Kısa inceleme: Samsung Galaxy Note 7

Name: Samsung Galaxy Note 7
Brand: Samsung

Patlayıcı birleşim. Note nihayet Avrupa semalarında da görülebiliyor. Ancak ürün çıktığı gibi teknik sorunlarla mücadele edip, üretici tarafından toplanmaya başladı bile.

Daniel Schmidt, ✓ Manuel Masiero, Published 09/23/2016 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android ARM Phablet Smartphone Touchscreen

Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Samsung Galaxy Note 7 (Galaxy Note Seri)

İşlemci

Samsung Exynos 8890 Octa 8 x 2.6 GHz, Mongoose / Cortex-A53

Grafik kartı

ARM Mali-T880 MP12 - 4 GB VRAM

Bellek

4 GB

, LPDDR4

Görüntü

5.70 inç 16:9, 2560 x 1440 pixel 515 PPI, Touch Display, native pen support, Dual Edge Super AMOLED, Gorilla Glass 5, HDR, parlak: evet

Harddisk

64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash, 64 GB

, 52.4 GB Boş

Bağlantılar

1 USB 3.0, Ses çıkışları: 3.5 mm headphone jack, Kart okuyucular: MicroSD up to 256 GB (SDHC, SDXC), 1 Parmak izi okuyucu, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Alıcılar: Barometer, Fingerprint scanner, Gyroscope, geomagnetic sensor, Hall sensor, Heart rate monitor, Iris scanner, Proximity, RGB Light Sensor , Ant+, BeiDou, Galileo

Network

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM/GPRS/Edge (850, 900, 1800 and 1900 MHz), UMTS/HSPA+ (Bands 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8), LTE Cat. 9 (Bands 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28 (all FDD) as well as bands 38, 39, 40 and 41 (all TDD)), LTE, GPS

Boyut

yükseklik x genişlik x derinlik (mm): 7.9 x 153.5 x 73.9

Batarya

3500 mAh Lithium-Ion, Konuşma süresi 3G (üreticiye göre): 26 h

İşletim sistemi

Android 6.0 Marshmallow

Camera

Primary Camera: 12 MPix Dual-Pixel autofocus, aperture f/1.7, optic image stabilization (OIS)
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix additional 3.7 MP infrared sensor, which is used as Iris scanner

Ek özellikler

Hoparlörler: Mono speaker, Klavye: virtual, two OTG adapters, power adapter, USB 2.0 cable, headset, quick-start guide, warranty information, S Pen, Samsung Apps, Edge Launcher, Grace UI, 24 Ay Garanti, USB Type-C, IP68 protection, SAR head: 0.249 W/kg, Body SAR: 1.280 W/kg, fanless

Ağırlık

170 g, Güç kaynağı: 60 g

Fiyat

849 Euro

Bağlantılar

Samsung anasayfa
Samsung notebook kısmı

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

see all specifications

Networking
iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m
Acer Liquid Jade Primo Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash	551 MBit/s +91%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	303 MBit/s +5%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	288 MBit/s
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	286 MBit/s -1%
iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m
Acer Liquid Jade Primo Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash	451 MBit/s +299%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	290 MBit/s +157%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	256 MBit/s +127%
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	113 MBit/s

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 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

click to load images

Sasmung Galaxy Note 7

Huawei P9

Apple iPhone 6s Plus

Canon EOS 70D

click to load images

Sasmung Galaxy Note 7

Huawei P9

Apple iPhone 6s Plus

Canon EOS 70D

click to load images

Sasmung Galaxy Note 7

Huawei P9

Apple iPhone 6s Plus

Canon EOS 70D


554 cd/m²	544 cd/m²	497 cd/m²
545 cd/m²	544 cd/m²	467 cd/m²
543 cd/m²	542 cd/m²	473 cd/m²

Parlaklığın yayılımı

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maksimum: 554 cd/m² (Nits) Ortalama: 523.2 cd/m² Minimum: 1.77 cd/m²
Aydınlatma: 84 %
Batarya modunda parlaklık: 544 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Siyah: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 1.8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
100% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
83.92% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
96.1% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
100% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
87.3% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.12

Download ICC Dosyası (X-Rite i1Pro 2)

	Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Dual Edge Super AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.7"	Samsung Galaxy Note Edge Super AMOLED, 2560x1600, 5.6"	Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Super AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.7"	Huawei P9 Plus AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5"	Microsoft Lumia 950 XL AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.7"	Apple iPhone 6S Plus IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5"	LG Stylus 2 IPS, 1280x720, 5.7"	LG V10 Quantum-IPS, 2560x1440, 5.7"
Screen		-30%	-6%	-95%	-24%	-31%	-142%	-105%
Brightness middle	544	481 -12%	394.8 -27%	361 -34%	297 -45%	583 7%	370 -32%	450 -17%
Brightness	523	474 -9%	397 -24%	366 -30%	297 -43%	560 7%	374 -28%	431 -18%
Brightness Distribution	84	94 12%	91 8%	87 4%	93 11%	91 8%	92 10%	93 11%
Black Level *						0.46	0.25	0.22
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	1.9	2.24 -18%	1.49 22%	5.1 -168%	2.67 -41%	3.55 -87%	6.1 -221%	5.18 -173%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	4.2			10 -138%	3.98 5%		16.5 -293%	10.39 -147%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	1.8	4.02 -123%	1.98 -10%	5.5 -206%	2.81 -56%	3.88 -116%	7 -289%	6.94 -286%
Gamma	2.12 ^104%	3.07 ^72%	2.19 ^100%	2.24 ^98%	2.08 ^106%	2.2 ^100%	2.25 ^98%	2.24 ^98%
CCT	6449 ^101%	6476 ^100%	6382 ^102%	7388 ^88%	6379 ^102%	7280 ^89%	8350 ^78%	8091 ^80%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)	83.92				66.31 -21%	59.05 -30%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)	100				99.79 0%	92.8 -7%
Contrast						1267	1480	2045

* ... smaller is better

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
4.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 2 ms rise
4.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 2.4 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. » 13 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
5.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 2.8 ms rise
5.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 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 (32.9 ms).

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

59.5 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 59.5 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 59.5 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8774 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	133845 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	128749 Points -4%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	133626 Points 0%
HTC 10	131866 Points -1%
Huawei P9	95743 Points -28%
OnePlus 3	142090 Points +6%
LG Stylus 2	28232 Points -79%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL	94122 Points -30%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	22523 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	28671 Points +27%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	24020 Points +7%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	27795 Points +23%
HTC 10	27176 Points +21%
Huawei P9	19854 Points -12%
OnePlus 3	30241 Points +34%
LG Stylus 2	4307 Points -81%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	23431 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	33031 Points +41%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	26964 Points +15%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	41615 Points +78%
HTC 10	30061 Points +28%
Huawei P9	21577 Points -8%
OnePlus 3	34023 Points +45%
LG Stylus 2	3744 Points -84%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	19834 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	19610 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	17380 Points -12%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	12854 Points -35%
HTC 10	20344 Points +3%
Huawei P9	15517 Points -22%
OnePlus 3	21771 Points +10%
LG Stylus 2	9085 Points -54%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	2292 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	2710 (2421^min) Points +18%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	1488 Points -35%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	3316 Points +45%
HTC 10	3157 Points +38%
Huawei P9	1237 Points -46%
OnePlus 3	3424 Points +49%
LG Stylus 2	53 Points -98%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	2670 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	3015 (2895^min) Points +13%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	1471 Points -45%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	4557 Points +71%
HTC 10	4581 Points +72%
Huawei P9	1080 Points -60%
OnePlus 3	4633 Points +74%
LG Stylus 2	42 Points -98%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	1532 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	2002 (1539^min) Points +31%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	1552 Points +1%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	1697 Points +11%
HTC 10	1512 Points -1%
Huawei P9	2510 Points +64%
OnePlus 3	1789 Points +17%
LG Stylus 2	728 Points -52%

Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	1865 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	1840 Points -1%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	2503 Points +34%
Huawei P9	1755 Points -6%
OnePlus 3	1754 Points -6%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	5213 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	5503 Points +6%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	4286 Points -18%
Huawei P9	4904 Points -6%
OnePlus 3	4097 Points -21%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	52 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	51 fps -2%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	59 fps +13%
HTC 10	43 fps -17%
Huawei P9	43 fps -17%
OnePlus 3	60 fps +15%
LG Stylus 2	4.9 fps -91%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL	18.75 fps -64%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	80 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	81 fps +1%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	78.9 fps -1%
HTC 10	73 fps -9%
Huawei P9	40 fps -50%
OnePlus 3	89 fps +11%
LG Stylus 2	5.1 fps -94%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL	27.11 fps -66%

GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	25 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	27 fps +8%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	11 fps -56%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	38.4 fps +54%
HTC 10	24 fps -4%
Huawei P9	19 fps -24%
OnePlus 3	46 fps +84%
LG Stylus 2	1.8 fps -93%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL	11.81 fps -53%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	38 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	38 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	18 fps -53%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	38.4 fps +1%
HTC 10	39 fps +3%
Huawei P9	18 fps -53%
OnePlus 3	47 fps +24%
LG Stylus 2	3.9 fps -90%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL	17.54 fps -54%

GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	14 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	15 fps +7%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	28 fps +100%
HTC 10	14 fps 0%
Huawei P9	11 fps -21%
OnePlus 3	30 fps +114%
LG Stylus 2	fps -100%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	26 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	28 fps +8%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	28 fps +8%
HTC 10	24 fps -8%
Huawei P9	10 fps -62%
OnePlus 3	31 fps +19%
LG Stylus 2	fps -100%

GFXBench
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	7.9 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	7.9 fps 0%
HTC 10	10 fps +27%
Huawei P9	7.1 fps -10%
OnePlus 3	18 fps +128%
LG Stylus 2	fps -100%
1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	15 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	15 fps 0%
HTC 10	18 fps +20%
Huawei P9	6.5 fps -57%
OnePlus 3	18 fps +20%
LG Stylus 2	fps -100%

PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	5115 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	4660 Points -9%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	5113 Points 0%
HTC 10	5809 Points +14%
Huawei P9	7058 Points +38%
OnePlus 3	7101 Points +39%
LG Stylus 2	4030 Points -21%

BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	2626 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	2074 Points -21%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	1746 Points -34%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	2206 Points -16%
HTC 10	2193 Points -16%
Huawei P9	2025 Points -23%
OnePlus 3	2496 Points -5%
LG Stylus 2	609 Points -77%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL	1465 Points -44%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	3994 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	4080 Points +2%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	3305 Points -17%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	3925 Points -2%
HTC 10	2806 Points -30%
Huawei P9	3930 Points -2%
OnePlus 3	3537 Points -11%
LG Stylus 2	914 Points -77%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL	1386 Points -65%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	2532 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	2072 Points -18%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	1138 Points -55%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	1124 Points -56%
HTC 10	1772 Points -30%
Huawei P9	2627 Points +4%
OnePlus 3	2052 Points -19%
LG Stylus 2	462 Points -82%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL	1945 Points -23%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	4273 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	2203 Points -48%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	2476 Points -42%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	4299 Points +1%
HTC 10	5009 Points +17%
Huawei P9	1583 Points -63%
OnePlus 3	4813 Points +13%
LG Stylus 2	324 Points -92%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL	2040 Points -52%
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	1101 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	994 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	998 Points -9%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	1199 Points +9%
HTC 10	928 Points -16%
Huawei P9	1029 Points -7%
OnePlus 3	1112 Points +1%
LG Stylus 2	1008 Points -8%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL	837 Points -24%

Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	714 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	733 Points +3%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus	858 Points +20%
HTC 10	608 Points -15%
Huawei P9	328 Points -54%
OnePlus 3	631 Points -12%

Lightmark - 1920x1080 1080p (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7	13.33 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	13.31 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A	6.6 fps -50%
Huawei P9	7.9 fps -41%
OnePlus 3	23.32 fps +75%

Legend

Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Samsung Exynos 8890 Octa, ARM Mali-T880 MP12, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash

Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Samsung Exynos 8890 Octa, ARM Mali-T880 MP12, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash

Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Samsung Exynos 7420 Octa, ARM Mali-T760 MP8, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash

Apple iPhone 6S Plus Apple A9, Apple A9 / PowerVR GT7600, Apple AP0064K (iPhone NVMe)

HTC 10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Huawei P9 HiSilicon Kirin 955, ARM Mali-T880 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash

OnePlus 3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash

LG Stylus 2 Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 MSM8916, Qualcomm Adreno 306, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Microsoft Lumia 950 XL Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 MSM8994, Qualcomm Adreno 430, 32 GB eMMC Flash

WebXPRT 2015 | JetStream 1.1 | BaseMark OS II | Octane V2 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	177 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	163 Points -8%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	96 Points -46%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, Apple AP0064K (iPhone NVMe)	190 Points +7%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	108 Points -39%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	128 Points -28%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	122 Points -31%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	51 Points -71%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash	113 Points -36%

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	61.3 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	75.1 Points +23%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	48.82 Points -20%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, Apple AP0064K (iPhone NVMe)	118.7 Points +94%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	52.1 Points -15%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	68.4 Points +12%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	54.4 Points -11%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	17.8 Points -71%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash	46 Points -25%

BaseMark OS II - Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	1101 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	994 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	998 Points -9%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, Apple AP0064K (iPhone NVMe)	1199 Points +9%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	928 Points -16%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	1029 Points -7%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	1112 Points +1%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	1008 Points -8%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash	837 Points -24%

Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	12579 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	13191 Points +5%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	7534 Points -40%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, Apple AP0064K (iPhone NVMe)	15967 Points +27%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	8905 Points -29%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	11783 Points -6%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	9155 Points -27%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	2742 Points -78%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash	8059 Points -36%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	2569 ms *
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	2564 ms * -0%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	5089 ms * -98%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, Apple AP0064K (iPhone NVMe)	1743 ms * +32%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	3146 ms * -22%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	2923 ms * -14%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	2921 ms * -14%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	12713 ms * -395%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash	5553 ms * -116%

* ... smaller is better

AndroBench 3-5 | BaseMark OS II

AndroBench 3-5
Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	484.6 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	487.3 MB/s +1%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	385.4 MB/s -20%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	275.1 MB/s -43%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	281.3 MB/s -42%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	408.7 MB/s -16%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	130.3 MB/s -73%
Xiaomi Mi 5 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	459.6 MB/s -5%
Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	135.2 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	145.1 MB/s +7%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	150.1 MB/s +11%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	115.6 MB/s -14%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	72.2 MB/s -47%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	153.3 MB/s +13%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	75.9 MB/s -44%
Xiaomi Mi 5 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	159.3 MB/s +18%
Random Read 4KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	82.7 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	86.7 MB/s +5%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	90.3 MB/s +9%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	29.92 MB/s -64%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	39 MB/s -53%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	137.6 MB/s +66%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	9.8 MB/s -88%
Xiaomi Mi 5 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	106.8 MB/s +29%
Random Write 4KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	14.72 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	15.79 MB/s +7%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	20.42 MB/s +39%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	15.89 MB/s +8%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	47.45 MB/s +222%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	18.23 MB/s +24%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	7.3 MB/s -50%
Xiaomi Mi 5 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	13.61 MB/s -8%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	72.4 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	76.4 MB/s +6%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	83.3 MB/s +15%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	55 MB/s -24%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	74.9 MB/s +3%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	43.84 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	50.4 MB/s +15%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	65.4 MB/s +49%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	24.83 MB/s -43%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	49.73 MB/s +13%

BaseMark OS II - Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	1101 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	994 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	998 Points -9%
Apple iPhone 6S Plus A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, Apple AP0064K (iPhone NVMe)	1199 Points +9%
HTC 10 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	928 Points -16%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	1029 Points -7%
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	1112 Points +1%
LG Stylus 2 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	1008 Points -8%
Xiaomi Mi 5 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	1106 Points 0%

Asphalt 8: Airborne
	Ayarlar	Değer
	high	30 fps
	very low	30 fps

Dead Trigger 2
	Ayarlar	Değer
	high	55 fps

... kıyaslama

Maksimum yük

Bekleme


40.4 °C	40.1 °C	39.9 °C
39.9 °C	40.1 °C	38.7 °C
39.5 °C	39 °C	38.7 °C

Maksimum: 40.4 °C
Ortalama: 39.6 °C


35.9 °C	39.8 °C	39.6 °C
36.7 °C	38.4 °C	39.2 °C
36.1 °C	38.2 °C	38.5 °C

Maksimum: 39.8 °C
Ortalama: 38 °C

Güç kaynağı 36.2 °C | Oda sıcaklığı 21.9 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 39.6 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 32.8 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.4 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.2 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.8 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 35.4 °C / 96 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

Samsung Galaxy Note 7 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 33% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 52% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

HTC 10 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.3% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 68% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 26% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 81% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Huawei P9 Plus audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 12% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (11.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (29.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 75% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 86% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 11% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Anlık tüketim

Kapalı / Bekleme modu	0.02 / 0.2 Watt
Boşta	0.72 / 1.37 / 1.44 Watt
Çalışırken	5.56 / 6.78 Watt


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

	Samsung Galaxy Note 7 3500 mAh	Huawei Mate 8 4000 mAh	Microsoft Lumia 950 XL 3340 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge 3600 mAh	Apple iPhone 6S Plus 2750 mAh	Huawei P9 Plus 3400 mAh	Samsung Galaxy Note Edge mAh
Power Consumption		-13%	-127%	4%	-3%	7%	-26%
Idle Minimum *	0.72	0.85 -18%	2.85 -296%	0.63 12%	0.5 31%	0.87 -21%	0.4 44%
Idle Average *	1.37	2.07 -51%	2.95 -115%	1.1 20%	1.9 -39%	1.2 12%	1.5 -9%
Idle Maximum *	1.44	2.28 -58%	3.26 -126%	1.56 -8%	2.2 -53%	1.27 12%	2.4 -67%
Load Average *	5.56	3.91 30%	8.92 -60%	5.95 -7%	3.2 42%	4.69 16%	6.9 -24%
Load Maximum *	6.78	4.69 31%	9.39 -38%	6.7 1%	6.4 6%	5.63 17%	11.8 -74%

* ... smaller is better

Batarya ömrü

Boşta (WLAN kapalı, minimum parlaklık)		23h 49min
WiFi Websurfing		10h 07min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		16h 00min
Çalışırken (maksimum parlaklık)		6h 01min

	Samsung Galaxy Note 7 3500 mAh	Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A mAh	Huawei Mate 8 4000 mAh	Microsoft Lumia 950 XL 3340 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge 3600 mAh	Apple iPhone 6S Plus 2750 mAh	Huawei P9 Plus 3400 mAh	LG Stylus 2 3000 mAh
Battery Runtime		-5%	11%	-38%	10%	-18%	-15%	-15%
Reader / Idle	1429	1775 24%	1872 31%	1078 -25%	1663 16%	1655 16%	1446 1%	1225 -14%
H.264	960		963 0%	611 -36%	914 -5%	714 -26%	776 -19%	697 -27%
WiFi v1.3	607	431 -29%	865 43%	369 -39%	732 21%	513 -15%	530 -13%	663 9%
Load	361	322 -11%	256 -29%	179 -50%	392 9%	197 -45%	263 -27%	258 -29%

Artılar

+ Harika ekran

+ Harika kamera

+ Uzun batarya süreleri

+ Birçok özelliğe sahip S-Pen

+ Cömert kullanılan sensörler

+ Hızlı LTE Cat. 9

+ Nihayet USB Type-C

+ OTG

+ Su ve tuza karşı dayanıklı

+ Kablosuz şarj ve hızlı şarj

+ Hızlı sistem çipi

Eksiler

- Yoğun kullanımda tıkanmalar

- Ortalama hoparlör

- Kötü WiFi performansı

- USB 3.1 imkanları kullanılmamış

- İris tarayıcı yeterince gelişmiş değil

- MHL veya Slimport desteği yok

In review: Samsung Galaxy Note 7 (SM-N930F). Test model courtesy of Notebooksbilliger.

Samsung, Galaxy Note 7 modeli ile yine harika bir akıllı telefon sunuyor ve bu cihazın gerçek bir rakibi yok. Bu kadar kullanışlı bir S-Pen hiçbir diğer cihazda bulunmuyor ve bir stylustan daha fazlası.

Ayrıca sunulan donanım da harika. Ekran ile başlayıp ekran ile son bulan bir liste bu. İşlemci, cömert ve hızlı bellek, su ve toza karşı dayanıklılık. Kamera harika resimler çekiyor ve batarya kullanımı oldukça uzun. Nihayet Samsung da USB C portu kullananlar arasına katılıyor.

Elbette bazı detaylar eleştirilebilir. WLAN çekim yönünden düşük bir performans sunuyor ve USB 3.1 daha iyi kullanılabilirmiş. Cihaz sadece USB 2.0 kablosu ile geliyor ve bunu anlamakta güçlük çekiyoruz. Hoparlörler de iyi olabilirmiş. Cihaz, Fiyatıyla da cebinizde delik açabilir.

Note serisinin fanları heyecanlanmakta haklı ve kullanışlı bir dijital cihaz arıyorsanız, daha iyisi yok.

Yazının orjinali için tıklayın.

Samsung Galaxy Note 7 - 2016-09-16 09/16/2016 v5.1 ^(old)
Daniel Schmidt

İşcilik

92%

Klavye

70 / 75 → 94%

Mouse

95%

Bağlanılabilirlik

54 / 60 → 89%

Ağırlık

91%

Batarya

95%

Görüntü

91%

Oyun performansı

58 / 63 → 92%

Uygulama performansı

61 / 70 → 87%

Isınma

87%

Ses

100%

Audio

59 / 91 → 65%

Camera

94%

Ortalama

81%

91%

Smartphone - Ortalama Ağırlık

Price comparison

Editor of the original article: Andreas Osthoff - Managing Editor Business Laptops - 1692 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2013

contact me via: LinkedIn

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Notebooklar Hakkında Aradığınız Herşey > İnceleme > Kısa inceleme: Samsung Galaxy Note 7

Daniel Schmidt, 2016-09-23 (Update: 2016-09-23)

Size Comparison

Display Response Times

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Samsung Galaxy Note 7 audio analysis

HTC 10 audio analysis

Huawei P9 Plus audio analysis

Artılar

Eksiler

Price comparison