092
• Samsung Galaxy J7 (2016)
  1007
• HTC One A9
  944
• Lenovo Vibe K4 Note
  729

In spite of the unimpressive chipset, the Galaxy J7 (2016) was a smooth experience when it comes to opening and multitasking applications. If you don't play graphic-intensive games, the phone packs more than enough horsepower to offer you adequate performance in everyday tasks.