Exynos-based Samsung Galaxy Note 9 to be speedier than the Snapdragon variant

Exynos-based Samsung Galaxy Note 9 to be speedier than the Snapdragon variant
Samsung has made a habit out of launching its flagship phones with different processors (either Qualcomm Snapdragon, or Exynos), depending on the market. This was the case with the Galaxy S9 series - released earlier this year - and things won't change with the upcoming Galaxy Note 9, which is expected to be announced sometime in the second half of 2018.

Not long after seeing a Snapdragon 845-based Galaxy Note 9 (model number SM-N960U) in a benchmark test, we've now spotted a test revealing a version of the phone that's powered by Samsung's own Exynos 9810 CPU. Similar to the Snapdragon variant, the Exynos-based Galaxy Note 9 (model number SM-N960N) is listed on Geekbench, runs Android 8.1 Oreo, and features 6 GB of RAM - not 8 GB of RAM, as a previous fake test wanted us to believe.

The new benchmark test shows that the processor performance scores of the Exynos Note 9 are superior to those of the Snapdragon variant: 2737 in single-core and 9064 in multi-core (vs. 2190 and 8806, respectively). Thus, in real life, the Exynos 9810-based Galaxy Note 9 should be a bit faster than the model powered by Qualcomm's Snapdragon 845. But that shouldn't surprise anyone, as the Exynos 9810-based Galaxy S9 is also faster than the Snapdragon 845-based S9.

Just like the Samsung Galaxy S9 and S9+ that are powered by the Exynos 9810 processor, the Exynos Note 9 will likely not be released in the US, where only the Snapdragon 845 model should be sold (at least officially). Nevertheless, we're hoping that both variants of the Samsung Galaxy Note 9 will be worthy successors to last year's Galaxy Note 8 (pictured above). 

Related phones

Galaxy Note 9
  • Display 6.4" 1440 x 2960 pixels
  • Camera 12 MP / 8 MP front
  • Processor Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Octa-core, 2800 MHz
  • Storage 128 GB + microSDXC
  • Battery 4000 mAh(29h 3G talk time)



1. lee480 unregistered

well, sammy fans can hate, but the fact is Exynos S9 have bad battery life. its 2018, minute increments in benchmark isnt really noticeable.

3. TechSceptic

Posts: 1156; Member since: Feb 05, 2018

Saying it has a bad battery life is an overreaction, and i'm saying this as an ACTUAL Exynos Galaxy S9 owner.

6. lee480 unregistered

I am an ACTUAL Exynos Galaxy S9 owner too and it is definitely not as good as the iphone 7 im using previously. of course as expected we can expect sammy fanboys start to down vote any posts critical of samsung but im chill. cheers!

7. TechSceptic

Posts: 1156; Member since: Feb 05, 2018

Let me get this straight. I'm saying that The Exynos Galaxy S9 doesn't have horses**t battery life, and that makes me a fanboy, instead of you possibly being a hater? Yeah, your bias is much more evident. The Exynos Galaxy S9 has proven to have at the very least the same kind of battery life as the average flagship smartphone, so evidence is on my side, not yours. All i said was that it wasn't bad. One of the best battery life tools is GSMarena's, it's definitely not Phonearena's, and in GSMarena's battery life tests the Exynos Galaxy S9 scores 78h, while the likes of the iPhone X scores 74h, and the iPhone 7 scores 61h. That's quite conclusive. If you look at battery life tests on youtube, then you will see that the Galaxy S9 also beats the likes of the iPhone X, which seems to be better than the iPhone 7. Cheers!

29. legiloca

Posts: 1676; Member since: Nov 11, 2014

I have the S9 Plus and I can say the battery life is OK. Casual web browsing, chit chats, Youtube they're all okay but the usual Samsung lag/stutter occurs when your performance mode is Default, trying using the Performance mode toggle, it has everything for everyone and speaking of which, gaming takes a chunk because I always toggle the Gaming performance mode on cause I don't like seeing my games throttle frame rates as if am using a 2013 phone. Long story short, it's OK depending really on how you use it, oh and btw I find the RAM Management still a bit too aggressive cause it can keep some apps but not games, pretty weird.

12. Macready

Posts: 1824; Member since: Dec 08, 2014

N=1, uncontrolled test and comparison with an unrelated phone. Sounds legit. Gsmarena test tells the full story.

54. t3at1m3

Posts: 12; Member since: Jul 05, 2017

Of course is legit

15. ColinW

Posts: 412; Member since: Jun 04, 2014

I have a 9 plus and it lasts a lot longer than the iPhone 7, which really has a poor battery life once you start to really use it. This is backed up by GSMarenas battery life tests. The smaller 9 will still outlast the 7 as well, most phones will.

18. darkkjedii

Posts: 31310; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

We’re not shocked you’d say that.

16. ColinW

Posts: 412; Member since: Jun 04, 2014

I have a 9 plus and it lasts a lot longer than the iPhone 7, which really has a poor battery life once you start to really use it. This is backed up by GSMarenas battery life tests. The smaller 9 will still outlast the 7 as well, most phones will.

24. Maccyb

Posts: 11; Member since: Oct 06, 2017

You are definitely an iSheep. The iPhone 7 battery cannot even come close to the Exynos Note8.

5. Phonehex

Posts: 767; Member since: Feb 16, 2016

The Exynos variant is surprisingly giving me better battery life. After one month with the SD845 variant i switched to the Exynos (Needed Dual Sim ) . Its giving me better battery life.Using the Exynos for about 4 weeks now.

11. KingSam

Posts: 1476; Member since: Mar 13, 2016

The only problem with the exysnos s9 is the cpu tuning. Anandtech did a complete analysis and even managed to somewhat mitigate the problem so there's no reason Samsung engineers can't do the same or better for the note 9.

13. TechSceptic

Posts: 1156; Member since: Feb 05, 2018

Well it seems like they have done some major tinkering, as the single core score is 2700 for the Exynos Note 9, while it is 3700 for the Exynos Galaxy S9 at the moment. It will be interesting to see what they have done that have caused this difference.

25. Back_from_beyond

Posts: 1438; Member since: Sep 04, 2015

Maybe Samsung realized that the high performance comes at a cost that it kills the battery faster, you know that issue Apple has that's caused by the high performance cores. Maybe Samsung has opted to limit the performance cores and boosted performance of the smaller cores to make up for the difference. It would also improve battery life by quite a bit too. It may also even out performance between the two different SoCs it will use.

26. TechSceptic

Posts: 1156; Member since: Feb 05, 2018

Yeah, i think it's definitely something like that. The only thing i hoped for is that this also brings improved an improved scheduler with it, as that would make the smartphones even faster, and they aren't even slow as it is, but i'm always up for improvements. I would be fine if the Exynos equipped Galaxy smartphones didn't speed up tho, as they're among the fastest smartphones as it is, so i would definitely be happier with an improved battery life. I really want Phonearena or anyone to get on this tho, in order to see what is different, once it arrives. I wonder if these changes are going to trickle down to the Exynos Galaxy S9.

48. deleon629

Posts: 469; Member since: Oct 04, 2014

You're right. I think the only thing missing is the mention that the exynos chips are tuned for best results & performance in the Asian market, specifically the connectivity tech in South Korea. This also explains why the turnover rate for Samsung phones in South Korea is so low: The s3 was the most widely used device in 2016; almost 4 years after its release.

2. hansip87

Posts: 228; Member since: Nov 10, 2015

whatever Sammy.. as long as your os lags, benchmark does nothing.

4. TechSceptic

Posts: 1156; Member since: Feb 05, 2018

The most interesting thing about this whole benchmark listing is that the Exynos Galaxy S9 scored 3700 in single core and 9000 in multi core, which is quite different from the one listed here for the Exynos Note 9. Clearly Samsung has done some tinkering with the Exynos 9810 SoC, so i'm very much interested in more in-depth benchmarks to try and see what is different. I would expect even better battery life from the Note 9 based on this benchmark.

32. Trex95

Posts: 2383; Member since: Mar 03, 2013

Nite line always comes with less score than ordinary S line since Note 7 nothing new.

44. vincelongman

Posts: 5724; Member since: Feb 10, 2013

Yea lets wait for real world analysis I assume Samsung has focused on closing the efficiency gap with the 845 at the cost of increasing the performance gap That being said, I hope Samsung prove me wrong

8. AgentZero

Posts: 314; Member since: Aug 16, 2014

im sorry this is a joke, the kirin 980 will be on a 7nm and will definitely be faster, the 2018 iPhone A12 will also be on 7nm and it will be a different beast … and the note 9 will cost 900-1000$ and use an outdated SoC compared to the competition and it will be branded as a power user flagship …. that is unacceptable.. Samsung can do better I know it and we all know it I just don't know why they hold back …

19. jellmoo

Posts: 2625; Member since: Oct 31, 2011

Dude, they are on different product cycles. Obviously the newer SoC will be faster. But they are released at different times. That's like complaining that the 980 will be obsolete because the SD 855 will be out right after...

21. AgentZero

Posts: 314; Member since: Aug 16, 2014

the product cycle is not the point , and the 855 is irrelevant to this , the note 9 will be competing with the mate 20 and the plus sized iPhone .. and they turned it into a s9+ with an S-pen … there is no logical reason to go for it unless you really love the S-pen

22. jellmoo

Posts: 2625; Member since: Oct 31, 2011

So which SoC should they use? One that does not currently exist? Of course the product lifecycle matters. Which chipset do you think every other flagship Android device is going to use until the 855 is available? This is not different than the Note 8 versus the S8+

23. AgentZero

Posts: 314; Member since: Aug 16, 2014

trust me a behemoth like Samsung is waaaaay ahead of whats on the market right now , 7nm is ready for them the biggest problem is that they are held back by QUALCOMM , until this .. I don't know what it is .. ends … we will never see what Samsung can really do

33. Trex95

Posts: 2383; Member since: Mar 03, 2013

Unfortunately Kirin 970 can’t beat Exyons 9810 in speed test I saw a comparison in YouTube between S9 plus Exyons 9810 and P20 Pro Kirin 970 and S9 plus beat P20 Pro with easy. Samsung already has 7nm Soc since TSMC announced 7nm Soc ready since one years ago and Samsung made this move in order to attempts Apple to manufacture there A12 with Samsung. But Apple can’t move to Samsung unless there contract done with TSMC.

46. mootu

Posts: 1530; Member since: Mar 16, 2017

Actually Samsungs 7nm EUV starts production in June and yields will be very low and expensive for at least the first 3 months. Samsung could not supply Apple with enough A12s to meet demand, that is the reason Apple are with TSMC for the A12.

9. Boast_Rider

Posts: 535; Member since: Sep 14, 2017

Seems like they are finally tuning it right. The frequency was way too high on the S9. Hence the reduced score from 3800 ish to 2700. I think it's the right compromise, since battery life is way more important.

34. Trex95

Posts: 2383; Member since: Mar 03, 2013

Battrey life aren’t bad at all on S9 plus Exyons used it for a week. The thing that calls battrey on Samsung phones is bixby sync in background that lot of people doesn’t know about it and doesn’t go shut it down.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.