Samsung's Galaxy S9+ trumps Apple's iPhone X in latest DxOMark benchmark

Posted:
in General Discussion
DxO on Thursday announced that the new Samsung Galaxy S9+ has achieved its best-ever DxOMark score, 99, toppling the Google Pixel 2's 98 and the Apple iPhone X's 97.




The S9+ is a smartphone "without any real weaknesses in the camera department," performing well in both photo and video regardless of the tested situation, DxO said. "Add one of the best smartphone zooms and a capable bokeh simulation mode to the mix, and the Galaxy S9 Plus is difficult to ignore for any photo-minded smartphone user."

The phone's signature feature is dual aperture support, allowing it to switch from f/2.4 to f/1.5 for more light, or simply for shallower depth-of-field. Most smartphones -- iPhones included -- can only ever shoot with a fixed aperture.

The S9+ still has some minor issues, among them the chance of halos, purple fringing, and/or blue or pink color casts.




While DxO's testing is thorough and uses a mix of lab and field testing, the company has admitted that its evaluations can be subjective, such that people will likely be well-off with any of the top-ranking smartphones.

Apple and Samsung regularly vie for the top spot in photography, which they see as an important bulletpoint for their phones. The iPhone X is equipped with dual-lens rear camera, allowing it to shoot in wide-angle at f/1.8 and 2x at f/2.4. It also employs technologies like optical image stabilization and a special Portrait mode, simulating DSLR-style bokeh.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 27
    So it gets 99, the Pixel 98 and the iPhone 97.

    I think “trump” is a poor choice of words.

    ”Barely beats” or “very slightly exceeds” would be more appropriate.
    StrangeDaysmagman1979netmagejony0chasm1983watto_cobraapplepieguy
  • Reply 2 of 27
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,056member
    Woah. They are setting fire to the smartphone market!
    auxiowatto_cobraapplepieguy
  • Reply 3 of 27
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    97, 98, 99? And this warrants the kind of headline we get for this report? I’m really pissed at how these tech blogs like AI keep the flame wars going with incendiary headlines. Does anyone really think anybody could tell the difference between a 97 and a 99 score outside of lab conditions? I think not. How would you react if some sales clerk at a T-mobile store told you about this test? If you were an iOS user would this make you switch? A difference of 2 points?

    And as for the pictures supplied it looks to me like the iPhone X and Pixel 2 photos are better than the S9 Plus. Good grief, why the constant oneupmanship game? Couldn’t the headline have been that the S9 Plus, Pixel 2, and iPhone X are very close in quality and all take great pictures? 
    edited March 2018 jahbladeStrangeDaysbonobobmagman1979flashfan207watto_cobraapplepieguy
  • Reply 4 of 27
    Unicorns_ReignUnicorns_Reign Posts: 6unconfirmed, member
    So it gets 99, the Pixel 98 and the iPhone 97.

    I think “trump” is a poor choice of words.

    ”Barely beats” or “very slightly exceeds” would be more appropriate.
    By definition the word "Trump" is correct. However the word "Trump" is used to emphasize how much you beat someone incorrectly just like the word "Literally" is overused in the incorrect way. I do agree with you though on your choice of words as they do represent in their win in a clearer manner of fact. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 27
    “Portrait mode”  :D
    watto_cobraapplepieguy
  • Reply 6 of 27
    mike1mike1 Posts: 3,275member
    I have a problem with findings like these. How do I know which one is more accurate if I wasn't there to shoot the photo.
    All we can see is the S9 photo is brighter. That doesn't mean that the Pixel 2 isn't a better representation of what I would see with the naked eye if I was there when the shots were taken. (Just using the extremes as an example.)

    Photography can either be a purely objective activity, which documents reality, or an artistic pursuit. Often it lies somewhere in the middle. That's why we use flashes in dark rooms. An honest evaluation of the camera's performance should offer the background of the shots. What would I have seen if I was there?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 27
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,858administrator
    So it gets 99, the Pixel 98 and the iPhone 97.

    I think “trump” is a poor choice of words.

    ”Barely beats” or “very slightly exceeds” would be more appropriate.
    The word "trump" is not quantitative, it is qualitative.

    In regards to fanning the flames: FTA: "While DxO's testing is thorough and uses a mix of lab and field testing, the company has admitted that its evaluations can be subjective, such that people will likely be well-off with any of the top-ranking smartphones."
    edited March 2018 chasmwatto_cobragatorguy
  • Reply 8 of 27
    mac_dogmac_dog Posts: 1,069member
    Samsung’s marketing team:

    ”Samsung needs more sales. Let’s muddy up the waters so customers who purchase our product don’t realize what a piece of shit they’ve spent their money on.”
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 27
    Color me shocked. /s
  • Reply 10 of 27
    larryalarrya Posts: 606member
    lkrupp said:
    97, 98, 99? And this warrants the kind of headline we get for this report? I’m really pissed at how these tech blogs like AI keep the flame wars going with incendiary headlines. Does anyone really think anybody could tell the difference between a 97 and a 99 score outside of lab conditions? I think not. How would you react if some sales clerk at a T-mobile store told you about this test? If you were an iOS user would this make you switch? A difference of 2 points?

    And as for the pictures supplied it looks to me like the iPhone X and Pixel 2 photos are better than the S9 Plus. Good grief, why the constant oneupmanship game? Couldn’t the headline have been that the S9 Plus, Pixel 2, and iPhone X are very close in quality and all take great pictures? 
    Yeah, I agree. It doesn’t matter much. Silver lining - maybe now that the X has the second best display, and the second best camera, we could see a price reduction (wishful thinking). 
    edited March 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 27
    hexclockhexclock Posts: 1,243member
    What happens when a phone reaches 100? Do they stop testing in perpetuity? I’m half joking. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 27
    KuyangkohKuyangkoh Posts: 838member
    Hahahahahaha....funny test mode.
    now what?? Let’s see how many millions they would sell. That would really TRUMP Clinton, ops
  • Reply 13 of 27
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    So it gets 99, the Pixel 98 and the iPhone 97.

    I think “trump” is a poor choice of words.

    ”Barely beats” or “very slightly exceeds” would be more appropriate.
    The word "trump" is not quantitative, it is qualitative.

    In regards to fanning the flames: FTA: "While DxO's testing is thorough and uses a mix of lab and field testing, the company has admitted that its evaluations can be subjective, such that people will likely be well-off with any of the top-ranking smartphones.”
    We’re complaining about the headline.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 27
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,858administrator
    lkrupp said:
    So it gets 99, the Pixel 98 and the iPhone 97.

    I think “trump” is a poor choice of words.

    ”Barely beats” or “very slightly exceeds” would be more appropriate.
    The word "trump" is not quantitative, it is qualitative.

    In regards to fanning the flames: FTA: "While DxO's testing is thorough and uses a mix of lab and field testing, the company has admitted that its evaluations can be subjective, such that people will likely be well-off with any of the top-ranking smartphones.”
    We’re complaining about the headline.
    I'm aware of what you're complaining about.
  • Reply 15 of 27
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,911member
    But... Consumer Reports said that the iPhone X had the best camera. Now I'm confused!

    FWIW, I would have said that the s9 edges out the iPhone X and Pixel 2. That would more accurately convey that the s9 was better, but by a slim margin.
    edited March 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 27
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,351member
    So it gets 99, the Pixel 98 and the iPhone 97.

    I think “trump” is a poor choice of words.

    ”Barely beats” or “very slightly exceeds” would be more appropriate.
    The days of DxO are numbered. 
    rinosaurmagman1979watto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 27
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Talk about DXO in a photography forum and they'll tell you what they think of their "tests".
    magman1979watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 27
    kruegdudekruegdude Posts: 340member
    Hmm

    "without any real weaknesses ...” 

    Followed later by

    “the chance of halos, purple fringing, and/or blue or pink color casts”

    Aren’t those weaknesses?
    magman1979netmagewatto_cobrarattlhedapplepieguy
  • Reply 19 of 27
    rinosaurrinosaur Posts: 32member
    DXO tests have long been flawed, not saying this particular result is correct or incorrect but they had done some outlandish rankings back in 2014/2015
    magman1979watto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 27
    magman1979magman1979 Posts: 1,292member
    It's funny that no one here, nor DxO, noticed or mentioned this little fact...

    By default, iPhone X / 8 / 8+ use HEIF image format, which is known to obfuscate fine image details due to the new compression algorithm.

    Having used my iPhone X in JPEG mode, I know it can easily match the S9 for detail resolution in images; I'm seeing compression smearing in these JPEG's they posted, and not ONCE do they mention in their test the baseline setup / options selected for the tests, which leads me to conclude this was a bunk test, as when you're doing comparisons like this, settings should be as close to equal as possible, including image storage format!

    DxO lost my respect years ago, and continue to fall down the rabbit hole with each passing asinine review they put out!
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.