Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 71.5 | 83.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 13 | -- |
| 0000-00-00 | 2018-03-16 |
| 6.63 x 3.02 x 0.33 inches | 5.81 x 2.70 x 0.33 inches |
| 6.99 ounces | 5.75 ounces |
| Cerulean Blue, Cloudwing Grey and Flowing Purple | Burgundy red, Coral blue, Ice blue, Lilac purple, Midnight black, Sunrise gold and Titanium gray |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 158.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.8 inches | 5.8 inches |
| 2460 x 1080 pixels | 2960 x 1440 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 568 pixels per inch |
| 5000 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.6 | 8.9 |
| 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 | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G57 MC2 GPU | Adreno 630 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.54 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 400 GB) external memory slot |
| 15.42 | 11.34 |
| Camera | |
| 64.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| -- | f/1.50 aperture |
| -- | 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 | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.8 | 4.96 |
| 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 | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy S9 has a global score of 83.3, which is better than the OSCAL Tiger 12's overall score of 71.5. Samsung Galaxy S9 is a lighter phone than the OSCAL Tiger 12, but both of them have the same thickness. The Galaxy S9 has a little bit better hardware performance than OSCAL Tiger 12, although it has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have 8 cpu cores.
OSCAL Tiger 12 counts with a better looking display than Samsung Galaxy S9, because although it has a way worse 1080 x 2460 resolution and a much worse pixels quantity per screen inch, it also counts with a bigger screen. Samsung Galaxy S9 captures better pictures and videos than OSCAL Tiger 12, although it has a back camera with lot less megapixels.
The OSCAL Tiger 12 counts with a lot bigger memory capacity for games and applications than Galaxy S9, because it has a slot for an SD memory card that admits a maximum of 1 TB and 64 GB more internal memory capacity. The OSCAL Tiger 12 features a way better battery life than Galaxy S9, because it has a 5000mAh battery size.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.