Notebookcheck

Test du Samsung Galaxy A90 5G : la 5G à prix réduit

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (traduit par Prévots), 12/16/2019

Internet ultrarapide pour tout le monde ? Le but du Samsung Galaxy A90 5G est de rendre la 5G plus abordable. Mais à 749 €, il est loin d’être un téléphone à petit prix. Nous allons voir dans ce test si ce prix est néanmoins justifié.

Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Processeur
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
Carte graphique
Qualcomm Adreno 640
Mémoire
6144 Mo 
Écran
6.7 pouces 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 393 PPP, capacitif, Super AMOLED, encoche en goutte d'eau, brillant: oui
Disque dur
128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash, 128 Go 
, , 115 Go libres
Connexions
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, Connectique audio: USB C, Lecteur de cartes mémoires: micro SD jusqu'à 512GB, 1 Lecteur d'empreintes digitales, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Capteurs: accéléromètre, gyroscope, capteur de proximité, boussole, USB C
Réseau
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B4/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B2/​B3/​B4/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B12/​B13/​B17/​B20/​B26/​B28/​B38/​B40/​B41/​B66), 5G (n78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Taille
Hauteur x Largeur x Profondeur (en mm): 8.4 x 164.8 x 76.4
Batterie
4500 mAh Lithium-Polymère
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Système d'exploitation
Android 9.0 Pie
Appareil photo
Appareil photo primaire: 48 MPix f/​2,0, autofocus à détection de phase, flash LED, vidéos à 2160p / ​30 FPS, rotable (appareil photo 1) ; 8,0 MP, f/​2,2, grand-angle (appareil photo 2) ; 5.0MP, f/​2.2, profondeur de champ (appareil photo 3)
Appareil photo secondaire: 32 MPix f/2,0
Fonctionnalités additionnelles
Haut-parleurs: mono sur la tranche inférieure, Clavier: virtuel, chargeur rapide, câble USB C, écouteurs, outil pour carte SIM, 24 Mois Garantie, DAS : 0,377 W/​kg (tête), 1,547W/​kg (corps) ; réception LTE : jusqu'à 2 Gbit/s, envoi LTE : jusqu'à 316 Mbit/s ; réception 5G : jusqu'à 5 Gbit/s , fanless
Poids
206 g, Alimentation: 72 g
Prix
749 euros
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Appareils du comparatif

NoteDateModèlePoidsDriveTailleRésolutionBest Price
84%12/19Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
855, Adreno 640
206 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.7"2400x1080
87%12/19Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU
194 g64 GB SSD6.1"1792x828
87%08/19Samsung Galaxy A80
730, Adreno 618
220 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.7"2400x1080
87%10/19OnePlus 7T Pro
855+, Adreno 640
206 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.67"3120x1440
86%11/19Google Pixel 4
855, Adreno 640
162 g64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash5.7"2280x1080
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G

Comparaison des tailles

165.2 mm 76.5 mm 9.3 mm 220 g164.8 mm 76.4 mm 8.4 mm 206 g162.6 mm 75.9 mm 8.8 mm 206 g150.9 mm 75.7 mm 8.3 mm 194 g147.1 mm 68.8 mm 8.2 mm 162 g
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 64 GB SSD
563 (min: 490, max: 597) MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Google Pixel 4
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
526 (min: 413, max: 655) MBit/s ∼93% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Adreno 640, 855, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
513 (min: 457, max: 532) MBit/s ∼91%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Adreno 640, 855+, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
471 (min: 347, max: 505) MBit/s ∼84% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Adreno 618, 730, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
428 (min: 360, max: 501) MBit/s ∼76% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1014, n=476)
235 MBit/s ∼42% -54%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Google Pixel 4
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
591 (min: 564, max: 609) MBit/s ∼100% +18%
Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 64 GB SSD
529 (min: 204, max: 603) MBit/s ∼90% +6%
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Adreno 640, 855, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
501 (min: 479, max: 554) MBit/s ∼85%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Adreno 640, 855+, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
352 (min: 311, max: 375) MBit/s ∼60% -30%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Adreno 618, 730, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
282 (min: 249, max: 327) MBit/s ∼48% -44%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 966, n=476)
222 MBit/s ∼38% -56%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø513 (457-532)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø501 (479-554)
GPS Garmin Edge 520 : vue générale.
GPS Garmin Edge 520 : vue générale.
GPS Garmin Edge 520 - Virages.
GPS Garmin Edge 520 - Virages.
GPS Garmin Edge 520 : pont.
GPS Garmin Edge 520 : pont.
GPS Samsung Galaxy A90 : vue générale.
GPS Samsung Galaxy A90 : vue générale.
GPS Samsung Galaxy A90 - Virage.
GPS Samsung Galaxy A90 - Virage.
GPS Samsung Galaxy A90 : pont.
GPS Samsung Galaxy A90 : pont.

Comparaison des images

Choisir une scène pour naviguer dans la première image. Un clic permet de changer le niveau de zoom, un autre clic permet de revenir à l'image originale dans une nouvelle fenêtre. La première image montre l'original pris par l'appareil testé.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
Cliquer pour charger les images
ColorChecker Photo
24.7 ∆E
39.8 ∆E
29.8 ∆E
28.7 ∆E
34.3 ∆E
47 ∆E
36.5 ∆E
23.2 ∆E
27.4 ∆E
23.1 ∆E
47.2 ∆E
47.4 ∆E
20 ∆E
34.8 ∆E
23 ∆E
45.4 ∆E
29.5 ∆E
32.9 ∆E
40.2 ∆E
43.2 ∆E
40.5 ∆E
30.7 ∆E
21.1 ∆E
11.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy A90 5G: 32.58 ∆E min: 11.76 - max: 47.41 ∆E
ColorChecker Photo
7.4 ∆E
5.5 ∆E
5 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
4.5 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
6.2 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
5.5 ∆E
10 ∆E
2.4 ∆E
3 ∆E
11.8 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
1.9 ∆E
1.9 ∆E
1.4 ∆E
3.6 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy A90 5G: 5.59 ∆E min: 1.37 - max: 11.85 ∆E
Galaxy A90 5G - Mire de test.
Mire de test.
Galaxy A90 5G - Mire de test à 1 Lux.
573
cd/m²
581
cd/m²
601
cd/m²
566
cd/m²
581
cd/m²
595
cd/m²
567
cd/m²
574
cd/m²
590
cd/m²
Homogénéité de la luminosité
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 601 cd/m² Moyenne: 580.9 cd/m² Minimum: 1.88 cd/m²
Homogénéité de la luminosité: 94 %
Valeur mesurée au centre, sur batterie: 581 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Valeurs des noirs: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.44 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
117.1% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.118
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Super AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.7
Apple iPhone 11
IPS, 1792x828, 6.1
Samsung Galaxy A80
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.7
OnePlus 7T Pro
AMOLED, 3120x1440, 6.67
Google Pixel 4
OLED, 2280x1080, 5.7
Screen
45%
12%
26%
32%
Brightness middle
581
679
17%
478
-18%
606
4%
447
-23%
Brightness
581
671
15%
486
-16%
611
5%
439
-24%
Brightness Distribution
94
93
-1%
96
2%
95
1%
93
-1%
Black Level *
0.68
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.44
0.8
85%
2.97
45%
3.46
36%
0.8
85%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
13.05
2.4
82%
10.18
22%
5.64
57%
1.4
89%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4
1.1
72%
2.5
37%
2
50%
1.3
67%
Gamma
2.118 104%
2.24 98%
2.031 108%
2.258 97%
2.22 99%
CCT
5882 111%
6610 98%
6533 99%
6779 96%
6213 105%
Contrast
999

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Scintillement / MLI (Modulation de largeur d'impulsion)

Afin d'abaisser la luminosité de l'écran, certains ordinateurs portables font varier très rapidement le rétroéclairage entre éteint et allumé. La fréquence à laquelle le rétroéclairage s'éteint et se rallume est normalement fixée à une valeur qui permet de rendre la variation indétectable à l'œil nu? Si la fréquence est trop basse, certaines personnes peuvent être sujettes à une fatigue oculaire, des maux de tête ou même percevoir les variations.
Scintillement / MLI (Modulation de largeur d'impulsion) décelé 223 Hz

Le rétroéclairage de l'écran scintille à la fréquence de 223 Hz (certainement du fait de l'utilisation d'une MDI - Modulation de largeur d'impulsion) .

La fréquence de rafraîchissement de 223 Hz est relativement faible, les personnes les plus sensibles devraient percevoir un scintillement et être sujettes à une fatigue oculaire accrue (avec le niveau de luminosité indiqué)

En comparaison, 51 % des appareils testés n'emploient pas MDI pour assombrir leur écran. Nous avons relevé une moyenne à 13573 (minimum : 43 - maximum : 2500000) Hz dans le cas où une MDI était active.

Temps de réponse de l'écran

Le temps de réponse d'un écran mesure la rapidité à laquelle l'écran est capable de changer une couleur pour une autre. Un temps de réponse élevé se traduit par une image floutée pour les objets en mouvement. Les joueurs bénéficieront de faibles latences d'affichage en jeu.
       Temps de réponse noir à blanc
6 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées↗ 3 ms hausse
↘ 3 ms chute
L'écran montre de très faibles temps de réponse, parfait pour le jeu.
En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.8 (minimum) et 240 (maximum) ms. » 4 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances.
Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont meilleures que la moyenne (24.9 ms) de tous les appareils testés.
       Temps de réponse gris 50% à gris 80%
10 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées↗ 5 ms hausse
↘ 5 ms chute
L'écran montre de bons temps de réponse, mais insuffisant pour du jeu compétitif.
En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.9 (minimum) et 636 (maximum) ms. » 8 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances.
Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont meilleures que la moyenne (39.5 ms) de tous les appareils testés.
Geekbench 5
Vulkan Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2154 Points ∼89%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
2430 Points ∼100% +13%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2081 Points ∼86% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (1849 - 2154, n=7)
2032 Points ∼84% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (143 - 3222, n=40)
1355 Points ∼56% -37%
OpenCL Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2369 Points ∼87%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
2716 Points ∼100% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2218 - 2395, n=7)
2302 Points ∼85% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (183 - 4593, n=46)
1803 Points ∼66% -24%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2733 Points ∼79%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3463 Points ∼100% +27%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
2940 Points ∼85% +8%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2494 Points ∼72% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2441 - 2852, n=8)
2616 Points ∼76% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (807 - 3575, n=58)
1886 Points ∼54% -31%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
740 Points ∼55%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
1343 Points ∼100% +81%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
792 Points ∼59% +7%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
725 Points ∼54% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (725 - 750, n=8)
742 Points ∼55% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (150 - 1344, n=58)
537 Points ∼40% -27%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10251 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
7177 Points ∼69% -30%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10442 Points ∼100% +2%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10254 Points ∼98% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8342 - 11440, n=17)
9650 Points ∼92% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11690, n=413)
5411 Points ∼52% -47%
Work performance score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
12747 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
8626 Points ∼68% -32%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
12645 Points ∼99% -1%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
12190 Points ∼96% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (10330 - 14439, n=17)
12152 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 15193, n=577)
5882 Points ∼46% -54%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3308 Points ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2708 Points ∼76% -18%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
3564 Points ∼100% +8%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3044 Points ∼85% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2104 - 3365, n=17)
3013 Points ∼85% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=87)
2660 Points ∼75% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5703 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2160 Points ∼33% -62%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6527 Points ∼100% +14%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5228 Points ∼80% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (4236 - 5884, n=17)
5596 Points ∼86% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=87)
2655 Points ∼41% -53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4913 Points ∼89%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2262 Points ∼41% -54%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5509 Points ∼100% +12%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4509 Points ∼82% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3800 - 5012, n=17)
4688 Points ∼85% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=87)
2439 Points ∼44% -50%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4576 Points ∼98%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3219 Points ∼69% -30%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3160 Points ∼67% -31%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4683 Points ∼100% +2%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4112 Points ∼88% -10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (1934 - 4576, n=17)
3845 Points ∼82% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5576, n=421)
2010 Points ∼43% -56%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6990 Points ∼86%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
8119 Points ∼100% +16%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2438 Points ∼30% -65%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8006 Points ∼99% +15%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6383 Points ∼79% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5184 - 7115, n=17)
6772 Points ∼83% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=421)
1808 Points ∼22% -74%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6257 Points ∼90%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
6067 Points ∼88% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2568 Points ∼37% -59%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6916 Points ∼100% +11%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5685 Points ∼82% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3969 - 6312, n=17)
5759 Points ∼83% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6916, n=422)
1684 Points ∼24% -73%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4119 Points ∼89%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3411 Points ∼74% -17%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3025 Points ∼66% -27%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4604 Points ∼100% +12%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4072 Points ∼88% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2345 - 4703, n=16)
3824 Points ∼83% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5133, n=449)
1918 Points ∼42% -53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10024 Points ∼56%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
17853 Points ∼100% +78%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3635 Points ∼20% -64%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
11448 Points ∼64% +14%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9217 Points ∼52% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (6358 - 10420, n=16)
9490 Points ∼53% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=449)
2415 Points ∼14% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7602 Points ∼83%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
9199 Points ∼100% +21%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3479 Points ∼38% -54%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8605 Points ∼94% +13%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7196 Points ∼78% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5268 - 8141, n=16)
7096 Points ∼77% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=449)
2036 Points ∼22% -73%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4374 Points ∼97%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
2429 Points ∼54% -44%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3215 Points ∼71% -26%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4519 Points ∼100% +3%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4199 Points ∼93% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2705 - 4429, n=17)
3918 Points ∼87% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4909, n=501)
1916 Points ∼42% -56%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6231 Points ∼88%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
5726 Points ∼81% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2244 Points ∼32% -64%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
7044 Points ∼100% +13%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6214 Points ∼88% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5663 - 6362, n=17)
6242 Points ∼89% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=501)
1503 Points ∼21% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5694 Points ∼91%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
4400 Points ∼70% -23%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2405 Points ∼38% -58%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6266 Points ∼100% +10%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5615 Points ∼90% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (4556 - 5747, n=17)
5498 Points ∼88% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=502)
1450 Points ∼23% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4231 Points ∼93%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3211 Points ∼71% -24%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4503 Points ∼99% +6%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4540 Points ∼100% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3001 - 4540, n=16)
3864 Points ∼85% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4900, n=541)
1779 Points ∼39% -58%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9703 Points ∼91%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3478 Points ∼33% -64%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10637 Points ∼100% +10%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8765 Points ∼82% -10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (6122 - 10008, n=16)
9255 Points ∼87% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=540)
1976 Points ∼19% -80%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7537 Points ∼92%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3415 Points ∼42% -55%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8165 Points ∼100% +8%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7263 Points ∼89% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5251 - 7820, n=16)
7039 Points ∼86% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8338, n=543)
1710 Points ∼21% -77%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
39293 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
33864 Points ∼86% -14%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
19389 Points ∼49% -51%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
30561 Points ∼78% -22%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
37641 Points ∼96% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (20636 - 45072, n=16)
31794 Points ∼81% -19%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=701)
14394 Points ∼37% -63%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
105631 Points ∼50%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
209204 Points ∼100% +98%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
51091 Points ∼24% -52%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
118129 Points ∼56% +12%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
102168 Points ∼49% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (97354 - 110432, n=15)
105649 Points ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=699)
22589 Points ∼11% -79%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
76813 Points ∼79%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
97276 Points ∼100% +27%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
37475 Points ∼39% -51%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
72173 Points ∼74% -6%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
73984 Points ∼76% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (55771 - 83518, n=15)
68785 Points ∼71% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=699)
18255 Points ∼19% -76%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
118 fps ∼37%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
322 fps ∼100% +173%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
84 fps ∼26% -29%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
185 fps ∼57% +57%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
139 fps ∼43% +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (85 - 167, n=18)
153 fps ∼48% +30%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=714)
38.7 fps ∼12% -67%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼68%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼68% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
59 fps ∼67% -2%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
60 fps ∼68% 0%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
88 fps ∼100% +47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (59 - 91, n=18)
63.8 fps ∼73% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=723)
28.5 fps ∼32% -52%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
88 fps ∼50%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
175 fps ∼100% +99%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
42 fps ∼24% -52%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
111 fps ∼63% +26%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
75 fps ∼43% -15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (50 - 102, n=18)
92.5 fps ∼53% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=619)
22.4 fps ∼13% -75%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼90%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼90% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
36 fps ∼54% -40%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
57 fps ∼85% -5%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
67 fps ∼100% +12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (51 - 85, n=18)
60.3 fps ∼90% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=628)
19.7 fps ∼29% -67%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
69 fps ∼59%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
117 fps ∼100% +70%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
30 fps ∼26% -57%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
79 fps ∼68% +14%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
57 fps ∼49% -17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (35 - 71, n=18)
62.1 fps ∼53% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=484)
18.2 fps ∼16% -74%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
57 fps ∼95%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +5%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
26 fps ∼43% -54%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
40 fps ∼67% -30%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
51 fps ∼85% -11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (36 - 58, n=18)
48.3 fps ∼81% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=486)
17 fps ∼28% -70%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
24 fps ∼40%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +150%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
10 fps ∼17% -58%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
17 fps ∼28% -29%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
24 fps ∼40% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (14 - 26, n=17)
21.7 fps ∼36% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=211)
9.95 fps ∼17% -59%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
16 fps ∼48%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
33 fps ∼100% +106%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
6.8 fps ∼21% -57%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
19 fps ∼58% +19%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
13 fps ∼39% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8.5 - 24, n=18)
16.5 fps ∼50% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 33, n=210)
6.89 fps ∼21% -57%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
37 fps ∼62%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +62%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
16 fps ∼27% -57%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
26 fps ∼43% -30%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
33 fps ∼55% -11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (22 - 38, n=17)
33.8 fps ∼56% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=215)
14.7 fps ∼25% -60%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
41 fps ∼47%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
87 fps ∼100% +112%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
18 fps ∼21% -56%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
47 fps ∼54% +15%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
32 fps ∼37% -22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (22 - 43, n=18)
40.3 fps ∼46% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 87, n=215)
16.4 fps ∼19% -60%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
41 fps ∼56%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
73 fps ∼100% +78%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
17 fps ∼23% -59%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
48 fps ∼66% +17%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
34 fps ∼47% -17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (22 - 42, n=18)
39.4 fps ∼54% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=409)
12.4 fps ∼17% -70%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
36 fps ∼60%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +67%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
15 fps ∼25% -58%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
24 fps ∼40% -33%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
30 fps ∼50% -17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (21 - 41, n=18)
32.3 fps ∼54% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=413)
11.1 fps ∼19% -69%
BaseMark OS II
Web (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1454 Points ∼91%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
1117 Points ∼70% -23%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
1236 Points ∼77% -15%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1601 Points ∼100% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (1076 - 1601, n=17)
1344 Points ∼84% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=650)
767 Points ∼48% -47%
Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9264 Points ∼87%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3855 Points ∼36% -58%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10618 Points ∼100% +15%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9307 Points ∼88% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8125 - 9510, n=17)
9197 Points ∼87% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=650)
2126 Points ∼20% -77%
Memory (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4996 Points ∼77%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3435 Points ∼53% -31%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5091 Points ∼79% +2%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6458 Points ∼100% +29%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2661 - 7500, n=17)
5010 Points ∼78% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=650)
1571 Points ∼24% -69%
System (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8670 Points ∼93%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
6484 Points ∼70% -25%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
9294 Points ∼100% +7%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8058 Points ∼87% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5993 - 9143, n=17)
8548 Points ∼92% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=650)
3061 Points ∼33% -65%
Overall (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4915 Points ∼93%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3129 Points ∼59% -36%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4992 Points ∼95% +2%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5277 Points ∼100% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3847 - 5397, n=17)
4768 Points ∼90% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=650)
1535 Points ∼29% -69%
AnTuTu v8
UX (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
69801 Points ∼89%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
78191 Points ∼100% +12%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
51228 Points ∼66% -27%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (51228 - 72343, n=6)
62647 Points ∼80% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6969 - 82947, n=35)
42935 Points ∼55% -38%
MEM (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
71045 Points ∼100%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
64026 Points ∼90% -10%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
52596 Points ∼74% -26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (52596 - 71045, n=6)
59887 Points ∼84% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (24176 - 100390, n=35)
49142 Points ∼69% -31%
GPU (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
166593 Points ∼84%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
199051 Points ∼100% +19%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
158097 Points ∼79% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (158097 - 175532, n=6)
168202 Points ∼85% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5938 - 209164, n=35)
86043 Points ∼43% -48%
CPU (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
131120 Points ∼90%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
145386 Points ∼100% +11%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
114777 Points ∼79% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (114777 - 140166, n=6)
134137 Points ∼92% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (40620 - 168185, n=35)
92147 Points ∼63% -30%
Total Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
438559 Points ∼90%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
486654 Points ∼100% +11%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
376698 Points ∼77% -14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (376698 - 450074, n=6)
424873 Points ∼87% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (84645 - 534558, n=35)
270267 Points ∼56% -38%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
132.886 Points ∼100% +106%
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G (Chrome 78)
64.578 Points ∼49%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
62.417 Points ∼47% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (45.5 - 67, n=15)
58.4 Points ∼44% -10%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
56.678 Points ∼43% -12%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75)
40.021 Points ∼30% -38%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 133, n=118)
36.3 Points ∼27% -44%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
293.36 Points ∼100% +158%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
115.44 Points ∼39% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G (Chrome 78)
113.78 Points ∼39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90.8 - 120, n=15)
110 Points ∼37% -3%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
107.51 Points ∼37% -6%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75)
77.376 Points ∼26% -32%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=547)
42.7 Points ∼15% -62%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
157 runs/min ∼100% +137%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chome 78)
66.4 runs/min ∼42% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G (Chrome 78)
66.2 runs/min ∼42%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (42.5 - 67.9, n=14)
62 runs/min ∼39% -6%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
61.8 runs/min ∼39% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 157, n=106)
40 runs/min ∼25% -40%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chome 75)
38.9 runs/min ∼25% -41%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
184 Points ∼100% +92%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90 - 129, n=18)
106 Points ∼58% +10%
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G (Chrome 78)
96 Points ∼52%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
94 Points ∼51% -2%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
93 Points ∼51% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75)
77 Points ∼42% -20%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=179)
67.4 Points ∼37% -30%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
48819 Points ∼100% +113%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
23999 Points ∼49% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17011 - 25640, n=18)
23212 Points ∼48% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G (Chrome 78)
22936 Points ∼47%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
22572 Points ∼46% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75)
16358 Points ∼34% -29%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=708)
6954 Points ∼14% -70%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (571 - 59466, n=733)
10398 ms * ∼100% -386%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75)
3027 ms * ∼29% -41%
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G (Chrome 78)
2139.4 ms * ∼21%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
2133.5 ms * ∼21% -0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1852 - 2611, n=17)
2133 ms * ∼21% -0%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
2072.2 ms * ∼20% +3%
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
572.8 ms * ∼6% +73%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Samsung Galaxy A90 5GSamsung Galaxy A80OnePlus 7T ProGoogle Pixel 4Average 128 GB UFS 3.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-64%
-28%
-39%
-9%
-58%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
59.4 (Tohsiba Exceria Pro M501)
56.9 (54.5 - 59.4, n=2)
-4%
49.8 (1.7 - 87.1, n=449)
-16%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
75.1 (Tohsiba Exceria Pro M501)
72.8 (70.5 - 75.1, n=2)
-3%
68 (8.1 - 96.5, n=449)
-9%
Random Write 4KB
168.5
21.6
-87%
26
-85%
146.64
-13%
123 (29.9 - 170, n=3)
-27%
24 (0.14 - 259, n=777)
-86%
Random Read 4KB
190.5
117.5
-38%
169
-11%
122.38
-36%
184 (170 - 192, n=3)
-3%
49.4 (1.59 - 226, n=777)
-74%
Sequential Write 256KB
522.3
190.4
-64%
405
-22%
247.73
-53%
421 (218 - 522, n=3)
-19%
101 (2.99 - 590, n=777)
-81%
Sequential Read 256KB
1418.4
501.5
-65%
1489
5%
655.4
-54%
1413 (1406 - 1418, n=3)
0%
283 (12.1 - 1781, n=777)
-80%
0102030405060Tooltip
; Arena of Valor; min; 1.32.1.2: Ø59.7 (49-60)
; Arena of Valor; high HD; 1.32.1.2: Ø59.8 (57-60)
; Shadow Fight 3; high; 1.19.4: Ø59.7 (58-60)
; Shadow Fight 3; minimal; 1.19.4: Ø59.6 (50-60)
 44.5 °C40.3 °C37.5 °C 
 44.7 °C40 °C37.3 °C 
 43.6 °C40.1 °C37.3 °C 
Maximum: 44.7 °C
Moyenne: 40.6 °C
33 °C37.6 °C39.7 °C
34.2 °C38.2 °C40.5 °C
35.1 °C38.5 °C40.1 °C
Maximum: 40.5 °C
Moyenne: 37.4 °C
Alimentation (valeur maximale)  43.5 °C | Température ambiante de la pièce 20.7 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 40.6 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.7 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 35.5 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.5 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.7 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204351.22536.842.33132.833.94033.734.85040.136.26331.330.48024.725.810025.624.412522.124.516019.924.520019.333.525017.241.931517.448.240017.150.850017.352.96301556.78001560.4100018.666.3125014.570.2160015.769.9200014.470.1250014.469.6315014.170400014.268.2500014.359.9630014.566.2800014.5681000014.566.61250014.559.21600014.741.9SPL62.464.460.727.579.8N15.51612.9142.9median 15median 59.9Delta1.513.143.948.443.64238.338.638.342.441.245.934.139.82730.128.629.627.929.226.132.225.141.72249.420.557.420.561.820.664.418.666.718.170.718.575.117.972.318.674.817.873.817.573.516.970.616.863.51768.81778.117.273.417.166.817.154.917.360.965.174.766.430.384.719.134.418.71.460.5median 18.1median 66.72.711.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy A90 5GSamsung Galaxy A80
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 71% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 19% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 82% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 13% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy A80 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 36% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 60% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consommation énergétique
Éteint/en veilledarklight 0 / 0.2 Watts
Au reposdarkmidlight 0.6 / 0.9 / 1.4 Watts
Fortement sollicité midlight 4.5 / 9 Watts
 color bar
Légende: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
4500 mAh
Apple iPhone 11
3110 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A80
3700 mAh
OnePlus 7T Pro
4085 mAh
Google Pixel 4
2800 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-59%
-5%
-129%
-34%
-33%
-28%
Idle Minimum *
0.6
0.56
7%
0.6
-0%
2.1
-250%
1.01
-68%
0.967 (0.6 - 1.96, n=17)
-61%
0.881 (0.2 - 3.4, n=800)
-47%
Idle Average *
0.9
2.99
-232%
1.2
-33%
3
-233%
1.63
-81%
1.519 (0.85 - 2.8, n=17)
-69%
1.741 (0.6 - 6.2, n=799)
-93%
Idle Maximum *
1.4
3.02
-116%
1.4
-0%
3.5
-150%
1.69
-21%
1.841 (1 - 2.9, n=17)
-32%
2.03 (0.74 - 6.6, n=800)
-45%
Load Average *
4.5
4.17
7%
5
-11%
5.3
-18%
4.67
-4%
4.6 (3.64 - 5.8, n=17)
-2%
4.07 (0.8 - 10.8, n=794)
10%
Load Maximum *
9
5.44
40%
7.1
21%
8.3
8%
8.78
2%
9.1 (7.49 - 11.9, n=17)
-1%
5.94 (1.2 - 14.2, n=794)
34%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Autonomie
Au repos (module WiFi éteint, luminosité au minimum)
35h 56min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
15h 46min
En lecture de Big Buck Bunny encodé en H.264 1080p
16h 27min
Fortement sollicité (luminosité au maximum)
4h 58min
Samsung Galaxy A90 5G
4500 mAh
Apple iPhone 11
3110 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A80
3700 mAh
OnePlus 7T Pro
4085 mAh
Google Pixel 4
2800 mAh
Autonomie de la batterie
7%
-21%
-5%
-45%
Reader / Idle
2156
2765
28%
1796
-17%
2015
-7%
1007
-53%
H.264
987
1147
16%
902
-9%
957
-3%
617
-37%
WiFi v1.3
946
866
-8%
713
-25%
912
-4%
460
-51%
Load
298
267
-10%
200
-33%
283
-5%
185
-38%

Points positifs

+ prix, pour un smartphone 5G
+ précision du GPS
+ stockage
+ lecteur micro SD
+ luminosité de l'écran
+ niveau de performances
+ autonomie

Points négatifs

- absence de Wifi 6
- haut-parleur
- écran non HDR
- chauffe en cas de sollicitations, throttling
- qualité d'appel
- appareil photo sans OIS ni zoom réglable en continu

Verdict

En test : le Samsung Galaxy A90 5G. Modèle de test aimablement fourni par Samsung Allemagne.
En test : le Samsung Galaxy A90 5G. Modèle de test aimablement fourni par Samsung Allemagne.

Pour l’instant, ceux qui voudraient de la 5G à petit prix devront se passer de certaines fonctionnalités – comme c’est le cas ici avec notre Samsung Galaxy A90 5G. D’un côté, l’appareil possède des arguments face aux smartphones haut de gammes, tels une excellente autonomie (mais sur laquelle l’influence du module 5G n’a pas pu être déterminée), et un lecteur de carte micro SD.

Ainsi, le choix ou non de l’A90 5G dépendra avant tout des goûts de l’utilisateur : l’appareil photo, le haut-parleur, la configuration de mémoire et les performances sont un peu médiocres pour un appareil à ce prix, et l’absence de certaines fonctionnalités, comme le HDR, la certification IP ou la charge sans-fil, pourrait également en rebuter plus d’un.

Le Samsung Galaxy A90 5G est un bon smartphone 5G, avec un peu moins de fonctionnalités que les concurrents haut de gammes.

Le Galaxy A90 5G est cependant l’un des moyens les moins chers de profiter de la 5G – si l’on excepte les importations d’appareils chinois. Le smartphone faisant une bonne impression générale, et possédant même des arguments uniques, nous pouvons le recommander pour les fans de 5G au budget un peu réduit.

L’intégralité de cette critique est disponible en anglais en suivant ce lien.

Samsung Galaxy A90 5G - 12/09/2019 v7
Florian Schmitt

Châssis
79%
Clavier
65 / 75 → 87%
Dispositif de pointage
96%
Connectivité
48 / 70 → 69%
Poids
88%
Autonomie
91%
Écran
83%
Performances en jeu
57 / 64 → 89%
Performances dans les applications
79 / 86 → 91%
Chauffe
87%
Nuisance sonore
100%
Audio
66 / 90 → 73%
Appareil photo
69%
Moyenne
77%
84%
Smartphone - Moyenne compensée

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Revues et rapports de ordinateurs portatifs et smartphones, ordiphones > Critiques > Test du Samsung Galaxy A90 5G : la 5G à prix réduit
Florian Schmitt, 2019-12-16 (Update: 2019-12-16)