Samsung Galaxy S8 review: Essence distilled

Synthetic benchmarks

Samsung really pulled out all the stops in the S8 and S8+ specs department. Nothing but the best, which in this case is the current pair of flagship offers from both Qualcomm and Samsung's own silicon divisions. Of course, we are talking about the Snapdragon 835 and the Exynos 8895 - both built on a cutting-edge 10nm manufacturing process.

In fact, word on the street is that the Korean giant might have been so enveloped in its quest for ultimate mobile performance that it actually hoarded all the initial Snapdragon 835 stock. This, allegedly, caused LG to resort to a Snapdragon 821 for the G6 and might have also forced Xiaomi to postpone the Mi 6. But at this point these are just speculations, of course.

Samsung claims there is virtually no performance variance between the pair. Both chips have a total of eight cores - a pretty standard setup. Qualcomm has its custom Kryo 280 cores working at 2.35 GHz. These do have a bit more wiggle room in terms of maximum frequency (2.45 GHz, as rated by Qualcomm), but this is what Samsung decided to go for. As for the Exynos 8895, it has four of redesigned M1 "Mongoose" V2 custom cores, clocked at 2.3 GHz and a less power-intensive cluster of four Cortex-A53 units, at 1.7 GHz.

There are some differences in the graphics department as well: an Adreno 540 on the Snapdragon 835 and a Mali-G71 MP20 on the Exynos 8895.

We've tested both the Exynos and the Snapdragon version of the S8+, and we'll now compare to the Exynos-powered S8, 4GB of RAM each.

So, let's dive in and kick things off with GeekBench 4, where the Galaxy S8 appears to be tuned slightly differently. While it matches the Exynos S8+ in single core tests, it's a notch slower in multi-core, though still ahead of the Snapdragon S8+. The Kirin 960 in the Huawei P10 is almost a perfect match in single-core, but can't keep up with all cores running. The iPhone 7 is still in a league of its own in terms of single-core output, but it holds them back in multi-core.

GeekBench 4 (multi-core)

Higher is better

• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  6338
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  6175
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  6106
• Huawei P10
  6069
• Apple iPhone 7
  5654
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  5645
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  5245
• OnePlus 3T
  4364
• Google Pixel XL
  4152
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  4139
• Sony Xperia XZs
  3979
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  3754
• LG G6 (US)
  3648
• HTC 10
  3621

GeekBench 4 (single-core)

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7
  3488
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  1945
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  1938
• Huawei P10
  1927
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  1915
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  1911
• OnePlus 3T
  1890
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  1854
• LG G6 (US)
  1792
• Sony Xperia XZs
  1724
• HTC 10
  1708
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  1535
• Google Pixel XL
  1507
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  1332

Anticipating some possible confusion with Galaxy S8 results from various sources over the next few days, we would like to offer some insight on the current GeekBench situation. At the end of last month, the popular benchmark suite was updated to version 4.1. It changed quite a few things and as per the developer's own accounts, users can expect increases of up to 2% in single-core and 5% in multi-core scores. That means that results between GeekBench 4.0 and 4.1 are no longer directly comparable. We have decided to do the fair thing and publish the older and comparable GeekBench 4.0 scores instead.

Moving on to some compound benchmarks, Basemark OS II 2.0 puts the S8s at the top of the chart - well, in the Android world at least, as the iPhone 7 is still a few points ahead.

Basemark OS 2.0

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7
  3416
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  3406
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  3376
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  3298
• Huawei P10
  2910
• OnePlus 3T
  2678
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  2670
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  2461
• Sony Xperia XZs
  2386
• Google Pixel XL
  2281
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  2128
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  1880
• HTC 10
  1839

It's pretty much the same story in Antutu 6, where the iPhone 7 snatches the victory by a tight margin. The S8 posts virtually identical numbers to the S8+, both in Exynos trim, while the Snapdraggon S8+ is a tiny bit behind.

AnTuTu 6

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7
  174532
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  174435
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  174070
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  168133
• OnePlus 3T
  165097
• HTC 10
  154031
• LG G6 (US)
  141895
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  141193
• Google Pixel XL
  141186
• Sony Xperia XZs
  133574
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  132084
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  129629
• Huawei P10
  126629
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  81615

Things aren't quite so clear-cut on the graphics side of things. The Mali-G71 MP20 is a true mobile graphics powerhouse, no question about it. It brings about the sort of power that will probably make console-grade gaming experiences possible on mobile down the line.

There are a few things to consider when analyzing the Mali-G71 MP20, as implemented inside the S8 and S8+. The main one, of course, being resolution. The new ultra-wide aspect ratio means about 576,000 extra pixels on top of QHD the GPU has to render on.

There is also the matter of proper support from game developers. Currently, Samsung is forced to play the middle-man between game engines and its new screen aspect ratio, offering both straight-forward support for the resolution, as well as resizing, fitting and cropping assistance. The latter is an imperfect solution and can sometimes lead to graphical errors and glitches - yet another batch of hurdles that early-adopters will have to endure.

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7
  61
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  57
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  50
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  50
• OnePlus 3T
  49
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  49
• Google Pixel XL
  47
• HTC 10
  47
• Sony Xperia XZs
  42
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  38
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  38
• Huawei P10
  29
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  21

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7
  60
• OnePlus 3T
  48
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  48
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  40
• Sony Xperia XZs
  40
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  36
• Huawei P10
  35
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  34
• Google Pixel XL
  30
• HTC 10
  28
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  27
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  27
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  15

However, it's not all that bad. Even today, many titles already support the wider aspect natively. Others scale and crop without any issue. We are happy to report that we couldn't really induce a crash in any game we tried but on the other hand we didn't try that many. The worst problems we managed to end up with are slightly cropped out controls around the very edges of the game interface and a few extra screen flashes while loading. All were pretty isolated and we can only expect improvements going forward.

As for actual on-screen performance, it quite understandably suffers a hit due to the lavish new resolution. Again, we will remind you that these are synthetic tests and any self-respecting game nowadays has the ability to scale back in quality or detail gracefully to ensure proper performance.

GFX 3.1 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7
  43
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  42
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  39
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  36
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  33
• OnePlus 3T
  33
• Google Pixel XL
  32
• Sony Xperia XZs
  32
• HTC 10
  31
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  29
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  28
• LG G6 (US)
  25
• Huawei P10
  22
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  15

GFX 3.1 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7
  60
• Sony Xperia XZs
  34
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  34
• OnePlus 3T
  33
• Huawei P10
  30
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  23
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  23
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  18
• Google Pixel XL
  17
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  15
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  15
• HTC 10
  15
• LG G6 (US)
  11
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  6.7

The Galaxy S8 is a truly amazing gaming device and a pretty future-proof one as well. These Open GL ES 3.1 scores definitely speak for themselves.

GFX 3.1 Car scene (offscreen)

Higher is better

• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  25
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  25
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  23
• Sony Xperia XZs
  20
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  20
• OnePlus 3T
  20
• Google Pixel XL
  19
• HTC 10
  18
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  16
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  15
• LG G6 (US)
  15
• Huawei P10
  14

GFX 3.1 Car scene (onscreen)

Higher is better

• Sony Xperia XZs
  21
• OnePlus 3T
  20
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  20
• Huawei P10
  16
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  13
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  13
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  12
• Google Pixel XL
  11
• HTC 10
  9.9
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  8.3
• LG G6 (US)
  8.1
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  7.9

Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal

Higher is better

• Apple iPhone 7
  1547
• Samsung Galaxy S8
  1189
• Samsung Galaxy S8+
  1111
• Samsung Galaxy S8+ (SD 835)
  817
• Samsung Galaxy S7
  732
• Huawei P10
  716
• Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (E8890, Nougat)
  680
• LG G6 (US)
  647
• OnePlus 3T
  641
• Google Pixel XL
  626
• Google Pixel (5.0)
  626
• Sony Xperia XZs
  623
• Samsung Galaxy Note5
  316

Much like the Galaxy S8+, the small S8 is hard to fault for performance in any area - it sets the standard, really. The few minor differences we observed, compared to the S8+, can very well be attributed to the margin of error between units and test runs.