Notebookcheck

Samsung Galaxy Note 8 Smartphone rövid értékelés

Daniel Schmidt (fordította Tamás Somogyi), 10/11/2017
Android ARM Galaxy Note Phablet Smartphone Touchscreen Business

Vissza a dobogó tetejére. A Note 8 legfőbb erényei a nagy, és kiváló Infinity kijelző, nagy teljesítmény, és - most először - egy kettős kamera rendszer. Ahogyan már megszokhattuk, az S-Pen tartozék, és a házban tárolható. Az, hogy a Samsung a Note 7 katasztrófája után megalkotta-e a tökéletes phabletet, cikkünkből kiderül.
Frissítés: PWM, kijelző válaszidő, hőkibocsátás és fogyasztás.

Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Galaxy Note Széria)
Processzor
Samsung Exynos 8895 Octa
Grafikus adapter
ARM Mali-G71 MP20, Mag: 850 MHz
Memória
6144 MB 
, LPDDR4x
Kijelző
6.3 hüvelyk 2.06:1, 2960x1440 pixel 522 PPI, kapacitív, 10 pontos multitouch, native pen support, Infinity Display, Super AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, fényes: igen
Háttértár
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, 51 GB ingyenes
Csatlakozók
1 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audió csatlakozók: kombinált fejhallgató/mikrofon jack, Kártyaolvasó: microSD, max. 400 GB (SDHC, SDXC), 1 Ujjlenyomat olvasó, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Szenzorok: gyorsulásmérő, helyzetérzékelő, pulzusmérő, Hall-szenzor, forgásszenzor, közelségérzékelő, nyomásmérő és G-szenzor, barométer, digitális iránytű, írisz szkenner, arcfelismerés, BeiDou, Galileo, Ant+, MST, Wifi Direct, Miracast, OTG
Hálózat
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM/GPRS/Edge (850, 900, 1800 and 1900 MHz), UMTS/HSPA+ (850, 900, 1880, 1900, 2010, 2100 MHz és AWS), LTE Cat. 16 (sávok: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, AWS és AWS-3), LTE, GPS
Méret
magasság x szélesség x mélység (mm-ben) 8.6 x 162.5 x 74.8
Akkumulátor
3300 mAh Lítium-Ion, Akkumulátor üzemidő (gyártói adat): 12 h, Beszédidő 2G (gyártói adat): 22 h
Operációs rendszer
Android 7.1 Nougat
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix Dual-Camera, 2X-es optikai zoom; teleobjektív: felbontás: 12MP AF, pixel méret: 1.0µm, szenzor méret: 1/3.6", szenzor képarány: 4:3, látószög: 45°. F.No (rekesz): F2.4. Nagylátószögű kamera: felbontás: Dual pixel 12MP AF, pixel méret: 1.
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix szenzor méret: 1/3.6", szenzor képarány: 4:3, F1.7 rekesz, Pixel méret: 1.22µm, látószög: 80°
További jellegzetességek
Hangszórók: mono, Billentyűzet: virtuális, hálózati töltő, USB kábel, AKG headset, két OTG adapter, SIM tű, quick start útmutató, biztonsági útmutató, S Pen, S Pen hegy szerszámok, tartalék tollhegyek, Samsung Experience UI 8.5, Samsung és Microsoft appok, 24 Hónap Garancia, USB-C (USB 3.1 Gen1), Bixby, feji SAR: 0.173 W/kg, test-SAR: 1.29 W/kg, IP68 minősítés, fanless
Súly
195 g, Tápegység: 62 g
Ár
999 ($950) Euró

 

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
914 MBit/s ∼100% +82%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
503 MBit/s ∼55%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
501 MBit/s ∼55% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
368 MBit/s ∼40% -27%
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
259 MBit/s ∼28% -49%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
656 MBit/s ∼100% 0%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
653 MBit/s ∼100%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
494 MBit/s ∼75% -24%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
374 MBit/s ∼57% -43%
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
165 MBit/s ∼25% -75%
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Low-light photo with the primary camera of Samsung's Galaxy Note 8
Low-light photo using the zoom of Samsung's Galaxy Note 8

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 2Scene 3
click to load images
Samsung Galaxy Note 8: Test chart photo (wide-angle)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8: Test chart photo (telephoto lens)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8: Test chart photo center (wide-angle)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8: Test chart photo center (telephoto lens)
525
cd/m²
522
cd/m²
545
cd/m²
526
cd/m²
530
cd/m²
550
cd/m²
532
cd/m²
534
cd/m²
560
cd/m²
Fényerő megoszlás
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 560 cd/m² Átlag: 536 cd/m² Minimum: 1.84 cd/m²
Fényerő megoszlás: 93 %
Centrumban: 530 cd/m²
Kontraszt: ∞:1 (Fekete: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.6 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 2.7 | - Ø
Gamma: 2.04
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.3
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
Dual Edge Super AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.7
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.2
Huawei Mate 9
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.9
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
IPS, 3840x2160, 5.5
Honor 8 Pro
IPS, 2560x1440, 5.7
Screen
12%
20%
-29%
26%
-2%
-19%
Brightness
536
523
-2%
562
5%
680
27%
553
3%
568
6%
514
-4%
Brightness Distribution
93
84
-10%
93
0%
93
0%
97
4%
92
-1%
91
-2%
Black Level *
0.42
0.35
0.62
0.3
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.6
1.9
27%
1.7
35%
4.3
-65%
1.4
46%
2.8
-8%
3.2
-23%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.7
1.8
33%
1.6
41%
4.8
-78%
1.3
52%
2.8
-4%
4
-48%
Gamma
2.04 118%
2.12 113%
2.13 113%
2.33 103%
2.21 109%
2.15 112%
2.27 106%
CCT
6206 105%
6449 101%
6435 101%
7255 90%
6667 97%
6728 97%
7120 91%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
83.92
81.57
63.1
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
100
99.87
99.83
Contrast
1657
1591
932
1803

* ... 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 detected 257.7 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 257.7 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 257.7 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware.

In comparison: 56 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 7499 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

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
4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (26.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
4.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (42.7 ms).
AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
173997 Points ∼76%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
133845 Points ∼59% -23%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
165382 Points ∼73% -5%
Huawei Mate 9
124087 Points ∼54% -29%
LG V30
156713 Points ∼69% -10%
HTC U11
175032 Points ∼77% +1%
Honor 8 Pro
146044 Points ∼64% -16%
HP Elite x3
115867 Points ∼51% -33%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
165399 Points ∼73% -5%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
5096 Points ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
5195 Points ∼75% +2%
Huawei Mate 9
6299 Points ∼91% +24%
HTC U11
6828 Points ∼98% +34%
Honor 8 Pro
6134 Points ∼88% +20%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6084 Points ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
5115 Points ∼62% -16%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
5830 Points ∼70% -4%
Huawei Mate 9
7403 Points ∼89% +22%
HTC U11
8295 Points ∼100% +36%
Honor 8 Pro
7356 Points ∼89% +21%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
1235 Points ∼80%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
1101 Points ∼71% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
1163 Points ∼75% -6%
Huawei Mate 9
1076 Points ∼70% -13%
LG V30
907 Points ∼59% -27%
HTC U11
1221 Points ∼79% -1%
Honor 8 Pro
1131 Points ∼73% -8%
HP Elite x3
458 Points ∼30% -63%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1542 Points ∼100% +25%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6121 Points ∼71%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
4273 Points ∼50% -30%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
6126 Points ∼71% 0%
Huawei Mate 9
3939 Points ∼46% -36%
LG V30
5026 Points ∼58% -18%
HTC U11
5976 Points ∼69% -2%
Honor 8 Pro
4070 Points ∼47% -34%
HP Elite x3
3974 Points ∼46% -35%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
6875 Points ∼80% +12%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3095 Points ∼70%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
2532 Points ∼57% -18%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3135 Points ∼71% +1%
Huawei Mate 9
3850 Points ∼87% +24%
LG V30
2091 Points ∼47% -32%
HTC U11
2085 Points ∼47% -33%
Honor 8 Pro
4277 Points ∼97% +38%
HP Elite x3
2003 Points ∼45% -35%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1319 Points ∼30% -57%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
5308 Points ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
3994 Points ∼61% -25%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
5319 Points ∼81% 0%
Huawei Mate 9
3616 Points ∼55% -32%
LG V30
4365 Points ∼66% -18%
HTC U11
5570 Points ∼85% +5%
Honor 8 Pro
4029 Points ∼61% -24%
HP Elite x3
1384 Points ∼21% -74%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
6582 Points ∼100% +24%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3338 Points ∼88%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
2626 Points ∼69% -21%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3301 Points ∼87% -1%
Huawei Mate 9
2772 Points ∼73% -17%
LG V30
2540 Points ∼67% -24%
HTC U11
3034 Points ∼80% -9%
Honor 8 Pro
2985 Points ∼79% -11%
HP Elite x3
1499 Points ∼40% -55%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
3097 Points ∼82% -7%
Geekbench 4.1
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
8310 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
8295 Points ∼98% 0%
Huawei Mate 9
Points ∼0% -100%
HTC U11
8281 Points ∼98% 0%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6744 Points ∼27%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
6695 Points ∼27% -1%
Huawei Mate 9
6445 Points ∼26% -4%
LG V30
6078 Points ∼24% -10%
HTC U11
6443 Points ∼26% -4%
Honor 8 Pro
6245 Points ∼25% -7%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2028 Points ∼34%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
2015 Points ∼34% -1%
Huawei Mate 9
1866 Points ∼31% -8%
LG V30
1900 Points ∼32% -6%
HTC U11
1906 Points ∼32% -6%
Honor 8 Pro
1853 Points ∼31% -9%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2346 Points ∼78%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
1518 Points ∼50% -35%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
2466 Points ∼81% +5%
Huawei Mate 9
2117 Points ∼70% -10%
HTC U11
2841 Points ∼94% +21%
Honor 8 Pro
2216 Points ∼73% -6%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2661 Points ∼49%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
2049 Points ∼38% -23%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3479 Points ∼65% +31%
Huawei Mate 9
2294 Points ∼43% -14%
HTC U11
3883 Points ∼72% +46%
Honor 8 Pro
1746 Points ∼32% -34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2584 Points ∼67%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
1901 Points ∼49% -26%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3188 Points ∼82% +23%
Huawei Mate 9
2240 Points ∼58% -13%
HTC U11
3590 Points ∼92% +39%
Honor 8 Pro
1832 Points ∼47% -29%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2342 Points ∼78%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
1532 Points ∼51% -35%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
2465 Points ∼82% +5%
Huawei Mate 9
2123 Points ∼70% -9%
HTC U11
2832 Points ∼94% +21%
Honor 8 Pro
1896 Points ∼63% -19%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1522 Points ∼51% -35%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3928 Points ∼51%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
2670 Points ∼35% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
4786 Points ∼62% +22%
Huawei Mate 9
2448 Points ∼32% -38%
HTC U11
5877 Points ∼76% +50%
Honor 8 Pro
1856 Points ∼24% -53%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
4235 Points ∼55% +8%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3414 Points ∼69%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
2292 Points ∼46% -33%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3958 Points ∼80% +16%
Huawei Mate 9
2367 Points ∼48% -31%
HTC U11
4744 Points ∼95% +39%
Honor 8 Pro
1865 Points ∼37% -45%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
3034 Points ∼61% -11%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
22829 Points ∼32%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
19834 Points ∼28% -13%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
20892 Points ∼29% -8%
Huawei Mate 9
15104 Points ∼21% -34%
HTC U11
20140 Points ∼28% -12%
Honor 8 Pro
15129 Points ∼21% -34%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
15626 Points ∼22% -32%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
36807 Points ∼8%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
23431 Points ∼5% -36%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
33077 Points ∼7% -10%
Huawei Mate 9
35626 Points ∼8% -3%
HTC U11
55725 Points ∼12% +51%
Honor 8 Pro
32243 Points ∼7% -12%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
63386 Points ∼14% +72%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
32399 Points ∼16%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
22523 Points ∼11% -30%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
29282 Points ∼15% -10%
Huawei Mate 9
27364 Points ∼14% -16%
HTC U11
40014 Points ∼20% +24%
Honor 8 Pro
25766 Points ∼13% -20%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
37746 Points ∼19% +17%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
105 fps ∼8%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
80 fps ∼6% -24%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
104 fps ∼8% -1%
Huawei Mate 9
80 fps ∼6% -24%
HTC U11
91 fps ∼7% -13%
Honor 8 Pro
43 fps ∼3% -59%
HP Elite x3
47.19 fps ∼4% -55%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
91.96 fps ∼7% -12%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
59 fps ∼13%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
52 fps ∼11% -12%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
58 fps ∼13% -2%
Huawei Mate 9
60 fps ∼13% +2%
HTC U11
58 fps ∼13% -2%
Honor 8 Pro
59 fps ∼13% 0%
HP Elite x3
26.42 fps ∼6% -55%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
57.71 fps ∼13% -2%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
51 fps ∼9%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
38 fps ∼7% -25%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
50 fps ∼9% -2%
Huawei Mate 9
34 fps ∼6% -33%
HTC U11
51 fps ∼9% 0%
Honor 8 Pro
29 fps ∼5% -43%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
58.71 fps ∼11% +15%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
38 fps ∼10%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
25 fps ∼7% -34%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
38 fps ∼10% 0%
Huawei Mate 9
37 fps ∼10% -3%
HTC U11
29 fps ∼8% -24%
Honor 8 Pro
20 fps ∼5% -47%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
55.17 fps ∼15% +45%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
42 fps ∼10%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
26 fps ∼6% -38%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
42 fps ∼10% 0%
Huawei Mate 9
24 fps ∼6% -43%
HTC U11
33 fps ∼8% -21%
Honor 8 Pro
21 fps ∼5% -50%
HP Elite x3
34.02 fps ∼8% -19%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
41.3 fps ∼10% -2%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
23 fps ∼13%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
14 fps ∼8% -39%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
23 fps ∼13% 0%
Huawei Mate 9
28 fps ∼16% +22%
HTC U11
15 fps ∼9% -35%
Honor 8 Pro
13 fps ∼7% -43%
HP Elite x3
16.09 fps ∼9% -30%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
41.5 fps ∼24% +80%
GFXBench 4.0
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
25 fps ∼7%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
15 fps ∼4% -40%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
25 fps ∼7% 0%
Huawei Mate 9
fps ∼0% -100%
HTC U11
24 fps ∼7% -4%
Honor 8 Pro
15 fps ∼4% -40%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
13 fps ∼0%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
7.9 fps ∼0% -39%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
13 fps ∼0% 0%
Huawei Mate 9
14 fps ∼0% +8%
HTC U11
13 fps ∼0% 0%
Honor 8 Pro
11 fps ∼0% -15%
Lightmark - 1920x1080 1080p (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
30.86 fps ∼84%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
13.33 fps ∼36% -57%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
25.06 fps ∼69% -19%
Huawei Mate 9
19.14 fps ∼52% -38%
HTC U11
36.58 fps ∼100% +19%
Basemark X 1.1
High Quality (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
41022 Points ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
19134 Points ∼43% -53%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
42335 Points ∼96% +3%
Huawei Mate 9
31104 Points ∼71% -24%
HTC U11
38752 Points ∼88% -6%
Medium Quality (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
43464 Points ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
41901 Points ∼93% -4%
Huawei Mate 9
42176 Points ∼94% -3%
HTC U11
44696 Points ∼99% +3%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
1295 Points ∼69%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
714 Points ∼38% -45%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
1280 Points ∼68% -1%
Huawei Mate 9
699 Points ∼37% -46%
HTC U11
812 Points ∼43% -37%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1177 Points ∼63% -9%
Epic Citadel - Ultra High Quality (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
59.7 fps ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
59.7 fps ∼97% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
59.7 fps ∼97% 0%
Huawei Mate 9
60.5 fps ∼98% +1%
HTC U11
60 fps ∼97% +1%

Legend

 
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 Samsung Exynos 8895 Octa, ARM Mali-G71 MP20, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Samsung Exynos 8890 Octa, ARM Mali-T880 MP12, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus Samsung Exynos 8895 Octa, ARM Mali-G71 MP20, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Huawei Mate 9 HiSilicon Kirin 960, ARM Mali-G71 MP8, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
LG V30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
HTC U11 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Honor 8 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 960, ARM Mali-G71 MP8, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
HP Elite x3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Apple iPhone 7 Plus Apple A10 Fusion, Apple A10 Fusion GPU / PowerVR, 128 GB NVMe
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Apple iPhone 7 Plus (Safari Mobile 10.0)
168.08 Points ∼100% +142%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
71.6 Points ∼43% +3%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
69.57 Points ∼41%
HTC U11 (Chrome 58)
69.51 Points ∼41% 0%
Huawei Mate 9 (Chrome 54)
68.6 Points ∼41% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)
62.198 Points ∼37% -11%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium (Chrome 59)
61.5 Points ∼37% -12%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 (Chrome Mobile 44.0.2403.133)
61.3 Points ∼36% -12%
Honor 8 Pro (Chrome Version 57)
58.065 Points ∼35% -17%
HP Elite x3
Points ∼0% -100%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 7 Plus (Safari Mobile 10.0)
26053 Points ∼100% +96%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)
14050 Points ∼54% +6%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
13265 Points ∼51%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 (Chrome Mobile 44.0.2403.133)
12579 Points ∼48% -5%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
11945 Points ∼46% -10%
Huawei Mate 9 (Chrome 54)
11897 Points ∼46% -10%
HTC U11 (Chrome 58)
11781 Points ∼45% -11%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium (Chrome 59)
10672 Points ∼41% -20%
Honor 8 Pro (Chrome Version 57)
10016 Points ∼38% -24%
HP Elite x3 (Edge 1.14393)
8664 Points ∼33% -35%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
HP Elite x3 (Edge 1.14393)
4398.3 ms * ∼100% -134%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium (Chrome 59)
3199 ms * ∼73% -70%
Honor 8 Pro (Chrome Version 57)
3156.7 ms * ∼72% -68%
HTC U11 (Chrome 58)
2760.3 ms * ∼63% -47%
Huawei Mate 9 (Chrome 54)
2733.7 ms * ∼62% -46%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
2621.7 ms * ∼60% -40%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 (Chrome Mobile 44.0.2403.133)
2569.1 ms * ∼58% -37%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)
2236.7 ms * ∼51% -19%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
1876.8 ms * ∼43%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus (Safari Mobile 10.0)
1102.7 ms * ∼25% +41%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
204 Points ∼100% +28%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 (Chrome Mobile 44.0.2403.133)
177 Points ∼87% +11%
HTC U11 (Chrome 58)
162 Points ∼79% +2%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
161 Points ∼79% +1%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
159 Points ∼78%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus (Samsung Browser 5.2)
154 Points ∼75% -3%
Huawei Mate 9 (Chrome 54)
152 Points ∼75% -4%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium (Chrome 59)
149 Points ∼73% -6%
Honor 8 Pro (Chrome Version 57)
141 Points ∼69% -11%
HP Elite x3 (Edge 1.14393)
130 Points ∼64% -18%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung Galaxy Note 8Samsung Galaxy Note 7Samsung Galaxy S8 PlusHuawei Mate 9HTC U11Honor 8 ProSony Xperia XZ Premium
AndroBench 3-5
-21%
1%
-32%
66%
149%
-22%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
59.27 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
43.84 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-26%
57.24 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-3%
29.53 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-50%
46.25 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-22%
32.16 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-46%
33.31 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-44%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
67.87 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
72.45 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
7%
71.12 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
5%
53.97 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-20%
68.82 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
1%
54.19 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-20%
36.79 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-46%
Random Write 4KB
14.55
14.72
1%
15.27
5%
8.77
-40%
79.97
450%
151.6
942%
17.2
18%
Random Read 4KB
122.48
82.68
-32%
127.18
4%
94.69
-23%
91.45
-25%
166.4
36%
74.1
-40%
Sequential Write 256KB
205.85
135.24
-34%
194.18
-6%
142.92
-31%
206.41
0%
187.1
-9%
194
-6%
Sequential Read 256KB
796.96
484.6
-39%
787.6
-1%
594.23
-25%
717.33
-10%
737.8
-7%
687
-14%
Max. terhelés
 33.2 °C33 °C32.4 °C 
 35 °C35 °C33.8 °C 
 35.7 °C34.7 °C33.1 °C 
Maximum: 35.7 °C
Átlag: 34 °C
29.8 °C31.3 °C31.8 °C
30.6 °C32.9 °C34.6 °C
30.6 °C36.2 °C36.4 °C
Maximum: 36.4 °C
Átlag: 32.7 °C
Tápegység (max.)  29 °C | Szobahőmérséklet 21.5 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.631.32525.427.23125.326.14032.925.15033.624.56331.6268028.4241002728.212520.828.21602234.520021.348.325020.852.331521.257.640019.460.150019.563.963017.767.180017.965.5100017.868.6125017.372.1160017.474.6200016.776.2250017.278.4315018.281.1400017.977.4500017.672.8630017.775.4800017.877.91000017.970.91250018.167.11600018.258.1SPL3086.9N1.369.1median 17.9Samsung Galaxy Note 8median 67.1Delta1.310.731.641.625.437.825.337.432.933.833.63831.632.328.432.32738.220.843.82249.321.351.820.852.121.253.619.454.219.562.417.765.417.965.117.866.317.365.817.468.416.767.717.267.818.270.417.971.317.669.817.77117.871.317.965.318.162.818.257.63080.11.348.9median 17.9Apple iPhone 8 Plusmedian 65.31.37.331.635.225.433.125.329.932.92533.629.231.631.228.426.9272620.833.92243.521.349.920.854.821.257.519.462.319.566.417.767.317.96417.863.217.364.917.462.516.756.317.26018.26117.963.217.662.817.760.317.861.617.962.518.164.518.255.83075.61.336.8median 17.9Huawei P10 Plusmedian 61.61.34.8hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 29% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 58% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple iPhone 8 Plus audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 18% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Huawei P10 Plus audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (75.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 15% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 82% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Energiafogyasztás
Kikapcsolt állapot / Készenlétdarklight 0.06 / 0.13 Watt
Üresjáratdarkmidlight 0.73 / 1.44 / 1.53 Watt
Terhelés midlight 4.56 / 5.09 Watt
 color bar
Kulcs: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3300 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note 7
3500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3500 mAh
Huawei Mate 9
4000 mAh
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
3230 mAh
HP Elite x3
4150 mAh
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
2915 mAh
Power Consumption
-9%
9%
-33%
-37%
-37%
-33%
Idle Minimum *
0.73
0.72
1%
0.68
7%
0.78
-7%
0.62
15%
0.86
-18%
0.77
-5%
Idle Average *
1.44
1.37
5%
1.13
22%
2.13
-48%
2.44
-69%
1.46
-1%
2.04
-42%
Idle Maximum *
1.53
1.44
6%
1.16
24%
2.17
-42%
2.59
-69%
1.59
-4%
2.24
-46%
Load Average *
4.56
5.56
-22%
4.69
-3%
6.32
-39%
4.94
-8%
8.1
-78%
4.69
-3%
Load Maximum *
5.09
6.78
-33%
5.24
-3%
6.49
-28%
7.91
-55%
9.35
-84%
8.66
-70%

* ... smaller is better

Akkumulátor üzemidő
Üresjárat (WLAN nélkül, minimális fényerő)
18h 54min
WiFi böngészés v1.3
7h 54min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
11h 02min
Terhelés (maximális fényerő)
4h 06min
Samsung Galaxy Note 8Samsung Galaxy Note 7Samsung Galaxy S8 PlusHP Elite x3Huawei Mate 9Apple iPhone 7 PlusHTC U11OnePlus 5
Battery Runtime
37%
29%
18%
32%
25%
-3%
10%
Reader / Idle
1134
1429
26%
1565
38%
2205
94%
1538
36%
1835
62%
1250
10%
1534
35%
H.264
662
960
45%
742
12%
760
15%
947
43%
813
23%
498
-25%
623
-6%
WiFi v1.3
474
607
28%
736
55%
422
-11%
758
60%
587
24%
560
18%
518
9%
Load
246
361
47%
275
12%
185
-25%
219
-11%
225
-9%
212
-14%
247
0%
PCMark for Android - Work 2.0 battery life
Huawei Mate 9
677 min ∼100% +37%
Samsung Galaxy J7 2017
669 min ∼99% +35%
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
533 min ∼79% +8%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
495 min ∼73%
HTC U11
476 min ∼70% -4%

Pro

+ kiváló kijelző
+ gyors lapkakészlet
+ bővíthető háttértár
+ dual SIM lehetséges
+ remek S Pen, sok funkcióval
+ USB 3.1, DisplayPort és HDMI képességgel
+ Gigabit LTE
+ gyors Wi-Fi, nagy hatótávval
+ gyorstöltő funkció és vezeték nélküli töltés
+ por- és vízálló
+ sokféle szenzor

Kontra

- a lapkakészlet terhelés alatt lefojt
- a bővített jótállás nem terjed ki folyadékkárra
- gyenge GPS
- a hangszóró lehetne jobb
- az ujjlenyomat olvasó helyzete nem a legjobb
In review: Samsung Galaxy Note 8. Review sample courtesy of Samsung Germany.
In review: Samsung Galaxy Note 8. Review sample courtesy of Samsung Germany.

A Samsung ismét egy kiváló terméket adott ki a kezéből a Galaxy Note 8 képében, és az S Pen rajongóknak amúgy sincs igazán nagy phablet választékuk. A készülék hardvere kiemelkedő. Ugyanakkor, az árat figyelembe véve, a gyártó lehetett volna bőkezűbb a belső tárhely terén.

A kijelző, a teljesítmény és a kamerák is első osztályúak. A kisebb telep némileg kiábrándító, mivel az üzemidő rövidült miatta. Ezen felül, véleményünk szerint, a 2.06:1 képarány nem ideális a Note széria számára. Mivel a panel keskenyebb lett, ezért széltében kevesebb helyünk marad, főleg, hogy a Note app nem változtatja automatikusan a képernyő tájolását. A 16:9-es arány talán jobb lett volna.

Ezt leszámítva a Samsung minden szükségeset belepakolt ebbe az üzleti okostelefonba, és még a Samsung DeX dokkoló állomással is kompatibilis, így kiválthat egy asztali gépet.

Összességében, a Note 8 kiváló okostelefon Azok azonban, akiknek az S Pen nem fontos, jobban járnak a Galaxy S8+-szal. Nemcsak kevesebb pénzt kell kiadniuk érte, de hosszabb akku üzemidőre is számíthatnak.

Ez az eredeti értékelés rövidített változata. A teljes, angol nyelvű cikk itt olvasható.

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Magyarország - Kezdőlap > Tesztek / áttekintők > Samsung Galaxy Note 8 Smartphone rövid értékelés
Daniel Schmidt, 2017-10-11 (Update: 2017-10-11)