Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 71.5 | 87.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 13 | -- |
| 0000-00-00 | 2018-08-24 |
| 6.63 x 3.02 x 0.33 inches | 6.37 x 3.01 x 0.35 inches |
| 6.99 ounces | 7.09 ounces |
| Cerulean Blue, Cloudwing Grey and Flowing Purple | Cloud silver, Lavender purple, Midnight black and Ocean blue |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 457.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.8 inches | 6.4 inches |
| 2460 x 1080 pixels | 2960 x 1440 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 514 pixels per inch |
| 5000 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.6 | 8.7 |
| Performance | |
| MediaTek Helio G99 MT6789 (6 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset |
| Octa-Core 2200 MHz processor | Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2800 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Mali-G57 MC2 GPU | Adreno 630 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.63 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 15.42 | 14.14 |
| Camera | |
| 64.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| -- | f/1.50 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 8.69 | 10.23 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Battery | 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.8 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy Note9 is much better than OSCAL Tiger 12, having an 87.1 score against 71.5. Despite being the best cellphone in this review, Samsung Galaxy Note9 is a a little heavier and just a little thicker cellphone than OSCAL Tiger 12. Galaxy Note9 features a bit superior processing unit than OSCAL Tiger 12, although it has lesser RAM memory, they both have 8 processing cores.
The OSCAL Tiger 12 features an incredibly better looking screen than Samsung Galaxy Note9, because although it has a lot lower resolution of 1080 x 2460 and a bit less pixels per inch of display, it also counts with a bit bigger screen. The Galaxy Note9 has a superior camera than OSCAL Tiger 12, although it has a camera in the back with much less mega-pixels.
The OSCAL Tiger 12 counts with just a bit more memory to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Galaxy Note9, and although they both have the same internal storage capacity, the OSCAL Tiger 12 also has a slot for SD memory cards that supports a maximum of 1 TB. OSCAL Tiger 12 has superior battery lifetime than Samsung Galaxy Note9, because it has a 25% larger battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.