三星 Galaxy S8 智能手机简短评测
» Notebookcheck多媒体笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck游戏笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck低价办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck高端办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck工作站笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck亚笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck超级本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck变形本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck平板电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck智能手机Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck评测过最出色的笔记本电脑屏幕
» Notebookcheck售价500欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck售价300欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
Size Comparison
SD Card Reader | |
maximum SDCardreader Maximum Transfer Rate | |
average SDCardreader Average Transfer Rate |
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Apple iPhone 7 (Klaus I211) | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
Huawei P10 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
LG G6 | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Apple iPhone 7 (Klaus I211) | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
LG G6 | |
Huawei P10 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 |
|
Brightness Distribution: 94 %
Center on Battery: 566 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.7 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 3.1 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99.87% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
81.57% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
Gamma: 2.15
Samsung Galaxy S8 Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 5.8" | Samsung Galaxy S7 SAMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.1" | LG G6 IPS LCD, 2880x1440, 5.7" | Huawei P10 LTPS, 1920x1080, 5.1" | Apple iPhone 7 Plus IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5" | Lenovo Moto Z AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5" | OnePlus 3T Optic-AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | 6% | -27% | -33% | 16% | 2% | -88% | |
Brightness middle | 566 | 350 -38% | 646 14% | 547 -3% | 557 -2% | 485 -14% | 421 -26% |
Brightness | 564 | 351 -38% | 611 8% | 556 -1% | 553 -2% | 490 -13% | 430 -24% |
Brightness Distribution | 94 | 98 4% | 89 -5% | 86 -9% | 97 3% | 92 -2% | 84 -11% |
Black Level * | 0.23 | 0.43 | 0.35 | ||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.7 | 2.04 24% | 4.5 -67% | 4.8 -78% | 1.4 48% | 2.1 22% | 7.1 -163% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 5.4 | 3.25 40% | 8.3 -54% | 8.8 -63% | 3.1 43% | 5.5 -2% | 15.3 -183% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.1 | 1.63 47% | 6 -94% | 4.5 -45% | 1.3 58% | 2.6 16% | 6.8 -119% |
Gamma | 2.15 102% | 2.07 106% | 2.27 97% | 2.39 92% | 2.21 100% | 2.23 99% | 2.23 99% |
CCT | 6335 103% | 6391 102% | 7996 81% | 7194 90% | 6667 97% | 6843 95% | 7866 83% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 81.57 | 86.86 6% | 67.74 -17% | 63.1 -23% | 88.14 8% | ||
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99.87 | 99.35 -1% | 99.05 -1% | 99.83 0% | 100 0% | ||
Contrast | 2809 | 1272 | 1591 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 250 Hz | ||
The display backlight flickers at 250 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 250 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
3.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2 ms rise | |
↘ 1.2 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. » 11 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
5.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2.8 ms rise | |
↘ 2.8 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 (32.8 ms). |
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
HTC U Ultra | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Xiaomi Mi 5s | |
OnePlus 3T | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 |
Geekbench 4.4 | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 |
GFXBench 3.0 | |
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
HTC U Ultra | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Xiaomi Mi 5s | |
OnePlus 3T | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
HTC U Ultra | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Xiaomi Mi 5s | |
OnePlus 3T | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 |
GFXBench 3.1 | |
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
HTC U Ultra | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Xiaomi Mi 5s | |
OnePlus 3T | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
HTC U Ultra | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Xiaomi Mi 5s | |
OnePlus 3T | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 |
PCMark for Android | |
Work performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
HTC U Ultra | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Xiaomi Mi 5s | |
OnePlus 3T | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
HTC U Ultra | |
Sony Xperia XZ |
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 |
Lightmark - 1920x1080 1080p (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
OnePlus 3T | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 |
Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
HTC U Ultra | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Xiaomi Mi 5s | |
OnePlus 3T | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
HTC U Ultra | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Xiaomi Mi 5s | |
OnePlus 3T | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
Huawei P10 | |
LG G6 | |
Apple iPhone 7 | |
HTC U Ultra | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Xiaomi Mi 5s | |
OnePlus 3T | |
Google Pixel XL 2016 |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy S8 | Samsung Galaxy S7 | Huawei P10 | LG G6 | HTC U Ultra | Sony Xperia XZ | Lenovo Moto Z | OnePlus 3T | Xiaomi Mi 5s | Google Pixel XL 2016 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | -13% | 145% | -13% | -8% | -44% | 56% | 82% | -23% | -40% | |
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 53.5 | 53.6 0% | 32.19 -40% | 53.3 0% | 67.6 26% | 29.8 -44% | 45.64 -15% | |||
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 63.9 | 72.3 13% | 54.2 -15% | 77.6 21% | 82.8 30% | 33.5 -48% | 78.5 23% | |||
Random Write 4KB | 15.25 | 16.01 5% | 152.3 899% | 16.58 9% | 13.7 -10% | 10.5 -31% | 74.9 391% | 74.4 388% | 15.08 -1% | 14.56 -5% |
Random Read 4KB | 127.2 | 85.9 -32% | 168.4 32% | 95.2 -25% | 84.2 -34% | 71.5 -44% | 117.2 -8% | 123.6 -3% | 100.3 -21% | 87.7 -31% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 193.2 | 145.7 -25% | 189.8 -2% | 122.8 -36% | 164.7 -15% | 138 -29% | 168.3 -13% | 165.3 -14% | 153.5 -21% | 83.4 -57% |
Sequential Read 256KB | 793 | 483.8 -39% | 738 -7% | 428.7 -46% | 423.9 -47% | 281 -65% | 439.7 -45% | 436.4 -45% | 412.7 -48% | 258.2 -67% |
Asphalt 8: Airborne | |||
Settings | Value | ||
high | 29 fps | ||
very low | 30 fps |
Temple Run 2 | |||
Settings | Value | ||
default | 60 fps |
Temple Run 2 | |||
Settings | Value | ||
default | 60 fps |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.7 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 37.5 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy S8 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
LG G6 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 48% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 66% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 28% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Huawei P10 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 49% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 68% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 26% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Off / Standby | 0.02 / 0.14 Watt |
Idle | 0.78 / 1.1 / 1.16 Watt |
Load |
4.15 / 5.12 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Samsung Galaxy S8 3000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S7 3000 mAh | LG G6 3300 mAh | Huawei P10 3200 mAh | Apple iPhone 7 1960 mAh | OnePlus 3T 3400 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 5s 3200 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -6% | -35% | -65% | -5% | -54% | -36% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.78 | 0.68 13% | 0.62 21% | 0.83 -6% | 0.54 31% | 0.61 22% | 0.4 49% |
Idle Average * | 1.1 | 1.02 7% | 1.43 -30% | 2.1 -91% | 1.51 -37% | 1.77 -61% | 1.7 -55% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.16 | 1.14 2% | 1.48 -28% | 2.18 -88% | 1.54 -33% | 1.81 -56% | 1.81 -56% |
Load Average * | 4.15 | 4.73 -14% | 5.52 -33% | 6.57 -58% | 3.75 10% | 6.67 -61% | 5.84 -41% |
Load Maximum * | 5.12 | 7.16 -40% | 10.47 -104% | 9.32 -82% | 5.01 2% | 10.98 -114% | 9.12 -78% |
* ... smaller is better
PCMark for Android - Work 2.0 battery life | |
Huawei Mate 9 | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
Sony Xperia XZ | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
HTC 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy S7 |
Samsung Galaxy S8 3000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S7 3000 mAh | Apple iPhone 7 Plus 2915 mAh | LG G6 3300 mAh | Huawei P10 3200 mAh | Lenovo Moto Z 2600 mAh | HTC U Ultra 3000 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -5% | -5% | -0% | -8% | -12% | -18% | |
Reader / Idle | 1667 | 1810 9% | 1835 10% | 1789 7% | 1540 -8% | 1371 -18% | 1568 -6% |
H.264 | 771 | 892 16% | 813 5% | 779 1% | 582 -25% | 724 -6% | 605 -22% |
WiFi v1.3 | 719 | 456 -37% | 587 -18% | 692 -4% | 966 34% | 407 -43% | 546 -24% |
Load | 264 | 242 -8% | 225 -15% | 252 -5% | 176 -33% | 320 21% | 214 -19% |
Pros
Cons
凭借其Galaxy S8,三星创造了一个优秀的产品,甚至比其较大的Galaxy S8 +姐妹机型更好一些。这与S7产品线是不同的,然而Plus型号不能利用其较大的电池,并且更重。 此外,指纹扫描仪的位置由于其尺寸问题而不能达到一定舒适度。因此,当不需要较大屏幕时,可以节省100欧元(〜110美元)的额外费用。
该智能手机拥有时尚的设计和新无边框显示屏。再现了准确的色彩,亮度高和反射少,这也是Galaxy S8的明显优点。另外,配备了新的可以提升性能的SoC,还安装了一个千兆位LTE模块。不过,三星不为该机提供双SIM卡的机型,实在太糟糕了。
尽管如此,三星Galaxy S8还是得接受一些批评,即使它是一款出色的智能手机。
多样化的安全功能也是一个很强的加分点,但是智能手机不应该使用脸部识别,因为这种方法太容易被蒙混过关。不幸的是,个人助理Bixby还不完整,不能让我们信服。
我们希望三星给消费者更多的自由。例如,128 GB型号(6 GB 内存)在欧洲无法获取,另外,如果客户不在亚洲,客户将无法选择所有可用的颜色。
然而,三星已经很好地升级了其高级智能手机为Galaxy S8,它拥有时尚的设计,一个超级棒的相机,非常好的电池续航时间和一个优秀的屏幕。
注:本文是基于完整评测的缩减版本,阅读完整的英文评测,请点击这里。
Samsung Galaxy S8
- 09/03/2022 v7 (old)
Marcus Herbrich, Daniel Schmidt