Nowadays, most Android phones are sold with the promise of a fixed number of major Android version updates, with top-end phones like the Samsung Galaxy S26 series and the Google Pixel 11 line promising an impressive seven. But it seems these promises might, in some cases, be more hopeful than guaranteed.

While neither Google nor Samsung have so far shown any sign of reneging on their update commitments, Sony just did with the Xperia 10 VI.

In a support post spotted by Phandroid, the company explained that while it had originally promised that the Sony Xperia 10 VI would receive three Android version updates, it will actually only receive two, as “due to limitations related to the device’s storage configuration, the Xperia 10 VI does not support an Android 17 upgrade experience that we consider adequate.”

The phone will at least still receive the promised four years of security updates, and Sony claims that this issue won’t affect other models, but it goes to show that these support promises aren’t as ironclad as you might have expected.

This could be the first of many rollbacks

Of course, if updating the Sony Xperia 10 VI would genuinely have degraded the experience of using it, Sony probably made the right choice in not doing so. But that’s cold comfort for anyone who bought the phone off the back of Sony’s update commitment.

And who’s to say something similar couldn’t happen with other phones, whether those from Sony or other brands. In fact, expensive high-end phones might be even more at risk of unfulfilled commitments, with most offering up to seven years of promised updates; seven years is a long time in the tech world, so who’s to say whether Android 24 will actually work well on a phone that launched this year.

So, if you weren’t already doing so, you should probably take any support commitments as a goal rather than a guarantee.

Google has never exactly been a bastion of privacy, but its reputation has just taken another hit with a controversial new Android default — it's just started automatically linking your phone number(s) to all signed-in Google accounts on your Android device.

As spotted by Reddit user Nanosinx, Google Play Services has started automatically verifying your phone number and linking it across your signed in Google accounts — so if you have secondary accounts on your Android phone, perhaps for work or throwaway ones, these may now have your number linked to them.

As a phone number is quite private and potentially sensitive information, this isn’t ideal — and should obviously be an opt-in feature, as it always used to be.

It does seem that users are at least getting emails from Google alerting them to this change, so if you haven’t received any emails, your number(s) might not have been linked — at least not yet. But it’s still probably worth checking if that's important to you.

Shut it down

To check if the feature is enabled — and disable it if you don’t want it to be — head to Settings > Google (or Google services and preferences) > All services > Phone number verification. If this screen has a ‘Verify phone numbers automatically’ toggle enabled, then this is happening to your accounts — so disable that to turn off this ‘feature.’

But that won’t remove your phone number from accounts that it has already been linked to. For that, head to your Google account personal info page, then go to Contact info (or Personal info) > Phone, and remove the number from any account you don’t want it linked to.

Remarkably, some users are reporting that the same issue occurs even on the privacy-focused GrapheneOS, though possibly only if you’ve installed Google Play Services. And some users also report the auto verification toggle turning itself back on, so the above may only prove a temporary fix.

Understandably, Android users aren’t happy about any of this, with comments on Reddit including the likes of “I’m so sick of this,” “this feature is absolutely dumb,” and “scummy practices yet again by a mega corp.”

So this isn’t a popular change, but whether Google will care enough to switch it back to an opt-in rather than opt-out process remains to be seen.

If you have an Android phone then you’re probably already using Google Wallet, and with the latest Google Play Services update it’s getting slightly better in four ways.

As spotted by Android Police, the October Google Play Services update (v26.40) is rolling out now, and it — among other things — brings the ability to scan receipts into Google Wallet, so you’ll be able to save and view them in the wallet interface.

Additionally, this update improves merchant names in transaction notifications. Google hasn’t specified how they’re improved, but presumably this is aimed at providing more clarity about who or what you’ve sent money to.

More messages and fewer payment screens

The update also adds an in-app message center to Google Wallet, and while it’s not clear what kind of messages you might receive, we can imagine they might for example tell you about updates to the service — such as the ones we’re writing about here.

Finally, if you use Google Pay through Chrome for Android, the update lets you now “skip the Payment Request UI when you provide merchants with your name, email, and phone number.” That presumably makes for a faster, smoother payment process.

So while none of these upgrades are individually massive, combined they should make for a notable difference to your Google Pay experience.

The update will roll out automatically, so if you’re not seeing these changes yet, you likely will do soon. But to check what version of Google Play Services you have, you can head to Settings > Apps > Google Play Services, and you should see the version number at the bottom of this screen.

Imagine buying a brand new, sealed Android phone, and later realizing it came with preinstalled malware rooted deeply into the firmware and thus almost impossible to remove - generating fraudulent ad clicks for a malicious third party, and even turning the phones into residential proxies to be used for whatever sinister purposes.

Security researchers Bitdefender found an unidentified threat actor managed to compromise the supply chain of multiple smartphone manufacturers and added malware on a firmware level before the devices were even shipped to stores.

A number of brands were mentioned, including Doogee S200 X, Doogee Fire 3 Max, and Cubot KINGKONG X - both Chinese smartphone manufacturers building budget, rugged Android phones.

The reports also mention ripoff devices impersonating Samsung and Apple products. In general, these are devices using MediaTek chipsets, which were infected in a way that allowed the attackers to tamper with applications, grant themselves higher privileges, and even do remote code execution (RCE) attacks without the victim’s knowledge.

Victims across the world

Unfortunately, these devices were shipped all over the world, and Bitdefender claims “thousands” of people were victims, scattered across some 150 countries around the world, with the highest concentration found in Mexico, France, Italy, United States, Germany, Brazil, and Spain.

The malware comes in different shapes and sizes. So far, Bitdefender uncovered 32 malicious apps, including those pretending to be weather apps, file managers app lockers, OCR tools, and audio editors. All of these do the same thing - create an invisible overlay over different apps and register an ad being viewed, despite the fact that the user never actually saw it.

That way, whoever installed the malware scams the ad network into thinking the ad was served to thousands of users which, in turn, generates profit. We don’t know exactly how many devices are compromised this way, or how much money the crooks stole this way.

"The system app itself doesn’t register the fraudulent impressions and clicks," Bitdefender said. "The revenue engine is driven by the dropped cover apps, including real-looking weather, app-lock, note, and OCR apps, which load genuine ads through a legitimate ad SDK. The goal is simple: to load an invisible window on top of apps that registers ads being shown."

Spilling into the Play Store

Bitdefender also said that one of the uncovered applications (the app locker one), contained a TCP proxy element that registered the compromised phones with a remote command server. After successful registration, the attackers were able to forward traffic through the phone, essentially creating a residential proxy service that criminals can use for different things, from launching DDoS attacks to participating in spam and wire fraud.

They also found more than a dozen applications on the Google Play Store with the same fraudulent advertising code, as well as the same communications infrastructure. These, however, required manual installation and required users to grant them the requested permissions, which might have raised flags with the users.

Removing the malware isn’t as easy as simply uninstalling the app. The researchers said that many of the devices require cleanup on the firmware level, or disabling the malicious component using Android Debug Bridge (ADB), which could be too technical for many victims.

The easier and more elegant solution is also a more expensive one - don’t buy devices from brands with a shady reputation.

With this new model, Samsung has kept the basic Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7 formula intact, but shaved down the body, improved the hinge, added more processing power, and made the cover screen easier to live with.

The displays, camera hardware, battery, and charging have barely moved, though, leaving last year’s Galaxy Z Flip 7 looking far from obsolete — it's also now much cheaper than its newer sibling.

To help you make sense of what's changed and which model is best, we've weighed up the price, design, displays, cameras, performance, software, and battery life of these two foldable phones to see which deserves your money.

As a disclaimer, we've fully reviewed the Galaxy Z Flip 7, but not the Galaxy Z Flip 8. We have spent time with the former model, though, so we've based our judgements on both hands-on experience and on-paper specs.

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 8 vs Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7: specs comparison

Before we dig into the details, here’s an overview of both phones’ key specs:

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 8 vs Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7: price and availability

Samsung announced the Galaxy Z Flip 8 in July 2026, and the phone went on sale on August 7. Prices start at $1,199.99 / £1,149 / AU$1,949 for the 256GB model, rising to $1,399.99 / £1,319 / AU$2,249 for 512GB.

The Galaxy Z Flip 7 arrived in 2025 at $1,099 / £1,049 / AU$1,799 for 256GB, while the 512GB version launched at $1,219 / £1,149 / AU$1,999.

Samsung is therefore asking an extra $100 for the entry-level Z Flip 8, despite retaining the same storage capacity. The gap grows further with the 512GB models, and the older Flip 7 is likely to become even more tempting as retailers clear stock and discounts begin to appear, especially around sales events like Black Friday.

Given the global memory shortage and rising inflation, Samsung's decision to raise the price of the Galaxy Z Flip 8 makes some sense, but it does mean the Z Flip 7 — which is still a great phone — represents even better value in 2026.

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 8 vs Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7: design

Samsung has focused on making the Galaxy Z Flip 8 a little easier to carry and use, rather than giving it a big redesign. At 180g, it's 8g lighter than the Flip 7, while its 6.1mm unfolded body is 0.4mm thinner.

Fold the two phones shut, and the difference grows slightly, with the Flip 8 measuring 13.1mm compared with 13.7mm for its predecessor.

The revised Armor FlexHinge is the more useful change. Samsung has reduced friction inside the mechanism and widened the inner edges so that your fingers have more room to open the phone.

In our early hands-on testing of the Galaxy Z Flip 8, the phone felt noticeably easier to open and close than the previous model — a small refinement that should become more valuable when you repeat the motion dozens of times each day.

Otherwise, the family resemblance is strong. Both phones use the same flat-sided clamshell shape, with the large cover screen wrapping around the two rear cameras.

The Flip 7 already felt sturdy and polished, although its familiar Galaxy styling could look rather restrained beside some rival foldables.

Winner: Galaxy Z Flip 8

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 8 vs Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7: display

Samsung has carried both of the Flip 7’s displays straight over to the Galaxy Z Flip 8. Each phone opens to reveal a 6.9-inch, 1080 x 2520 AMOLED panel with a 1–120Hz adaptive refresh rate, while the outside is covered by a 4.1-inch, 948 x 1048 FlexWindow. Peak brightness remains 2,600 nits.

That leaves little room between them on paper, although this is hardly a weakness for the older phone. In our review of the device, we awarded the Flip 7 a perfect 5/5 for its displays, finding the inner screen bright and clear even outdoors.

The Flip 8 receives some cover-screen improvements, but the main changes concern how Samsung’s software uses the FlexWindow rather than the panel itself. We’ll cover those additions later.

Both phones offer two excellent screens, and there is no convincing hardware reason to choose one over the other.

Winner: Tie

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 8 vs Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7: cameras

Samsung has left the underlying camera hardware unchanged — you might be sensing a theme emerging here.

Both phones combine a 50MP main camera with a 12MP ultra-wide and a 10MP selfie camera, with no dedicated telephoto lens for longer-range shots.

In our testing, the Flip 7 produced strong results with more natural-looking colors than some older Samsung phones and an excellent Portrait mode.

Its folding design also lets you use the cover screen as a viewfinder for sharper selfies from the 50MP rear camera, although the lack of optical zoom limits its versatility.

The Galaxy Z Flip 8 directs its attention towards video.

Camcorder Grip places the recording and zoom controls within easy reach when the phone is held sideways, while Super Steady’s Horizontal Lock can keep footage level as the handset moves or rotates.

Our early hands-on found the latter feature particularly effective, although more aggressive stabilization can crop the frame and reduce image quality.

Winner: Galaxy Z Flip 8

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 8 vs Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7: performance and software

This is where the Galaxy Z Flip 8 begins to put some meaningful distance between itself and its predecessor.

US and Australian models of the Z Flip 8 use Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 for Galaxy chipset, while the UK version of the phone receives Samsung’s Exynos 2600, replacing the Exynos 2500 inside the Flip 7. The latter chipset features in every version of the Flip 7, in every region.

The older phone still handles everyday apps, split-screen multitasking, and Samsung DeX without much trouble, but its performance was one of the weaker parts of our review. The Flip 8 has considerably more headroom for gaming, demanding apps, and Samsung’s growing collection of AI features — even if your version of the phone uses the Exynos 2600, and not the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5.

Its software is also better suited to the folding design. Android 17 and One UI 9 add a proper FlexWindow app tray and let you rearrange widgets directly from the cover screen.

Both phones receive seven generations of Android upgrades, but the Flip 8 naturally starts one version later and offers a smoother cover-screen experience from day one.

Winner: Galaxy Z Flip 8

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 8 vs Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7: battery

Samsung has kept the same 4,300mAh battery in both phones, alongside 25W wired and 15W wireless charging.

Neither model comes close to the fastest-charging foldables, and the Flip 8 gains no extra capacity to offset its more powerful hardware.

The Flip 7 generally made it through a full day in our review, although heavier photography or gaming could leave it needing an evening top-up.

The Flip 8’s newer chipset should use that capacity more efficiently, but the improvement is unlikely to transform the experience. These remain one-day phones with relatively slow charging, leaving little to separate them.

Winner: Tie

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 8 vs Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7: verdict

The most revealing thing about this comparison is how mature Samsung’s Flip formula has become.

The Galaxy Z Flip 8 improves the parts you touch every day — weight, thickness, hinge action, performance, and cover-screen software — while leaving the displays, camera hardware, battery, and charging largely untouched.

Given these upgrades, the Flip 8 is a better phone for someone buying their first Flip, especially if they plan to keep it for several years.

Existing Flip 7 owners have far less reason to move. Last year’s model still delivers most of the same foldable experience, and its lower price makes the Flip 8’s refinements look expensive rather than essential.

Overall winner: Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 8

It's been two years since Amazon last released a Fire tablet, and 15 years since the first model was released — and I thought 2011 would be the first and last time I'd ever purchase one of Amazon's touchscreen tablets.

That might be about to change with the release of this new product range, which ditches FireOS for Android, packs Alexa+ intelligence, and boasts some pretty impressive specs at an approachable price point across its three sizes.

A Kindle, yes, but not Fire

Now, to its credit, the original Kindle Fire was designed to toe the line between Amazon's successful Kindle product range and general-use tablets, but it didn't succeed tremendously at the latter. While many Amazon devices do lean heavily into the world's biggest retailer's... well, retailing, it erred at times on the side of being a dedicated Amazon shopfront, which, for 15-year-old me, wasn't incredibly useful.

Media playback was fine across platforms, e-reading was decent, but the meager app support, clunky FireOS, and painful Silk web browser experience quickly relegated the slate into the pits of my personal e-waste landfill. With little meaningful change to address these woes in the 13 years of Kindle Fires (later rebranded as Fire Tablets) that followed, I never quite forgave Amazon for its misstep into mobile computing.

Times have changed, however, and now I've got my sights set on the new range of Amazon Alexa Tablets.

We discussed the Amazon Alexa Tablet in our latest episode of the TechRadar Podcast, which you can watch below.

For one thing, I use Alexa+ services every day, and while I find the system far from perfect, it is the most user-friendly in terms of smart home device compatibility and accessibility. Plus, on these tablets you can enable Alexa+ to see your screen and offer in-context services, offering seamless interaction with the rest of Amazon's devices; if you find a recipe on your tablet, you can ask Alexa+ to save it, send it to your Echo Show device, and prepare the steps for you to follow while you're cooking.

There's a looming question over how much functionality you lose if you don't have an Alexa+ subscription ($19.99 / £19.99 / AU$29.99 per month, but free for Prime members); however, as I noted in the latest episode of the TechRadar Podcast (which you can watch above), I imagine a lot of the target audience for the product are, like me, pretty bedded in with Amazon's services already.

Regardless, the devices are all the more compelling when you see their prices. The largest and most performant Amazon Alexa Tablet 12 Pro starts at just $499.99 / £449.99 with a 120Hz display, 8GB of RAM, and 128GB of storage. There's also an optional Nanomatte display model (much like the internal screen on Apple's new iPhone Duo), starting at $549.99 / £599.99, which is where I'm setting my sights for a more comfortable reading experience.

That's before we get to the optional keyboard attachment and Pro Pen, which open doors for productivity use cases, especially now that software like G Suite will run far better natively. Plus, the Alexa Tablet 12 Pro is powered by the MediaTek Dimensity 8400 chipset; Amazon says "with up to 16GB of RAM, Amazon Alexa Tablet 12 Pro delivers nearly three times faster processing and nine times faster graphics than any tablet we’ve ever shipped."

You can read the full range of prices and more insights in Axel's aforementioned hands-on with the slates, but suffice it to say, they're coming in hot, and as an Apple device user with an Alexa smart home, I find myself at a real crossroads when it comes to choosing my next device.

The Alexa Tablet 12 Pro, Alexa Tablet 11, and Alexa Tablet 8 — plus the new Amazon Kids Tablets — are available to pre-order now and will begin shipping October 19.

Yes, the ‘Fire’ nomenclature is gone — and, mercifully, Fire OS along with it. The Alexa Tablet 12 Pro is the first Amazon tablet to support full Android, meaning users will be able to access the Google Play Store and its millions of streaming, gaming, and productivity apps, including Google Maps, YouTube, and Gmail.

The Alexa Tablet 12 Pro — which is joined by the smaller Alexa Tablet 11 and Alexa Tablet 8 in a three-product lineup — is also the first Amazon tablet to feature baked-in Alexa+ integration, so it’s got AI chops to rival Apple’s Apple Intelligence-compatible iPads and Samsung’s premium Galaxy tablets.

In other words, the Alexa Tablet 12 Pro is about as far away from the Amazon Fire Max 11 as the Kindle-maker could have gotten — and Amazon acknowledges that this distinctly premium product marks a dramatic change in strategy for the company.

“Without a doubt, this is the biggest leap we've ever made in developing tablets in our history,” Eric Saarnio, Vice President of Amazon Devices International, told me in a briefing for the new Alexa Tablet range. “And I'm incredibly excited about what the team has built.”

Despite their shortcomings, Amazon’s existing Fire tablets have been a hit for the company — “we've sold a ton of tablets over the years, and that’s something we're very proud of,” Saarnio says — but they’re loss-leader products designed to usher customers into Amazon’s digital ecosystem, rather than market-leading tablets in their own right.

The Alexa Tablet 12 Pro, by contrast, is a full-blown premium slate with specs to rival the Apple iPad Air (2026). It features a 12-inch, 120Hz display, up to 16GB of RAM, and 3x more CPU power than any previous Amazon tablet.

Buyers can also choose to equip their Alexa Tablet 12 Pro with Amazon’s anti-glare Nanomatte technology, which improves visibility outdoors and makes on-screen text look as if it’s sitting on top of the display (I’ve seen it in person, and it’s not a million miles away from the nano‑texture finish on the iPhone Duo’s inner display).

Why has Amazon pumped such impressive specs (and, presumably, millions of dollars in development costs) into the Alexa Tablet 12 Pro? Because it recognizes that consumer habits are changing, and it wants to offer a one-stop-shop device for streamers, gamers, and productivity-focused users alike.

More than just an entertainment device

“The truth is, what people are using tablets for is really starting to evolve — and it’s the power of the cloud that’s changing things,” Saarnio told me.

“The ability to build and code is really powerful, and you can do that [now] from your tablets. And for sure, tablets are there for entertainment, and that's where it all starts. But I do think there’s this evolution starting to happen, where [people are] using tablets just to get things done.

“When we think about tablets going forward, I don't necessarily think they’re going to be a replacement for a laptop. But I do think they're going to be very powerful tools to both entertain and to help you be productive. And so, as we think about our next era in tablets, we wanted to bake all of that [into one device]. And we really landed on three big things [in the Alexa Tablet 12 Pro].

“First: performant, premium hardware, with exceptional screens that deliver for customers. Second: we're moving to full Android, and [granting] access to the Google Play Store, which will give customers the ability to access millions of apps that they enjoy today. And last but not least: we wanted to give them access to an assistant. So we’ve embedded Alexa+ into the tablet, along with access to everything they love about Amazon. To be clear, this isn't an app that we've added to the tablet: it’s actually baking the Alexa+ experience into it.”

Now available in the US, UK, and Australia, Alexa+ is Amazon’s cloud-based virtual assistant. It can respond to queries in natural language, control your smart home devices, and, of course, seamlessly interact with all other Amazon services. Notably, on the Alexa Tablet range, Alexa+ can look at what's on your screen (when given explicit permission to do so) and provide real-time, in-context assistance, similar to Gemini Live’s screen sharing functionality.

On the Alexa Tablet 12 Pro, Tablet 11, and Tablet 8, Alexa+ lives in a dedicated Dynamic Tab in the top left corner of the screen, and can be expanded into a full-screen For You tab for more comprehensive interaction.

Alexa+ costs $19.99 / £19.99 / AU$29.99 per month, but is free for Prime members. It’s not yet clear how the service’s deep integration into the Alexa Tablet will function if you’re not subscribed to it.

Interestingly, the Alexa Tablet can also transform into a Kindle for a completely distraction-free experience. When activated, Kindle mode silences notifications, reduces blue light, and extends battery life. It’s particularly effective on the Alexa Tablet 12 Pro when paired with Amazon’s Nanomatte finish.

“What we think we've invented here is a tablet that doesn't, in any way, force you to compromise,” Saarnio concluded. “It's great for entertainment; it’s intelligent; it's great for productivity and helping you get things done. All in one package. And you get all of this starting at £500.”

That price reveal triggered an audible gasp in my briefing session. $549.99 / £499.99 is an extremely competitive price for a 12-inch tablet with a 120Hz display, 8GB of RAM, and 128GB of starting storage. Even the top-end version of the Alexa Tablet 12 Pro (which comes with 16GB of RAM) costs just $679.99 / £599.99 (we’re awaiting confirmation of Australia pricing).

The iPad Air, for reference, starts at $749 / £749 / AU$1,249 following Apple’s June price increases. That device features a more powerful M4 chipset than the Alexa Tablet 12 Pro, which runs on the MediaTek Dimensity 8400, but it’s smaller, at 11 inches, and has a static 60Hz display.

As you'll see in the price section, the Alexa Tablet’s specs do get worse as you move down the price ladder (the Alexa Tablet 8, for instance, has a 60Hz refresh rate, 4GB of RAM, and no Nanomatte display option). But the value of the 12 Pro bundles looks, on paper at least, exceptional — $699.99 / £639.99 for the Alexa Tablet 12 Pro with Nanomatte display (128GB), Alexa Tablet Pro Keyboard, and Alexa Tablet Pro Pen is still cheaper than Apple’s entry-level 11-inch iPad Air with 128GB of storage.

The big question, of course, is whether Amazon’s new tablets are any good. I’ve only been hands-on with the top-end Alexa Tablet 12 Pro, and my first impressions are positive — the Nanomatte screen looks great, the tablet’s aluminum construction is thin and light, and its access to the Google Play Store is going to please a lot of people. But we’ll need to put all three new devices through their paces before passing a full verdict on their value for money.

The Alexa Tablet 12 Pro, Alexa Tablet 11, and Alexa Tablet 8 — as well as new Amazon Kids Tablets — are available to pre-order now and will begin shipping October 19.

Pricing

Here's the full pricing information for the Amazon Alexa Tablet range (we'll update the below tables with Australia pricing when we have it):

Apple’s first foldable features many of the same compromises you might expect from a first-generation foldable, even from a company as meticulous as Apple, but the biggest concern for most users may be around the Duo's battery life.

I’ve spent the past three months using the Galaxy Z Fold 8 and its competitors. What battery life do they offer, and what can we learn from it? I tested six of the best globally available flagship foldables over several weeks to answer that question.

How I tested the folding phones' battery life

Over the past few months, I’ve been developing my own battery testing suite, CellMark, using a combination of AI models. After hundreds of hours and various iterations, I've built a solid test suite that accounts for each phone maker's idiosyncrasies and how the average person actually uses their phone today.

For this comparison, I ran the EnduranceMark suite, which loops until the battery level reaches 5%. A test is only valid if it successfully drains 80% of the battery, and each result below is characterized using a standardized metric. I ran two tests from this suite: the Synthesizer test to test drain under heavy loads, and my favorite, the Doom Scroller. As the name suggests, it simulates everyone’s favorite pastime of endlessly scrolling social media.

I also ran the ChargeMark charging test to log battery charging times. I paired the three CellMark tests with a web-browsing script that loaded 20 different web pages, scrolled at intervals, and looped to the next page, plus a looping video playback test.

As some phone makers aggressively limit background apps, some phones failed to complete certain tests, but I've included the relevant tests regardless.

Of course, these tests aren’t 100% indicative of real-world usage, but anecdotally, the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Doom Scrolling results closely matched my findings during daily use. Having tested smartphones for 20 years, I'm confident in the CellMark app's results.

Round 1: The charging test

For years, charging speeds differed markedly between folding phones sold in the US and those sold outside it. Simply put, the former were vastly slower than the latter.

In the above charging test, the Galaxy Z Fold 8's 45W charging speed got it to a respectable 69-minute full charge, but the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra sustained 45W charging for longer to reach a full charge in one hour.

The Moto Razr Fold, Honor Magic V6, and Oppo Find N6 were the top three in ascending order, with Oppo retaining a charging lead it has held for years. The Google Pixel 11 Pro Fold ranked last, which isn’t surprising given its charging is the slowest.

For the iPhone Duo, Apple says 60W charging can reach 50% in just 20 minutes. Apple hasn’t published a full-charge estimate, especially since phones optimize charging speeds for longevity, but its claims put the iPhone Duo's charging speed around the level of the Honor Magic V6 and Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra.

Round 2: The web browsing test

The second test was web browsing, and each phone ran a script to load 20 of the heaviest webpages on the internet and scroll through them to simulate real-world usage. Running in a loop, this gives us an estimate of the battery life if you’re always using your browser.

The Galaxy Z Fold 8 proved surprisingly strong here, but that's where a smaller screen comes in handy. Its drain rate was the lowest of all tests, meaning a larger battery at the same drain rate would theoretically give us the best battery life overall.

The Pixel 11 Pro Fold fell short of the competition, even though its drain rate was only the third-highest, while the Motorola Razr Fold proved that the Razr Fold — and its Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 processor — is very well optimized for web browsing. Apple hasn’t revealed any iPhone Duo web-browsing estimates, so it’s unclear what to expect.

Round 3: The video playback test

The other fairly standard test is video playback, which lets us directly test many phone makers’ listed claims. This involved looping a locally stored 4K video in the default media player with the phone’s brightness set to 50%.

It’s clear that every phone maker makes bold battery-life claims that don’t always reflect your real-world experience. Here, Samsung, Oppo, and Honor deserve credit for fairly accurate video playback claims, whereas the results on the Moto Razr Fold and Pixel 11 Pro Fold fall far short of what's stated.

For the iPhone Duo, Apple claims that you'll get up to 35 hours of video playback on the inside screen and up to 44 hours on the outer display. If it lives up to these claims, or even comes close, it will likely have the best video playback battery life of any folding phone.

Round 4: The Synthesizer performance test

Web browsing and video playback are two common ways we use our phones, but companies also optimize for these scenarios, and phones struggle considerably under heavy loads.

To test this, I built the Synthesizer, which runs a series of calculations around ever-increasing prime numbers and runs numerous I/O operations in the background, both designed to heavily tax the chipset.

None of these results are surprising on their own, but together they show just how differently each phone maker has balanced power and efficiency.

The Galaxy Z Fold 8 and Fold 8 Ultra use the high-specification Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 for Galaxy chipset, and Samsung doesn’t throttle performance of the chipset. The result is ~5.5 hours of battery life at high performance.

The Tensor G6 inside the Pixel 11 Pro Fold is surprisingly well optimized, but as the above test shows, Motorola, Honor, and Oppo all offer considerably better battery performance and battery-life balance. The result is sustained high-load performance for much longer.

Round 5: The doomscrolling test

When I started building CellMark, I set out to build an app that could, among other tests, simulate social media usage. Considering how we use our phones — and my additional needs for visual ways to demonstrate battery and charging tests on social media — this felt like the most natural test to build.

It’s also where I've faced challenges with Oppo and Motorola phones specifically, which prevent the CellMark app from running tests longer than nine hours. Despite this, it reveals a lot of interesting data.

First, the thin body on the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra and larger battery mean it runs considerably hotter than all the competition.

The thicker build and vapor chamber of the iPhone Duo should mean this won’t be an issue for Apple's first foldable, although the A20 Pro chipset is a powerhouse. The Galaxy Z Fold 8 proves it's possible to be a small phone without succumbing to overheating problems, despite using the same processor as its sibling.

The performance of the Pixel 11 Pro Fold proves the Tensor G6 is a welcome improvement over the Tensor G5, while the Honor Magic V6 reigns supreme yet again.

It’s worth noting that the Find N6 and Razr Fold results ran for 9 hours before ending, and while all phones drain much faster as thermal temperature rises, both likely had the lowest drain and best thermal performance.

The key takeaway there? The processor makes a big difference: the Find N6 has one fewer performance core than its rivals, while the Razr Fold uses the Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 rather than the high-performance Elite version. Both companies made these choices with battery life in mind, and it becomes especially apparent when you look at thermal performance in these tests.

The 24-hour Galaxy Z Fold 8 run

Just days before publishing, I tested the Galaxy Z Fold 8 with a few changes to determine what battery life would look like under more optimal conditions. The surprise is just how much of a difference it makes.

Running the Doom Scroll test on a Galaxy Z Fold 8 with background data sync disabled and brightness set to 40%, I achieved 24 hours and 42 minutes on a single Doom Scroll run. That’s nearly 150% higher than the rest of the Galaxy Z Fold 8 testing results.

Also, every foldable phone maker tells you to open the phone for the fastest charging, partly because of thermal management. During this test, all 8,907 logged telemetry samples showed a nominal thermal status. In simple terms: unfold your phone to keep it cooler.

How might the iPhone Duo's battery compare?

Apple claims the iPhone Duo has better battery life than the iPhone 17 Pro Max, offering up to 35 hours of video playback when unfolded or 44 hours when folded. That puts it 35% higher than the Galaxy Z Fold 8, and paired with a thicker body and better thermal management, the iPhone Duo could set a new battery-life benchmark for folding phones in the US.

The true test will be in real-world use cases like Doom Scroller. I’m excited to see how optimized the iPhone Duo is, but am cautiously optimistic that it can at least match the Galaxy Z Fold 8. We’ll find out once the iPhone Duo goes on sale.

To many in Europe, Fairphone is seen as a niche yet reliable Android manufacturer that specializes in one thing: fair phones. Its devices are made from eco-friendly materials, in factories that respect their workers, and are designed to last ages so they don't become e-waste.

But the new Fairphone 6 Plus — officially called the Fairphone Gen 6 Plus — is not just for European buyers. It's the first of the Dutch brand's smartphones to be released in the US, giving a whole new audience of green-minded consumers the chance to buy a phone that aligns with their ethical beliefs.

If that's you, the Fairphone 6's slightly newer successor is an easy recommendation; there's no real competition in the environmentally-friendly phone space, at least since Teracube stopped making new devices. But there are other reasons to pick up the Fairphone 6 Plus, too.

For starters, it boasts impressive durability credentials, with a military-grade chassis and plastic body that shrugs off drops and bumps with ease. If you do damage something, the phone is easy to open up at home, allowing you to replace parts instead of throwing the device away or shelling out loads of money for a company to repair it.

In fact, that's Fairphone's whole schtick: it wants your phone to last as long as possible, to avoid it going into landfill (they're eco-friendly, remember). So the 7 years of software updates make sense too.

Okay, so you're now brushed up on Fairphone, but let's fully rip the band-aid off: the brand's phones are rarely good value for money if you compare them with similarly priced rivals. It's the same with Fairphone's audio products, like the Fairbuds XL: you pay for longevity, not features.

Samsung, Google, and Motorola all offer Fairphone 6 Plus-beating phones for the same price, and if you live outside the US, a whole host of Chinese brands offer superior specs for a fraction of the cost. The Fairphone 6 Plus doesn't match its rivals in performance, camera capabilities, or slimness (though longevity, of course, is a different conversation).

Normally with Fairphones, you're paying for their eco-friendly credentials and high level of repairability. But a price hike for the Fairphone 6 Plus over the non-Plus model makes this trade-off a little harder to stomach, especially when the specs are barely different. And sure, price hikes are rife these days — Fairphone isn't alone in charging more for not much more — but they're harder to justify when the handsets weren't that competitive anyway.

But that 4-star score? As a devout green buyer, I'd still recommend the Fairphone 6 Plus. It lets you talk the talk and walk the walk, as long as you don't need a flagship phone. For me, Fairphone is the only company whose tech is actually, genuinely green — there's no greenwashing going on here (at least to my knowledge).

Still, the Fairphone 6 Plus is only worth it if you have the money to spare, plan on keeping your handset for a long time, or find it discounted in the sales. And if it is on sale in your country, keep tabs on the Fairphone 6 too: it's basically the same phone for a slightly lower price.

Fairphone 6 Plus review: price and availability

• Released in August 2026 in Europe and US
• Sells for $649.99 / £569 (roughly AU$1,100)
• Price hike over predecessor

The Fairphone 6 Plus was revealed in mid-August 2026, a little over a year after the unveiling of the ‘standard’ or non-Plus model. This is Fairphone’s modus operandi: it often releases main-series phones every other year, bridging the gap with ‘Plus’ models in the meantime.

This latest Plus model justifies that suffix with its price, though. The Fairphone 6 Plus costs $649.99 / £569 (roughly AU$1,100, though Fairphone doesn’t sell its tech in Australia), which is a sizeable price hike over the Fairphone 6’s £499 (roughly $680 / AU$990) starting price. The latter phone remains on sale as a valid alternative to the newer handset, especially for cost-conscious buyers.

Given the relatively few upgrades the new model offers, for a higher price, its value proposition just isn’t as competitive.

Notice how I could share a US price for the Fairphone 6 Plus? That's because it's the first of the brand’s mobiles to be sold in the States, finally giving green-minded US buyers a phone to buy since Teracube went quiet.

As I'll mention later in the review, the Fairphone 6 Plus is designed to be repaired, and you can easily buy spare parts on the brand's websites. These range in price and vary by region, and so instead of reeling off a massive list, I'll simply refer you to Fairphone's website for the full list.

It's worth noting, too, that the Fairphone 6 Plus — like many previous Fairphone models — is also available in a de-Googled /e/OS configuration from Murena, which puts privacy at the forefront of the experience. This version of the phone costs $699.99 / £599 (around AU$1,009). We'll be publishing a separate feature on the de-Googled Fairphone experience in the coming weeks.

Fairphone 6 Plus review: specs

Fairphone 6 Plus review: design

• Bulky handset that stretches the hand
• Neat touches like a switch, a side-mounted fingerprint scanner, and military protection
• Easily repairable and modifiable

People often turn their noses up at Fairphones for their middling specs, but I’ve used most of them, and to me, I'd say their designs are an equal reason why some users may be put off. These phones are bulky. The 6 Plus measures 156.5 x 73.3 x 9.6mm and weighs 193g, so in this age of super-slim mobiles, it feels like a dinosaur.

There are benefits to this chunky size. Not only does it ensure the phone is easier to repair — more on that later — but it means it's better protected too. Case in point, the Fairphone 6 Plus has the military-grade MIL-STD-810H compliance, and IP55 protection against dust and water jets. I used the handset without a case and never felt like it was at risk.

On the left edge of the phone you get your power rocker, and on the right there’s a power button with a fingerprint scanner embedded. This worked flawlessly in my testing, unlocking the handset instantly and never failing to recognise my thumb, though some prefer phones with under-display scanners.

The right edge also has a physical switch, which can be programmed for different functions like turning on Airplane mode, enabling the torch, or enabling Fairphone’s Moments (which basically turns your handset into a ‘Lite’ mode with only access to certain apps). The switch is useful if you use it right, but it’s a shame that the list of functions is a little limited. I can’t use it to instantly open Google Maps, for example, or turn on NFC.

You can buy the mobile in a fetching blue, as you can see in the images, which is new for the Plus model. There are also green and black options, matching the Fairphone 6’s hues (but no white, as was offered for the previous model).

Now onto one of the big draws of Fairphone handsets: they’re designed to be repairable. This means you can remove various elements using a simple Fairphone screwdriver, and replace them if anything is damaged. If you smash the screen of your handset, scratch the lens, or find the battery health greatly diminished, you can simply swap the offending components out instead of buying an entirely new phone.

A side-effect of this modularity, which Fairphone has greatly leaned on in recent years, is that you can remove the parts for another purpose: buying accessories. You can swap out the phone’s back and replace it with a card holder or finger loop, for instance, the latter of which you can see in all of these review pictures (I absolutely love using it to hold the phone).

There are other accessories available from the My Fairphone app, and they all vary in price.

• Design score: 4 / 5

Fairphone 6 Plus review: display

• 6.31 inches, 1,116 x 2,484 resolution
• 120Hz refresh rate, 1,400 nits max brightness
• Decent display, but nothing special

Despite the Fairphone 6 Plus feeling like a pretty chunky phone in the hand, its display is a little smaller than those of many Android rivals.

The panel measures 6.31 inches diagonally, and it's broken up by a top-center punch-hole cut-out for the front camera. It's got a 1116 x 2484 resolution, 120Hz refresh rate, and 20:9 aspect ratio; the size, OLED build, and 1400-nit max brightness all match the specs of the Fairphone 6’s panel.

A note on the refresh rate: by default, it’s set to 90Hz, so bump it up in the Settings app if you don’t mind the resulting lower battery life.

I can’t pretend that this is the best-looking screen on any Android phone, but the difference between ‘best’ and ‘good enough’ is tiny, and the Fairphone 6 Plus’ display will seem as good as any other to most users. Unless you’re doing something wild like professional photo editing, you’ll find the display to be bright and responsive.

One small annoyance: at the top of the display is a speaker grille, which is much larger than most you see in this day and age. It proved quite the fluff magnet when the phone was in my pocket; I kept having to pick bits of tissue out of it.

• Display score: 4 / 5

Fairphone 6 Plus review: software

• Stock Android 16 (or /e/OS in alternative model)
• And I mean stock: there's no bloatware or extra features
• Seven years of OS updates

The Fairphone 6 Plus comes with Android 16 pre-installed — and I mean stock Android, not ‘almost-stock’ like some other brands use. So you’re not getting loads of random pre-installed social media and holiday apps here. There's a single pre-installed app (which I'll get to later), and beyond that, you’re getting a clean slate with the bare minimum Google apps that all Android phones come equipped with.

A clean interface is great, but you’re also lacking other brands’ customization options here. If you like tweaking the look of your phone until it’s truly unique, you’ll find the Fairphone lacking — though I’ll applaud the accessibility options like high-contrast icons and text outlines that make writing easier to read.

Otherwise, you’re getting the ‘standard’ Android experience: a home screen in which to bury apps, widgets and shortcuts, plus a familiar quick-settings menu if you swipe down from the top of the phone, though I occasionally faced a recurring bug that wouldn’t let me close it easily. I also missed Circle to Search, a close-to-universal Android feature that isn’t available on Fairphones.

This aforementioned extra app is My Fairphone, which you won’t be using all the time, so you can hide it in the App Gallery. It lets you check your phone’s health (including storage use, temperature, and runtime since last reboot), and buy accessories or spare parts for your phone. If you’re planning to keep your Fairphone running for years, this latter option will be the most intriguing — although some may find the My Fairphone app unnecessary.

Fairphone has pledged that its Gen 6 Plus phone will get at least seven Android updates (bringing you to Android 24, if Google’s software naming stays true), which is one of the best commitments we’ve seen for Androids. It helps the company's longevity promise; this phone will keep working for a long time.

Not sure about using Google’s hegemonic operating system? A version of the phone is available with /e/OS, an open-source ‘anti-Android’ operating system designed around data control, privacy and security. Given that it’s not Android, it’s not designed for the average buyer, but some people who want something more secure might consider it. However, I haven’t tested it, so I can’t give a personal take on how it works.

• Software score: 4.5 / 5

Fairphone 6 Plus review: cameras

• 50MP main, 13MP ultra-wide, and 32MP front cameras
• Basic, expected range of camera modes
• Very light-touch optimization (perhaps too light-touch)

Fairphone decided to keep its camera array unchanged from the Fairphone 6 to the new model, which means I'm going to keep my camera score similarly unchanged.

We're looking at a 50MP f/1.9 main and 13MP f/2.2 rear duo, with a 32MP f/2.0 front-facing camera rounding out the party. Okay, there's been one tweak: the main snapper now has a smaller aperture, but the changes aren't huge.

I wouldn't recommend a Fairphone if you're looking for an accomplished camera phone, and as the unchanged specs show, the 6 Plus hasn't changed my stance. It's totally fine for the average buyer — your holiday snaps or selfies will be perfectly acceptable — but you won't be taking anything particularly amazing.

You can see this from the camera samples below, and the handicap is that the image optimization isn't particularly game-changing. Look at the field of flowers, or pizza: another handset would add much more saturation and contrast. The phone can perform better, but only in really well-lit scenarios. But, as I keep saying, its cameras are mostly fine. You can drop your photos into Photoshop if you want, to make up the difference.

The Fairphone 6 Plus offers the expected range of modes, including Portrait, low-light Night mode, and a Pro mode, but there's nothing especially unique, as you'd find in a Samsung or Google Pixel device.

I took the Fairphone on vacation, and the one thing I really missed was a way to zoom in. You can use digital zoom up to 10x, but anything over 2x looks a little too grainy to use. I would've loved to see a dedicated zoom lens added to this phone, but those only show up on devices designed for photography (or phones that cost significantly more).

• Camera score: 3.5 / 5

Fairphone 6 Plus camera samples

Fairphone 6 Plus review: performance and audio

• Snapdragon 7s Gen 4 chip, 12GB RAM, and 256GB storage
• Mid-range performance, though it starts sluggishly
• Bluetooth 6.0 but no headphone jack

Arguably the main Fairphone 6 Plus upgrade versus its regular sibling is its performance. The RAM capacity is up to 12GB (something I asked for in my review of the Fairphone 6), and the chipset is now a Snapdragon 7s Gen 4 (the previous model had a Gen 3). That’s the same chipset as you'll find inside the Nothing Phone (4a), so it’s no slouch on the performance front.

I’ve previously found the Snapdragon 7-series chips to be fine for mid-range devices like this, and the Fairphone 6 Plus is no exception — even if it did struggle now and then to run certain games. Most users will find it enough for most tasks, though this isn’t really a device designed for gamers.

When I put the phone through benchmarking tests, it returned an average Geekbench 7 multi-core score of around 3,500. Geekbench 7 is fairly new, so we haven't used it on enough phones to give useful comparisons, but the tool's browser library suggests this is a similar result to other mid-range mobiles.

On 3DMark, I put the phone through various tests. The results showed that the handset lags quite far behind flagships, even ones from several years ago, but it does stand as more powerful than the 'standard' Fairphone 6.

Just bought the Fairphone 6 Plus and finding it surprisingly slow? Most mobiles take a little while to get up to speed, but mine took a few days more than I’m used to. Give it some time before you declare something’s wrong.

Like most phones, the Fairphone has stereo speakers and no 3.5mm jack, so you’ll probably be relying on its Bluetooth 5.4 support for audio. One minor upgrade from past models is that the device supports aptX Lossless, so in theory, it’s better for audiophiles, but it still doesn’t support LDAC, so this is only a small win.

• Performance score: 3.5 / 5

Fairphone 6 Plus review: battery life

• Relatively small 4,415mAh battery
• Lasts roughly a day of use
• 30W charging, no wireless or reverse powering

The Fairphone 6 Plus has a 4,415mAh battery — on paper, that’s a little lower than most contemporaries, which usually offer power packs of 5,000mAh or above. However, in the past, I’ve been wowed by the battery life of Fairphone devices, which have often outperformed their spec sheets.

Not so much in the 6 Plus. Its battery life is ‘fine’, but the RAM and chipset upgrades from the past model clearly take their toll. The Fairphone lasts for about a day of average use, which is nothing to turn your nose up at, but it’s nothing exceptional, either. When I took the device on holiday, I relied on battery saver mode to make sure I had all the juice I needed.

You can power the phone up at 30W, which isn’t especially fast, but since fast charging can adversely affect battery health, it’s a hard thing to be critical of. You’ll have to plug the phone in for over an hour to charge it to full. There’s also no wireless or reverse power functionality.

• Battery score: 4 / 5

Fairphone 6 Plus review: value

I have the same problem every time I review a Fairphone; any other device with the same specs would cost a lot less, but with a Fairphone, you’re buying a device that lasts longer than rivals and takes much less of a toll on the environment.

Does that mean they’re good value or not? Because of their longevity, I usually say 'yes'. Fairphones aren't cheap, but if they last you twice as long as a rival phone would, and you’d end up buying two alternatives instead of one Fairphone, the price is justified.

But the Fairphone 6 Plus' price hike over the Fairphone 6 gives me pause to second-guess this. This phone is still a green marvel that will keep ticking for years, but its high price will probably deter most people from picking it up — and that's a shame.

• Value score: 3.5 / 5

Should you buy the Fairphone 6 Plus?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Fairphone 6 Plus review: Also consider

Not convinced by Fairphone's latest eco-phone? Here are some alternatives, all of which ostensibly have a green angle.

How I tested the Fairphone 6 Plus

• Tested for one month
• Everyday usage, including web browsing, social media, photography, video calling, gaming, streaming video, music playback
• Benchmarked using Geekbench 6, 3DMark, native Android stats

To write this Fairphone 6 Plus review, I used the device for one month. I conducted lab-style testing during one week of this month-long period, but for the other three weeks, I popped my SIM into the 6 Plus and used it as my normal smartphone.

This means I used it for texting, playing games, streaming music, working, and taking pictures as anyone else would. During this time, I also used the 6 Plus abroad during a vacation, so it really got put through its paces.

I've been reviewing Android phones for TechRadar since the start of 2019, and was on the team for much of that time. This means I've tested plenty of other competitors and past Fairphone models (including the Fairphone 6), as well as some other gadgets from the company, including its headphones.

I also recently published a long-read piece on gadget repairability for TechRadar, which included an interview with Fairphone's Head of Product.

Read more about how we test

First reviewed September 2026

Back in January, Samsung released the globally available Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra, before Oppo and Xiaomi dropped the Oppo Find X9 Ultra and Xiaomi 17 Ultra, respectively, both of which were made available in the UK but not the US (Australian buyers, meanwhile, got the Xiaomi, but not the Oppo).

Google entered the race with the Google Pixel 11 Pro in August, and now Apple has released the iPhone 18 Pro, which is earning plaudits for its variable aperture feature and pro-level video capture capabilities.

So, wherever you are in the world, you’ve likely got at least three compelling camera phones to consider at the time of writing, and I took two of them — the iPhone 18 Pro and Galaxy S26 Ultra — on a recent trip to Hawaii to see how they stack up against one another.

Below, I’ve added examples of both phones’ wide, zoom, macro, ultra-wide, and selfie-taking capabilities to help you decide which model is right for you. Then, at the end, I've summarized my thoughts on how they compare.

Specs

Before we dig into the comparison, here’s a quick roundup of each phone’s key camera specs:

In addition to the optical zoom distances listed above, both phones offer an additional ‘optical-quality’ zoom (8x for the iPhone, 2x and 10x for the Samsung), but they do so via a sensor crop rather than fixed focal lengths, so I’ve prioritized their true optical zoom distances in the ‘zoom’ section below.

It’s also worth noting that, to save storage, both the iPhone 18 Pro and Galaxy S26 Ultra capture images in smaller file sizes than their large sensors suggest by default. Specifically, the iPhone defaults to 24MP (using Apple’s ‘super-high-resolution’ imaging pipeline), while the Galaxy S26 Ultra defaults to 12MP (via pixel-binning).

I stuck with these out-of-the-box shooting settings for each of the comparisons below.

Wide

iPhone

Samsung

In this picture of a statue by the beach — “The Acrobats” by John Robinson — we can immediately see the difference between the two phones’ approaches to color science.

The iPhone’s image is the more natural of the two, with more pronounced shadows and muted colors, versus the Samsung’s brighter, more contrast-heavy image. This difference is particularly apparent on the statue’s torso and patch of grass to the right of the scene.

iPhone

Samsung

Here, again, the Samsung’s image has punchier, arguably more artificial-looking colors, but the difference isn’t quite so stark as in the first image. Both photos are equally detailed.

iPhone

Samsung

Again, only a subtle difference between the two images, but the leaves are certainly greener in the Galaxy’s shot (see the top right-hand side of the image)

iPhone

Samsung

The iPhone and Samsung take radically different approaches to capturing this shadowy pathway. The former’s image is more realistic, with strong detail maintained where the leaves meet the sky. The Galaxy’s image is impressively detailed, too, but its colors are much more stylistic than natural, which is emerging as a theme in this comparison.

iPhone

Samsung

This, for me, is the clearest example yet of the color science difference I’ve referenced below every image so far. Both of these shots are equally detailed, but the Samsung has definitely dialed up the saturation versus the iPhone’s more neutral shot.

iPhone

Samsung

Moving on to a sunset image, and the iPhone does a good job at maintaining the clarity of both the foreground and background, while the Galaxy goes full “Oh, so you want a sunset shot?” mode. I definitely don’t hate the Monet-style sky the Samsung has captured here — it's certainly the more aesthetic of the two — but in doing so, the phone obscures almost everyone in the foreground. The iPhone’s shot is, again, more balanced, but much less stylistic.

iPhone

Samsung

This image, though, proves that the Galaxy S26 Ultra can effectively balance foreground and background in low light. I actually think it does a slightly better job than the iPhone here, but there’s not much in it.

iPhone

Samsung

Again, pretty similar results here, but the iPhone definitely chooses a warmer hue that fades from orange to red, while the Samsung goes from red to an almost pink color. This is, in fairness, a particularly tricky shot to capture.

Zoom

iPhone

Samsung

Back to that statue again, this time at 4x optical zoom for the iPhone and 5x optical zoom for the Samsung.

The level of detail captured is impressive in both cases, but the Galaxy’s image is, in my opinion, the sharper of the two, which makes sense given the phone's optical advantage over the iPhone — the Galaxy essentially has more information for its processing algorithms to work with, resulting in a slightly more detailed image.

I also like the way the Galaxy dials down the color of the blurred clouds in the background to really bring the statue into focus, which isn't something you'd expect given the phone's gung-ho approach to colors we've observed so far.

iPhone

Samsung

Interestingly, in these photos — taken at the same optical distances as above — the Samsung has again dialed down the colors to produce a much grayer image than the iPhone, though I'm not sure that approach works for this particular scene.

The iPhone's image is warmer and, in parts (see the cracks in the pavement), a touch more detailed.

iPhone

Samsung

This is an example of each phone’s maximum digital zoom capabilities — 40x for the iPhone, 100x for the Samsung. Yes, 100 is a bigger number than 40, but you can see why Apple doesn’t bother to offer anything beyond that figure. In both cases, the phone is guessing at details via processing trickery, rather than actually being able to capture them, which results in two pretty unusable images.

Still, the Samsung will produce iPhone-like results up until around the 50x mark, so it's a more versatile zoom camera overall.

Macro and ultra-wide

iPhone

Samsung

Macro mode — where your phone automatically switches to its ultra-wide camera lens when you move close to a small subject — was my favorite test to carry out on both the iPhone 18 Pro and Galaxy S26 Ultra, because macro photography is something Apple and Samsung phones have been good at for years.

In this example, as we’ve seen previously, the iPhone 18 Pro opts for more realistic, neutral colors, while the Galaxy’s shot has way more contrast. The greens in these two images are quite literally different shades.

iPhone

Samsung

Again, the level of detail here is comparable across both shots, but this is the first instance where I actually prefer the Galaxy’s deeper, more artistic-looking colors. The iPhone's brighter image is closer to reality, though.

iPhone

Samsung

In this example, it’s the other way around; I prefer the iPhone’s colors to the Samsung’s. However, you’ll notice — if you zoom in on the vascular tissue of the leaves — that the Galaxy phone actually captures more detail.

iPhone

Samsung

As in my comparison between the iPhone 17 Pro and OnePlus 15’s cameras, I’ve only included one regular ultra-wide example here because I was so preoccupied with the phones’ wide and telephoto lenses while shooting in Hawaii that I forgot to take more with their respective ultra-wide lenses (perhaps my colleague was right in saying that phones don’t need ultra-wide lenses at all — but that’s a debate for another day).

In any case, everything I said about the first few photos in this comparison applies again here. Both phones capture excellent detail — I'd probably give the edge to the iPhone, since it captures the graininess of the sand slightly better than the Samsung — but their approaches to color science differ dramatically, which is evident in the sand, sky, and grass pictured above. The iPhone captures the scene as it is; the Samsung captures the scene as it thinks you want it to be.

Selfies

iPhone

Samsung

Both of these selfies are detailed and well-balanced in terms of color, but the iPhone's image is the slightly sharper of the two, no doubt because the 18 Pro has a larger 18MP front-facing sensor than the Galaxy S26 Ultra’s 12MP sensor. It does a better job of maintaining the clarity of my flyaway hairs, for instance.

It’s worth mentioning, too, that the iPhone 18 Pro’s ‘Center Stage’ selfie camera uses subject tracking to automatically keep you in the frame, and also lets you switch between portrait and landscape modes, depending on how many subjects are in frame. I've used that particular feature a lot, so it's definitely not a gimmick.

Verdict

There’s no doubt that both of these phones are among the best camera phones money can buy in 2026, but they do differ on several fronts.

For everyday shots in good lighting, both the iPhone 18 Pro and Galaxy S26 Ultra — in their respective default shooting modes — capture plenty of detail, but you’ll get more natural-looking shots from the former, and more vibrant, stylized shots from the latter.

In low light, the iPhone takes slightly brighter pictures and, as a result, sometimes captures more of the scene than the Galaxy, but Samsung’s style-focused color science can similarly lead to better results than the iPhone. It all depends on what you’re shooting and which aesthetic you prefer.

When it comes to zoom, both phones perform well, though the Galaxy will get you closer to your subject than the iPhone without sacrificing detail (5x optical zoom vs 4x optical zoom). You also get an additional 3x optical zoom option on the Samsung, which you don’t get on the iPhone. If I wanted the most versatile zoom shooter, I’d choose the Samsung.

For selfies, though, the iPhone is the clear winner, with its larger 18MP sensor and genuinely useful framing tricks.

As mentioned, the iPhone 18 Pro also boasts a variable aperture feature. Since I wanted to compare both of these phones using their out-of-the-box shooting settings, I didn’t manually control the aperture on the iPhone in any of the above shots, but Apple does give you the option to do so, whereas Samsung does not.

Changing the aperture is useful for tweaking how much of a given background you want to keep in focus (as my colleague Lance demonstrates in a separate piece), and you can also achieve some nice lens flare effects in low light while doing so. But this is very much a pro-level feature that most users won’t play around with too much.

Overall, then, I’d say the Galaxy S26 Ultra is my preferred camera phone for zoom photography and stylized shots, but the iPhone 18 Pro is the more consistent wide shooter in both well-lit and low-light scenarios. It’s got a better selfie camera, too, and since Apple’s new pro-level controls unlock more possibilities for the iPhone, it’s the phone I’ll be sticking with until the next wave of camera-focused Chinese flagships rolls around.

Incidentally, I'll be publishing separate Portrait mode and video comparisons shortly, so stick with TechRadar for more on these two top-end camera phones.

Among the many tricks you can turn to to free up some space on your device, one of the lesser-known options is reducing the room taken up by apps you're not really using any more. You can do it on any phone model: Android calls it archiving, and iOS calls it offloading, but the process works in a similar way.

This isn't uninstalling apps (which is also an option for freeing up space): it's stripping them down to the bare bones. It works best for those apps that you're not using regularly, but that you think you might come back to at some point, such as apps you only use on vacation or at events such as festivals, or games you haven't played in a while but still enjoy.

What archiving and offloading does

There's a good chance you've got a bunch of apps on your phone that you don't actually use that much: you installed them to test something, or try something out, or as an alternative to another app, and they just didn't stick. If you're not using these apps though, they're really just taking up room.

Uninstalling these apps is one option you've got, and will maximize the amount of storage space you get back. On Android, open the app drawer, tap and hold on an app, then drag it up to the Uninstall button at the top; on iOS, find the app on one of your home screens, press and hold on it, then tap Remove App > Delete App.

You can of course reinstall these apps whenever you like, but it's not a particularly quick or easy process. You need to find it again on the app store on your phone, wait for it to download, enter all your login details again, and customize it the same way you had it set up before. You might also lose some account data along the way, depending on the app.

Archiving or offloading is a middle ground. The bulk of the app gets removed from your phone, which helps with storage space, but key files stay in place — and the app icon stays in the app drawer or on the home screen. When you need the app again you just tap its icon, and after a few moments the necessary files are downloaded, and you're able to pick up from where you left off.

Archiving apps on Android

This feature is called Auto Archive on Android, and Google promises it can free up as much as 60% of the storage that an app is using, without removing the actual app or deleting your user data. It isn't turned on by default, but you can enable it yourself.

Open up the Play Store on your phone, tap your profile picture (top right), then choose Settings > General. Turn on the toggle switch labeled Automatically archive apps, and when storage space starts to run low, certain apps will be archived for you.

You can let Google choose the apps that are archived when space runs low, or archive them yourself. To archive an app, open Settings then Apps: Select the app you want, then tap Archive on the app details screen.

Android might prompt you to turn on Auto Archive if space is running low on your phone and you try and install something new from the Play Store: if this happens, tap Turn on to enable the feature, or No thanks if you want to clear some space manually.

Offloading apps on iOS

Over on iOS, the feature is called Offload Unused Apps, and it was introduced all the way back in 2017 with iOS 11. As on Android, the feature is off by default, but Apple will prompt you to turn it on when storage is low, or you can just turn it on preemptively: From Settings, select Apps > App Store, then turn on the Offload Unused Apps toggle switch.

Apple doesn't explain much about which apps are picked to be offloaded, so we're presuming that iOS chooses the ones you've left dormant for the longest when space starts to run out. Offloaded apps have a small arrow next to their name below their home screen icons.

You can opt to offload specific apps manually too, whether or not you've enabled the feature for iOS as a whole. From Settings in iOS, tap General > iPhone Storage, then select an app, and pick Offload App. The same screen lets you uninstall the app too.

How much space you're going to save using this method is obviously going to vary, but you might be able to free up more room than you thought. Whenever you need one of your offloaded apps back again, tap on its home screen icon to reinstate it.

It must be very difficult for a mobile operating system to tempt users away from Android or iOS, but on a small scale at least GrapheneOS seems to be doing so — and it’s now a little bit easier to get ahold of.

You see, this privacy-focused operating system that’s been built on top of the Android Open Source Project (AOSP), was previously limited to Pixel phones — which is somewhat ironic given it’s likely to appeal to people who want to escape Google’s grasp. But now it’s finally coming to a Motorola phone too.

The device in question is the newly launched Motorola Signature 27. This is a high-end handset, powered by the brand-new Snapdragon 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 chipset — making it even more powerful than the likes of the Samsung Galaxy S26 series. It also has a 6.8-inch screen and four rear cameras, so this is set to compete with the absolute best Android phones.

But unlike most of those rivals, you’ll be able to install GrapheneOS on it, as confirmed by the GrapheneOS X account. In fact, you might not even need to install it, as versions of the handset that ship with GrapheneOS pre-installed in place of Android are apparently planned too.

However, it’s unclear when that will be, or even when the Motorola Signature 27 will ship at all — though Motorola’s US site says to expect it sometime in November.

Hopefully the first of many

Whenever it does land it’s sure to be expensive (though pricing hasn’t yet been announced), but the GrapheneOS team have spoken about bringing its operating system to some future Motorola phones too, including possibly some lower end ones.

That said, there are some issues to solve, with the team previously saying (via Android Police) that “it's mostly due to how Qualcomm handles it. The latest Snapdragon flagships have the best security features. We'll also need Motorola to start paying them for longer updates below flagships."

So in other words it sounds like the use of this new chipset, alongside long-term software support, is why the operating system is being brought to the Motorola Signature 27 specifically.

Still, it’s nice to see GrapheneOS become at least slightly more widely available, and perhaps if previous chipsets were an issue, we might start seeing it brought to other Android brands once they launch phones with Qualcomm’s new silicon.

This is probably never going to be a truly mainstream OS, but by combining most of the familiarity of Android (including access to the Google Play Store if you choose to install it), with increased privacy and security features — particularly when it comes to what data is shared with Google and apps — it’s a very promising alternative to the big names for more privacy-conscious users.

Picking the Samsung Galaxy S26 FE to be your next phone would be a good decision. But whether it’s the best decision is the chewier question.

As has been the case for the past several years, Samsung has launched one final version of its Galaxy S flagship phones just before summer is out (in the US and UK, at least). This “Fan Edition” device aims to provide a more streamlined experience, focused on camera capabilities and AI, at a more approachable price.

However, Samsung has this all backwards. The Galaxy S26 FE’s cameras range from OK to weak, and the AI tools will soon be available on older models. Plus, the price hike this year makes the phone a little less of a bargain.

Arguably, the real reasons you’ll want a Galaxy S26 FE are its big screen, fast charging, strong battery life, and surprisingly good gaming performance. But then, if those are your priorities, you may still be better off looking elsewhere.

Confused yet? Hopefully the rest of my Galaxy S26 FE review will clear things up.

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE review: Price and availability

• Starts at $699 /£699 / AU$1,149

The Galaxy S26 FE first went on sale on September 4, 2026. It costs $699 / £699 / AU$1,149 for the standard version, which is $50 / £50 / AU$50 more than the Galaxy S25 FE cost when it launched.

As a result, it means there’s a $200 / £180 / AU$400 difference between this phone and the cheapest full-fat Samsung Galaxy S26, or a $400 / £400 / AU$700 gap if you compare it to the similarly-sized Galaxy S26 Plus. However, those Galaxy S26 models have twice as much storage as the S26 FE by default, which makes direct comparison a little complicated.

Also, keep in mind that you get six free months of Google AI Pro (worth about $120 / £114 / AU$200 at current subscription prices) with the purchase of the S26 FE. It’s an offer worth taking advantage of for the 5TB of cloud storage capacity alone, let alone the extra Gemini powers.

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE pricing

• Value score: 3.5 / 5

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE review: Specs

Before we continue, here’s a rundown of the Galaxy S26 FE’s hardware.

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE review: Design

• No major updates from previous model other than new colors
• Worthy of the Galaxy S name in terms of looks and durability

Looks-wise, there are no major body changes between the Galaxy S26 FE and the S25 FE — not that Samsung really needed to make any.

You still have three camera lenses embedded directly into the back of the phone, then flat rails with rounded corners around the sides, leading to a big display with a single centered selfie camera on the front.

Unless you’re able to tell the S26 FE apart from a regular S26 by the color of the handset, the big telltales that you’re holding an FE are the shiny back panel, instead of a matte texture, and the larger chin bezel under the display.

Speaking of colors, Samsung’s three offerings are Graphite, Blueberry and Pistachio (pictured). The gray option will satisfy anyone who isn’t fussed about the color of their phone, or who knows they’ll be using a case to add some style to their new handset, but I do like both the blue and pale green options for the balance they strike between boldness and subtlety.

Like the other Galaxy S26 models, the S26 FE is rated IP68 for water/dust-resistance, which we expect from any flagship phone launching today. However, it uses Gorilla Glass Victus Plus on both sides to protect against scratches and smashes, which is a generation behind what you get on the S26 or S26 Plus.

• Design score: 4 / 5

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE review: Display

• Big and colorful, but lower-spec resolution and brightness
• Larger bezels than other Galaxy S phones

The 6.7-inch AMOLED display of the Galaxy S26 FE matches the size of the Galaxy S26 Plus’ display, but that’s where the similarities end. The FE’s panel only reaches an FHD resolution, rather than the Plus’ more detailed QHD, and peaks at 1,900 nits of brightness according to Samsung’s testing, rather than the 2,600-nit rating of the other S26 models.

Even though the S26 FE can’t deliver as much brightness or as many pixels as Samsung’s top-tier displays, the detail and the colors of the FE’s panel are still strong, and the screen remains fairly legible even out in what remains of the summer sun.

The bezels around the Galaxy S26 FE’s display are thicker than they are on the Galaxy S26 Plus or other premium Samsung phones, which is an understandable limitation given the FE’s lower price. It doesn’t interfere with whatever you want to watch on the screen, but it’s a difference you’ll notice if you have used other recent Galaxy S phones.

• Display score: 3.5 / 5

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE review: Software

• Samsung’s latest OS comes pre-installed
• Seven more generations of updates have been promised

The Galaxy S26 FE comes pre-installed with OneUI 9, Samsung’s take on Android 17. That actually puts it ahead of the other Galaxy S26 models, which currently can only access OneUI 9 as a beta version.

OneUI 9 gives the FE a lot of tools to play with. My FanCam — the video subject tracking tool which just debuted on the much more expensive Galaxy Z Fold 8/ Galaxy Flip 8 series — is here and works just as capably. That’s joined by other AI-powered editing features like Photo Assist and Audio Eraser.

Meanwhile, for productivity, you have Now Brief and its new custom cards option to give you even more personalized updates all in one place, more supported apps for Now Nudge, plus expanded cross-app functions and Gemini.

Perhaps most importantly for the Galaxy S26 FE, it comes with Samsung’s full seven generations of Android and seven years of security updates promise. That’s the same as other Galaxy S models, and one additional year over what the cheaper Galaxy A57 gets, which is crucial for the value proposition of the S26 FE.

• Software score: 4 / 5

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE review: Cameras

• Minor upgrades but identical sensors to previous model
• The main and selfie cameras are good, but the ultra-wide and telephoto cameras lag behind

The Galaxy S26 FE’s camera loadout has a 50MP main rear lens as its centerpiece. You also have 12MP ultra-wide and 8MP 3x telephoto cameras on the back, as well as a 12MP selfie camera embedded in the display. This is the same basic setup as the Galaxy S25 FE, and also what you'll find on the Galaxy S26 and Galaxy S26 Plus, except that the more expensive phones get a higher-resolution 10MP zoom camera instead.

Our first example is a main camera shot of some brightly colored buildings in London’s Soho neighborhood. It’s a tricky one for any camera to balance due to the shaded shopfronts on the left side and the sky and brightly lit building in the center and right side. The Galaxy S26 FE still has some detail to offer in the shadowed brickwork, but Samsung’s strength in bright colors is on full display on the other half of this particular image.

Keeping with the main camera but looking out at the London Eye at night, we see another strong attempt from the Galaxy S26 FE. There’s some softness in the details, but the balance of colors between the lights and the night sky still makes for an appealing shot.

Looking across a sun-scorched park with the ultra-wide camera, we see a shot with plenty of scenery in it, with little to no distortion at the edges. The brightness and colors could use work, though, as even accounting for the patchy grass and overcast sky, things look overly drab.

The two shots of the church bell tower, one at 2x magnification using the S26 FE’s main camera and the other using the 3x telephoto camera, reveal how best to zoom in with this phone’s particular cameras. The in-sensor 2x zoom still keeps the subtleties of the colors and markings within the brickwork and foliage of the shot, thanks to the 50MP main sensor having plenty of pixels to spare even when zoomed in. However, while the telephoto camera has greater reach, the resulting image is darker and flatter, as you might expect from the lower-resolution sensor. It’s more of a trade-off than I’d like to see on a flagship phone’s zoom camera.

I’m normally a fan of Samsung selfies, but I’m not sure I like how the highlights are exposed in this particular shot. Samsung’s excellent portrait algorithm has applied the perfect level of bokeh to this image, however, cutting around my head, and especially my glasses, accurately and applying a gentle blur to the leaves behind.

Having gone through these samples, you’ll see that the Galaxy S26 FE’s photography potential is reasonable, at least for what are arguably the two most important cameras. For future generations of S FE, though, Samsung could do with upping its game if it wants to continue claiming this is a flagship product.

• Camera score: 3 / 5

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE review: Performance

• The Exynos 2500 chip is a good performer, especially for graphics
• 8GB of RAM is limiting for a premium phone in 2026

Here’s an area where I was pleasantly surprised by the Galaxy S26 FE. Samsung’s own Exynos 2500 chipset sits inside the S26 FE, rather than the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 chip that basically all the other top Samsungs of 2026 are using. But that hasn’t stopped the S26 FE from turning in some decent scores.

As the table below reveals, the Exynos 2500 lags behind slightly in CPU single-core results, but is on par with or ahead of the pack on the rest of the tests. It’s a long way out in front on the Solar Bay benchmark, no doubt thanks to the Exynos’ GPU, which is well-suited to the ray-tracing graphics that this test focuses on.

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE benchmark scores

Bearing only 8GB of RAM compared to the 12GB in other premium Samsung phones, the Galaxy S26 FE does struggle with multitasking or intensive apps. While you can still game on this phone happily, it’s not a handset you’ll want to do anything more practical on than standard browsing and messaging.

• Performance score: 4 / 5

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE review: Battery

• The same battery/charging hardware as the more expensive S26 Plus
• Battery life day-to-day is good, while charging is plenty fast enough

Samsung offers the same 4,900mAh battery capacity in the Galaxy S26 FE as it does in the Galaxy S26 Plus. However, according to Samsung’s official battery estimates, the S26 FE doesn’t offer the same battery life, managing 29 hours of video playback compared to the S26 Plus’ 31 hours or the S26’s 30 hours.

For me, I used about 40% of the phone’s battery during a typical day’s use. This included some work, some photography, and some social media scrolling and video watching. The Galaxy S26 FE could definitely survive two days of regular use before needing to charge, as you would hope from a phone with this size of battery.

The Galaxy S26 FE is still equipped for 45W wired charging and 15W wireless charging. That’s the same wired speed as the S26 Plus and Ultra, but the wireless charging is slower, since the FE is not Qi2 compatible.

Using a 45W charger, Samsung estimates a 69% refill for the S26 FE in half an hour. In my own test, I found the S26 FE managed to fill to 43% in 15 minutes and to 100% in 58 minutes. Considering the battery life this phone can manage, a complete refuel in under an hour and getting over two-fifths full in a quarter-hour isn’t bad at all, even if faster options are out there.

• Battery score: 4 / 5

Should you buy the Samsung Galaxy S26 FE?

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE scorecard

Buy it if…

Don’t buy it if…

Samsung Galaxy S26 FE review: Also consider

How I tested the Samsung Galaxy S26 FE

I reviewed the Samsung Galaxy S26 FE over the course of two weeks as a work phone, using it for writing stories, answering emails and messages, watching video and playing games. I did this both at home and on the move with a SIM card installed.

Specific tests included running Geekbench 6 CPU benchmarks and 3DMark graphics benchmarks, a charging speed test using a compatible third-party charger, the taking of hundreds of photos across all of the S26 FE’s cameras to test image quality, and the careful monitoring of battery drain during use to figure out how reasonable the manufacturer’s battery life promises are.

Read more about how we test

First reviewed: September 2026

The successors to last year’s China-only Xiaomi 17 Pro, the 18 Pro and 18 Pro Max boast an extra display on their respective rear panels: a 2.66-inch OLED for the Pro and a 2.86-inch, 120Hz OLED for the Pro Max. These mini screens can display widgets, wallpapers, and media controls, and can be used to frame selfies taken with the phones’ rear cameras.

That’s similar to what was on offer with last year’s Xiaomi 17 Pro devices, though with this year’s phones, Xiaomi is introducing its own — and potentially even better — take on Samsung’s popular Privacy Display technology.

Like Privacy Display on the Galaxy S26 Ultra, Xiaomi’s Smart Privacy Display can restrict side-on viewing to prevent people from snooping on you at angles beyond 60 degrees. It can also work its magic on notifications and widgets without affecting the rest of the display.

Notably, though, Xiaomi’s take on the technology can be applied to apps used in split-screen mode (maybe you only want to obscure one app, and not the other), as well as to specific locations and app notifications (because some pop-ups may be more risqué than others).

Smart Privacy Display is a feature of both the Xiaomi 18 Pro and 18 Pro Max, though the latter obviously has a larger screen: it’s 6.9 inches vs. 6.4 inches on the Pro.

I got the chance to get hands-on with the smaller Pro model at Snapdragon Summit 2026 (thanks, Qualcomm, for flying me out to Hawaii), and although I wasn’t able to unlock the display unit to test Smart Privacy Display, the rear OLED display was partially functional.

I used it to snap a few selfies using the Xiaomi 18 Pro’s 200MP main lens, which can be activated with a wave gesture or a press of the volume button.

As for the size and weight of the device, it’s (very) similar to the iPhone 18 Pro, which I suspect is a deliberate choice on Xiaomi’s part. Lest we forget that the iPhone Duo-like Xiaomi 18 Fold launched exactly one day before the iPhone Duo last month.

Other specs include the new Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6 and Snapdragon 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 chipsets for the Pro and Pro Max, respectively, as well as a shared triple-lens camera array comprising a 200MP main lens, a 200MP telephoto lens, and a 50MP ultra-wide lens.

The Pro comes equipped with a 7,000mAh silicon-carbon battery, while the Pro Max gets a larger 8,500mAh cell. Those capacities may be smaller outside of China, though.

We also don’t have much clarity on what Xiaomi means by a “global” launch. As mentioned, neither the Xiaomi 17 Pro nor 17 Pro Max launched outside of China, but the Xiaomi 17 Ultra did arrive in the UK and Europe, so I'd wager that those regions will get at least one of the Xiaomi 18 Pro and 18 Pro Max at some point. A US or Australia launch for either phone seems unlikely, though.

As for price, the 18 Pro will start at ¥5,999 CNY (around $900 / £675 / AU$1,300), and the 18 Pro Max at ¥6,999 (around $1,050 / £785 / AU$1,500). If and when these phones do arrive outside of China, though, their respective prices are likely to be much higher.

Just four months after launching the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra-rivaling Motorola Razr Fold, Motorola has now unveiled the Motorola Signature 27, supposedly “the most advanced smartphone Motorola has ever created.”

And we can believe it, because the Signature 27 is one of the first two phones (alongside the Xiaomi 18 Pro Max) to be announced with the Snapdragon 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6, which Qualcomm just announced at Snapdragon Summit 2026. That’s the same chipset as we’re expecting to power the rumored Samsung Galaxy S27 Ultra, which will likely be unveiled early next year.

The Signature 27 is a de facto successor to the original Motorola Signature, announced back in January, but it’s also the first Motorola flagship to adopt the company’s new numerical, year-based naming structure, reflecting Motorola’s desire to position the Signature 27 alongside the best Android phones of 2027.

And that, too, makes sense. The original Signature boasts impressive specs across the board, but its chipset — the Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 — is a step below the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, which powers the Galaxy S26 Ultra, Oppo Find X9 Ultra, and other contemporaries.

In using the Snapdragon 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6, the Signature 27 won’t be at the same power disadvantage as its predecessor. We don’t know the rest of the phone’s specs just yet, but for reference, the original Signature uses a 6.8-inch quad-curved AMOLED display, a 5,200mAh silicon-carbon battery, and three 50MP rear cameras.

A recent Signature 27 teaser did, however, reveal that the phone will come with at least a 200MP Sony sensor in a four-camera rear setup, which will inevitably see it competing with the best camera phones of next year.

We also know the Signature 27 will feature Bang & Olufsen-tuned audio, so it’ll presumably boast some impressive speaker credentials, and Motorola has confirmed the available color options, too: Pantone Capulet Olive and Pantone Coal Smoke. The latter features a woven texture, which Motorola says “reinforces strength, durability, and premium quality.”

The Motorola Signature 27 is expected to come to global markets later this year. Its price is unconfirmed, but given that the original Signature starts at £899.99 (roughly $1,210 / AU$1,800), it’s safe to expect a steeper figure for Motorola’s “most advanced smartphone ever.”

Succeeding last year’s Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, both chipsets have been designed to reduce reliance on RAM (no prizes for guessing why), and each will unlock advanced gaming and agentic AI capabilities for the next generation of flagship Android phones (including, we presume, the Samsung Galaxy S27 Ultra). But how, and why, do they differ?

I attended the Snapdragon Summit in Hawaii to speak to Qualcomm's team about the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6 and 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6. Here’s why the American silicon giant is launching two flagship chipsets this year — and why one of them is shipping with the ‘Extreme’ moniker.

Why are they different?

As Lekha Motiwala, Senior Director of Product Management at Qualcomm, told me: “Some OEMs [Original Equipment Manufacturers] are trying to reach the pinnacle of technology, while others are trying to reach broader audiences. We want to give choice and flexibility to the OEMs.

“The 8 Elite Gen 6 is the next generation to the 8 Elite Gen 5. The 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 is positioned above it as the top tier, to enable newer experiences like ultra[-level] gaming, professional video codec support, etc. — on the 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6, we are going beyond what we traditionally do [with our flagship chipsets], hence the tiering this year.”

“Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6 delivers generational improvements across all key experiences, and is designed to power the core flagship tier,” added Ellie Fortin, Senior PR spokesperson at Qualcomm.

“The Snapdragon 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 sits above Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6 as our top-tier Elite platform, showcasing leadership in AI, gaming, and advanced platform technologies, and is designed to power the best, most aspirational devices. The Snapdragon 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 includes everything in the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6, plus additional capabilities and advanced AI features. They’re both on 2nm TSMC.”

How are they different?

As for what Qualcomm means by ‘everything’ in the above statement, let’s get technical. Both chipsets feature the newest version of the company’s Oryon CPU, comprising two prime cores up to 5GHz (that’s a world-first) and six performance cores up to 4GHz. This CPU also packs a 16MB Oryon Flex Cache, which Qualcomm says will allow mobile agents to run demanding workloads without slowing down.

Qualcomm’s re-tooled Hexagon NPU [neural processing unit] features a new Hexagon Element Accelerator that should speed up how quickly AI prompts are processed by your phone — regardless of which new chipset it’s running — while the NPU in the 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 gets 50% more Large Shared Memory than the equivalent NPU in the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5.

Still with me? As for the new Adreno graphics unit, Qualcomm says it represents the “biggest generational leap yet,” and will deliver substantial gains in graphics performance and power efficiency for phones equipped with either the 8 Elite Gen 6 or 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6. But the latter pulls further away from its sibling with something called Adreno Neural Fusion — a dedicated gaming rendering technology that uses AI to deliver enhanced graphics and longer play sessions in compatible titles like Honkai: Star Rail, Diablo Immortal, and War Thunder: Mobile.

Couple that with three AI-dedicated GPU cores, and the 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 looks set to make the next best gaming phones more capable than ever: “We’re introducing Adreno Matrix cores, which are exclusive to the 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6,” Motiwala explained to me. “They support the running of AI workloads within the graphics pipeline itself. Rendering becomes smarter, [you’ll get] super resolution, frame generation — many of these features can now be run within the graphics pipeline rather than moving to the NPU and other [parts of the chipset]. So now you’ll have much lower latency and much lower power consumption.”

And finally, both new chipsets feature the Qualcomm Spectra ISP for improved digital stabilization, color processing, and motion detection, but only phones equipped with the 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 will support — or rather have the capability to support — Advanced Professional Video (APV) codecs and 8K 60fps video capture.

Initial impressions

In other words, the Snapdragon 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 is likely to be the chipset of choice for Android phone manufacturers hoping to claim that their upcoming flagships offer the very best in AI features, performance efficiency, and image processing. But it remains to be seen whether the likes of Samsung, Xiaomi, and Oppo can actually make use of all this extra power.

In truth, even the current-gen Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 provides more than enough juice for 99% of smartphone tasks, and so that’s almost certainly going to be true of the 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 (the clue is in the name) and indeed the lower-spec 8 Elite Gen 6, both of which are objectively more powerful than last’s year’s flagship chipset.

The key takeaway here is that Qualcomm is aware of the memory constraints affecting the technology industry, and has clearly worked hard to bring AI processing closer to the chipset with this year’s Snapdragon lineup. This should mean that, even if upcoming Android flagships arrive with lower RAM capacities than their predecessors (see the Google Pixel 11 Pro), their ability to process AI tasks won’t be negatively affected — if we take Qualcomm’s word for it, it’ll actually be improved.

Basically, it’s about doing more with less. Or maybe more with more, but not as much ‘more’ as we might’ve expected pre-RAM crisis.

Which phones will be supported?

Both the Motorola Signature 27 and Xiaomi 18 Pro Max are the first phones to be announced with the Snapdragon 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 chipset. The Xiaomi 18 Pro, meanwhile, will use the regular Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6.

We don’t have any other official information about which phones will use either chipset just yet, but here’s a list of rumored devices whose respective predecessors use the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 and could therefore ship with Qualcomm’s latest slices of Snapdragon silicon:

• Samsung Galaxy S27 Ultra
• Samsung Galaxy S27 Plus
• Samsung Galaxy S27
• Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 9 Ultra
• Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 9
• Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 9
• Xiaomi 18 Ultra
• Xiaomi 18
• Oppo Find X10 Ultra
• Oppo Find X10 Pro Max
• Oppo Find X10
• Honor Magic 10 Pro
• Honor Magic V7
• RedMagic 12 Pro
• RedMagic 12S Pro

Samat was referring to the five brand-spanking new Googlebooks arrayed around the room, all running Googlebook OS, the first hybrid lovechild of ChromeOS and Android.

A year ago in an interview with me ostensibly about Android 16, the over-sharing Samat let slip, "we’re going to be combining ChromeOS and Android into a single platform," and set the tech world on fire.

He said it so casually back in July 2025 that I scarcely grasped the significance. After all, there's been chatter about the idea for ages, but no one had confirmed it, and if it were true, it would mean Google was looking at the idea of an Android ecosystem in a whole new way.

Now, however, we have the fruits of that comment and all the labor in Googlebook OS and Googlebooks laptops from partners Asus, Acer, Lenovo, Dell, and HP, which go on pre-order today and start shipping October 5.

Samat told me that he wanted five partner brands and not just two because he wanted to show the breadth of options and noted that they have some points of differentiation, like some have facial recognition, and other Googlebooks include a fingerprint reader. To this point, we have ultra-lights, like the 2.2lb Asus, and workhorses, like a 15-inch Lenovo, and pen-supporting convertibles from Acer. While there's a range of CPUs, from the Intel Core Ultra line to the Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite, and even MediaTek, they do all share some core Googlebook features.

There's the Glowbar, a thin, multi-colored bar on the top cover of all the laptops that lights up to let you know, among other things, that Gemini is at work, or to show battery status. There are even some Easter Eggs to discover. I wondered out loud if the battery status would work when the laptops weren't plugged in. Unfortunately, it's to show charge status.

Each laptop has a massive, haptic touchpad, and there's a G key for quick access to Google features, and a special Caps Lock key with instant access to text-based add-ons like emojis. They all offer the magic cursor, which you can jiggle to open screen-aware Gemini access, basically telling Gemini to do [this] with [that] on-screen element. They all also start with 16GB. Samat told me he was excited that they all start with the "right amount of RAM." 16GB means these natively Gemini-supporting portables are ready for a lot of local AI (the CPUs can reportedly handle up to 45 TOPs).

While a hybrid platform, there's no indication that this is a mobile OS in desktop clothing. Yes, there are things like customizable widgets (and ones you can create via prompts) that I, after a two-finger click on the trackpad, could endlessly resize and move, and access to all your Android Apps. But there are also desktop-level apps and services (online and offline access to Canva, Netflix, and Adobe apps), a dock, and a full file system.

One cool demo showed how you could search across files on your Googlebook and Android phone and even dig into inscrutable file names because the system can see inside files.

The Android infusion combines the Android in your hand and the Googlebook laptop on your desk. There's a single sign-on that recognizes you as one user on the phone and laptop. An email started on your Android phone can be continued seamlessly on the laptop (it does not yet let you go in the other direction). There's a small icon that appears in the dock, showing a tiny phone. You click that, and it opens the email draft on the laptop Gmail app.

The intention here is quite clear: a true Android ecosystem where, Samat told me, it all just works. "That's the dream," he said. The benchmark for such an ecosystem will always be Apple and how its laptops, desktops, phones, and wearables all work together. I asked Samat if I could expect similar levels of interoperability, zeroing in on how when I get an authentication code on my iPhone, it automatically appears on my MacBook Air. He said the unified messaging system will allow this, and added that they would've demoed it on stage that day, but wanted to keep the presentation relatively lean.

Before the event, I wondered if Googlebooks were intended to compete with Apple's new and quite popular $699 / £699 / AU$1,049 MacBook Neo. However, these systems start at $899 / £999 (around AU$1,899) , and a few were $1,199 (around £1,200 / AU$1,680) and $1,299 (around £1,300 / AU$1,800).

That was intentional. Samat, who said Neos are great but that people often find their performance limits, told me they wanted to start with premium offerings. Instead of compromises, Googlebooks offer eye-catching designs and real performance.

Googlebooks run desktop-grade apps online and offline, though App downloads appear to come exclusively through the Google Play Store, and in demos I saw, the systems have the power to do traditional coding and Agentic or Vibe Coding with Google Antigravity. It's worth mentioning, though, that to do the latter, you will need a Gemini account and tokens.

Samat, though, is excited about the power and possibilities, enthusing over the inclusion of a Linux Terminal, a fact that's not surprising since the stack includes a Linux Kernel (right below the Android Stack).

Glancing around the room, Samat asked me which Googlebook was my favorite. As I scanned the crowded demo space, I realized just how much each laptop looked like a standard Windows system, until, of course, you opened them up and saw that Googlebook OS desktop. After a moment, I told him the 2.2-lb. Asus Googlebook is quite attractive. Samat grinned and asked me if I'd checked out the aluminum-clad HP. I agreed that it looked like a premium laptop, too.

On stage, Samat said, "For so long I’ve wanted to do what we’re doing today," calling Googlebooks "a new category of laptops built for how people actually work today."

Later, Samat told me this is "just a start," and there's a lot more to come.

The Googlebooks I saw were notable for their smooth and polished operation. It may be the merging of two platforms, but each Googlebook's desktop and operations I tried felt remarkably unified, as if they'd been together all along.

Still, I had to wonder how this all fits in with Googlebook's cousin, the Chromebook, low-cost laptops that are more or less shell systems offering easy access to cloud-based apps. Schools love them. Samat claimed that 70% of all US education is using them and said it's the only system designed to be passed from one person to another (as each user signs in and out and so on).

Googlebooks and Chromebooks are not mutually exclusive. Samat said Chromebook is important, but it's for a different user and purpose. I said that Chromebook is a doorway, but the Googlebook appears to be about productivity. "Exactly," he told me, still smiling.

There is an Android malware out there that comes with an AI assistant that tells it what to do. The assistant seems to be independent of the malware’s operator, allowing the tool to work without requiring the operators to be present in real-time.

The malware in question is called RedHat. It was discovered by security researchers Zimperium zLabs, who believe it is of Chinese origin. It is currently being distributed via third-party app stores, social media, malvertising, and SMS spam, and requires Android’s Accessibility permissions to work.

The malware itself is a typical banking trojan - it creates an invisible overlay every time the victim brings up a banking app, capturing login credentials and one-time passwords, and thus giving attackers direct control over people’s banking accounts.

AI-powered eyes

But what makes RedHat stand out from a sea of Android banking trojans is its AI-powered component. The model serves as a kind of remote “eyes and hands” for controlling the victim’s phone.

Usually, when criminals develop banking trojans, they need to code exact coordinates of the layout for it to work. They need to code where the password is entered, or where the login button is. If the banking app gets redesigned and changes its layout, the malware breaks.

With AI, that is no longer a problem. RedHat gets a picture of what’s on the screen, sends it to the AI assistant, which then instructs the malware on how to proceed.

"RatHat uses AI to intelligently navigate and control the device interface in real-time, making its operations more adaptable and harder for security software to detect than traditional, scripted automation," Zimperium explained.

The tool also has a few advanced persistence mechanisms, being capable of reinstalling deleted components, and intercepting the uninstall process to cancel it while displaying a fake error message to the victim.

So far, there is no word on who the targets are, or how many people might have been compromised.

Via BleepingComputer

Poco’s latest high-end phone, the Poco F9 Ultra, continues to show you don’t have to spend absolute top dollar to get the best performance — but a price increase over the previous-generation model is hard to ignore.

The F9 Ultra replaces the Poco F8 Ultra after less than a year, and with the same chipset and design, it doesn’t change too much at first glance. But look deeper, and this is a refined upgrade that boasts an enormous battery bringing multi-day power, a new 200MP main camera sensor, and some of the best speakers on any phone.

The whole package proves you don’t have to spend four figures to land a phone with top-of-the-line specs and performance. The base model with 12GB RAM and the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 chipset costs $799 / £899 — yes, that's a $70 / £150 increase over the starting price of the F8 Ultra, but Poco did explain to TechRadar that it believes this new price remains "competitive" for the level of specs on offer. And it has a point — there are only a handful of phones offering 12GB RAM and the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 chipset for less money (one of which is Poco's own F8 Ultra).

The F9 Ultra's massive 6.9-inch AMOLED display looks great and is capable of 185Hz refresh rates during compatible games. Gameplay is also boosted with the unusual addition of a Bose-tuned subwoofer on the back, plus you're getting dual speakers, which makes the F9 Ultra a top choice for hands-free calls and listening to podcasts without headphones (though I still can’t condone blasting music from it here are on principle).

As mentioned, for those after the latest Snapdragon silicon for as little money as possible, the F9 Ultra is only undercut by Poco's own F8 Ultra, or indeed the Xiaomi 17, which launched for £899 but is currently on sale for £699. But the F9 Ultra still costs a whopping $500 / £380 less than the Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra, and it wipes the floor with the pricier Google Pixel 11 Pro XL when it comes to gaming.

The cherry on top is a mammoth 8,050mAh battery, one of the biggest on a flagship device available in the UK at the time of writing (September 2026). It means the F9 Ultra can last for three days with moderate use, and I found it impossible to kill in a waking day.

And lastly, aside from a slightly stingy four years of Android updates, six years of security patches to see you through to 2032 is good to see on a phone as well-rounded as this.

Poco F9 Ultra review: Price and availability

• Starts at £899 / $799 / €1,099.99
• A $70 / £150 price increase on the F8 Ultra
• Not officially available in Australia
• Still competitive considering the specs

The Poco F9 Ultra starts at $799 / £749, though the US price varies depending on the seller (the phone is not officially available through US carriers, but $799 is Poco's official US price). Official UK availability is good to see, though £749 represents a £150 increase on the F8 Ultra’s £749 starting price, and at the time of writing, the older model is on sale for £649, which is an absolute steal.

But in being equipped with the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 chipset, the F9 Ultra undercuts the Galaxy S26 Ultra — the only S26 series phone in the UK to run a Qualcomm chipset — by an almighty £380, and it's much less than the £1,279 Pixel 11 Pro XL, too, whose Tensor G6 chipset can’t hold a candle to the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 in terms of performance.

In fact, at £899, the F9 Ultra is the same price as the Google Pixel 11, but it offers superior gaming chops, a more expansive display, and much better battery life. That's why, despite increasing the price, Poco believes the F9 Ultra remains "competitive" in today's market — and we're inclined to agree.

• Value Score 4 / 5

Poco F9 Ultra review: Specs

Here’s a look at the Poco F9 Ultra’s key specs:

Poco F9 Ultra review: Design

• Similar look to the iPhone 17 Pro
• Large but manageable device
• Sleek dark cherry colour replaces gaudy denim

The Poco F9 Ultra I reviewed is the lovely Dark Cherry option, which I prefer over the F8 Ultra’s bold but gaudy Denim Blue. Despite being a very large phone, the F9 Ultra is very comfortable to hold thanks to subtly curved aluminum side rails and a ‘Glass Fibre’ composite rear, which should be more resilient than the glass found on most rival flagship devices.

There’s also a black model if you'd prefer a safer option, with a red power button for a pop of color. The Dark Cherry variant hardly shows any fingerprints on its matte surface, and the overall look of the F9 Ultra grew on me in the weeks I was testing it, despite its obvious similarities with the iPhone 17 Pro and indeed the F8 Ultra.

The phone's four-circle camera design alongside the Bose-branded subwoofer is different enough to me, and manages to look as simplistic as possible. The F9 Ultra also doesn’t rock and wobble when used face up on a table, which is a nice touch.

Save for the one-piece volume rocker above the power button on the right edge, there isn't much else to report besides a USB-C port and speaker grilles on the top and bottom. When all is said and done, this is quite a conservative design when it’s not clad in faux denim!

• Design score: 4 / 5

Poco F9 Ultra review: Display

• Large, bright 6.9-inch panel
• Up to 185Hz refresh rate in some games
• Punch-hole selfie camera

The Poco F9 Ultra’s display is excellent, with great brightness and clarity. It's a 6.9-inch 1200 x 2608 AMOLED panel that Poco claims has a peak brightness of 10,000 nits, much higher than rivals. However, it tames that claim by saying this 10,000-nit figure only applies to 1% of the display area, so a 4,500-nit “multi-scenario peak brightness” is the real figure here.

This is a good example of a brand obfuscating the real specs when it doesn’t need to. The F9 Ultra has a great screen, so Poco should lean into the actual numbers rather than fudging a fake one for marketing purposes. The display is very easy to read in bright sunlight, which is all you need to know.

Poco offers excellent granular control over display and color settings, a nod to the phone's gaming focus under the hood. You'll find ‘Original color PRO’ or ‘Vivid’ options in the settings app, which offer full custom control so you can find the right look for you. A dedicated hardware chip can even enhance video quality if you switch the ‘dual-core visuals’ toggle on. All this really does is smooth everything out, so I left it off.

The display can refresh at up to 185Hz, which is the highest I have ever tested on a phone. Most modern OLED displays achieve 120Hz with a variable rate, and some gaming phones have pushed to 144Hz or 165Hz. At the time of writing, the F9 Ultra's 185Hz rate is only available in CrossFire: Legends and Blood Strike, but you'll still get 165Hz in titles like Call of Duty: Mobile and Bang Bang.

So again, what Poco should really say here is that the F9 Ultra has an excellent 120Hz display in most scenarios. That information is hard to come by in the review documents I was provided with, and most users, most of the time, will never see 185Hz unless they play the two aforementioned games daily.

I personally prefer the Pixel 11 Pro XL’s display, which I think handles white balance better and isn’t so blinding to look at, but it’s a close call, and the F9 Ultra certainly has one of the best displays for the price. It’s a great choice for a large screen and undercuts, say, the Galaxy S26 Plus by a significant margin, though the F9 Ultra's display has a slightly lower resolution.

With every conceivable display spec under the sun included here, such as HDR10+, Dolby Vision, and TÜV Rheinland certification for flicker-free viewing and blue light filtration, it’s hard to criticize the screen on this phone.

• Display score: 5 / 5

Poco F9 Ultra review: Cameras

• Strong 200MP main lens
• Very capable 5x telephoto
• Ultra-wide is not the best

Poco has equipped the F9 Ultra with a pleasingly capable trio of cameras, which is led by a 200MP main lens, an upgrade on the 50MP shooter on the F8 Ultra. Shots are binned down to 12.5MP by default, though 50MP and 200MP settings can be toggled on.

In the default mode, shots look excellent, offering most of the color and mood I personally like from Xiaomi phones such as the Xiaomi 17 Ultra and 17T Pro, though Poco does not have the same Leica partnership or photo filters here.

Apart from a few times where colors looked wildly oversaturated, I really liked the output from the F9 Ultra. It has an artistic, filmic quality that many phones abandon in 2026 in favor of sharpened, contrast-heavy looks. The main camera is better than that of the regular Galaxy S26, which retails for $899 / £879, $100 / £20 less than the Poco.

It’s great to see a 5x optical zoom lens here too, mirroring what you’ll find on the Xiaomi 17T Pro and beating the S26’s 3x optical lens handily. Images are crisp thanks to optical image stabilization (OIS), and shooting in portrait mode at 5x makes for some great street photography. The F9 Ultra is also a phone that’ll come in handy when you’re sitting up in row Z at your next Harry Styles concert thanks to digital zoom up to 100x, though things look patchy after 30x.

The 50MP ultra-wide lens is the weakest of the three cameras, but that’s usually the case on triple-lens phones. In broad daylight, images are very usable, but without OIS, the smaller sensor size shows its limitations in low light, with noise and grain.

The 32MP selfie shooter is solid for solo and group snaps, and works as you’d expect for video calls.

Speaking of video, the main lens can record at up to 4K at 60fps, or even 8K at 30fps. 4K 60fps is great to see, though the Snapdragon chipset here is probably capable of 4K 120fps, like you’ll find on the aforementioned Xiaomi 17 Ultra and the cheaper 17T Pro. This is a case of Poco limiting its hardware’s capabilities in software, which is a shame, even if most users won’t notice.

That said, the camera app is fully featured and well designed, with an accomplished Pro mode offering the ability to shoot in RAW for those who want to edit images later on their computer.

• Camera score: 4 / 5

Poco F9 Ultra review: Camera samples

Poco F9 Ultra review: Performance

• Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 is still excellent
• Nothing slows this thing down
• Bose audio is fun but not a gamechanger

Performance is where Poco phones really shine, and the F9 Ultra is the most performant Poco phone yet. Its flagship-level specs include the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 chipset, though this is the same chipset as you'll find in the F8 Ultra. Poco explained this decision to us, so you can see if you agree with the firm's reasoning, but it does appear as though the launch of the F9 series was brought forward this year, because Poco has opted to not use the next-generation flagship Snapdragon chipset, which is usually unveiled in October.

The base $799 / £899 F9 Ultra comes with 12GB RAM and 256GB storage, though there are also 512GB and 1TB storage options available, each offering 16GB RAM. Poco sent me the latter for review, which retails for £1,199 — notably less than the 12GB/256GB Galaxy S26 Ultra, which is £1,279. So, despite some price rises, Poco is still delivering value here for those after the very best specs for the money.

Performance follows, too. I could not get the F9 Ultra to stutter, even when playing Genshin Impact with the settings maxed out — the Pixel 11 Pro XL, by contrast, can’t even load the game.

The impressive thing about the F9 Ultra is its sustained performance under load. Where rival phones can stutter after half an hour or so on Call of Duty: Mobile, the Poco soldiers on (pun intended) without breaking a sweat. The phone didn't overheat once during my time testing it, presumably thanks to the built-in cooling system that Poco says reduces strain on the CPU.

Audio is great thanks to two stereo speakers and the addition of a subwoofer next to the cameras. This is tuned by Bose thanks to a partnership, and promises deeper bass and a wider soundstage. Compared to the Pixel 11 Pro XL and Samsung Galaxy S26 Plus, the Poco F9 Ultra sounds much fuller when playing music out loud or listening to gaming audio, though I don’t think this is a reason to buy the phone. The Bose partnership improves audio slightly, but you will still want headphones connected via Bluetooth for most things.

Now that you can no longer buy the identically priced OnePlus 15 in the US or UK (RIP), the F9 Ultra would have been your best bet for Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5-level power, but the previous-gen F8 Ultra offers incredibly similar performance and is available at the time of publication for £649.

• Performance score: 5 / 5

Poco F9 Ultra review: Software

• HyperOS 3 based on Android 16 at launch
• Some AI tools require account sign in
• Four years of Android updates, six of security

The F9 Ultra gets Xiaomi’s HyperOS 3 Android skin, which at launch is based on Android 16, rather than the latest version, 17. Poco says the phone will get four platform updates, presumably to Android 20, and six years of security updates to keep buyers going until 2032.

HyperOS changes the look of Android to feel a little more like the iPhone’s iOS, but that’s no bad thing as it is perfectly functional, if a little cluttered at times. It’s a shame to see bloatware installed on a phone of this price, with AliExpress, Amazon Music, TikTok, and a few others pre-installed, but they can all be removed.

Going the way of iOS, notifications are a swipe from the left while quick settings are from the right. After I’d wrangled the software a bit during setup, I got it looking cleaner with more icons per row and fewer folders full of apps that are initially presented.

What is thankfully not shoved in your face is AI, even though there is a lot of it on board. There’s a whole section in the settings app called Xiaomi HyperAI, which directs you to Google’s built-in Gemini platform, as well as Xiaomi’s own branded AI tools.

AI Dynamic Wallpapers, AI Writing to generate text, AI Speech Recognition to transcribe audio, AI subtitles for videos — AI everything! In the Gallery app, there are some capable AI editing tools, including a beautify mode that works well. But others, such as an Ultra HD toggle or an Expand feature to generate images, require you to sign in to a Xiaomi account within the settings app.

HyperOS is visually quite different to Google’s Android flavor on the Pixel or the now-barely-seen ‘stock’ Android look, but I’ve warmed to it in recent months. It’s perfectly functional, and mercifully lets you swipe down on notifications to expand them, unlike on fellow Xiaomi stablemate Redmi’s phones.

The software is also very responsive on this hardware. Menus flow, and apps open instantly. I saw and felt no difference between the F9 Ultra and other, more expensive Android flagship phones. It feels faster than Samsung’s S26 series in many ways, though that could be down to Samsung’s slower default animations.

• Software score: 4 / 5

Poco F9 Ultra review: Battery

• Two- to three-day battery life
• 100W fast charging but no charger in UK box
• 50W wireless and 27W reverse wired charging

The F9 Ultra has a whopping 8,050mAh silicon-carbon battery. This new tech means phone makers can put higher-density batteries in phones than they could with lithium-ion, resulting in devices of the same physical thickness that last for much longer. Using the F9 Ultra as my main phone for more than a week, I consistently got two days of use out of it, sometimes stretching into a third day’s morning.

That’s seriously good longevity, made even more impressive by the phone’s flagship specs. It’s capable of 100W wired charging, but there is frustratingly no charger in the box for UK buyers. I tested the charging speed of the F9 Ultra using a Vivo 100W charging brick with the ‘Top Speed’ charging setting turned on.

The phone went from dead to 100% in 95 minutes, which is impressive for a battery of this size, and it got to 27% in 15 minutes. You’ll have to fork out for a compatible fast charger, which is a little galling when you’re laying down at least $799 / £899.

The phone also has 50W wireless charging — faster than the S26 Ultra can do via a wired connection (45W) — and can even be used as a power bank for other devices thanks to 27W wired reverse charging and 22.5W reverse wireless charging.

A few phones on the market go for longer, like the Redmi Note 17 Pro Max, but the Poco F9 Ultra gets top marks here for stonking battery life paired with top-tier specs.

Here are the phone's charging speed results broken down:

• In 15 minutes: 27%
• In 30 minutes: 46%
• 0-50%: 33 minutes
• 0-100%: 95 minutes

• Battery score: 5 / 5

Should you buy the Poco F9 Ultra?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Poco F9 Ultra review: Also consider

The Poco F9 Ultra is a strong phone in its price range, but there are a couple of similarly priced options worth considering alongside it:

How I tested the Poco F9 Ultra

• Review test period: Two weeks
• Testing included: Everyday use with messaging, web browsing, social media, photography, video calling, gaming, streaming video, music streaming
• Tools used: Geekbench 6, 3DMark

I tested the Poco F9 Ultra over the course of two weeks, using it as my main phone with my main SIM card for a week, and as a secondary phone on other days. I used it to make calls, send WhatsApp messages, take video calls, play mobile games, stream podcasts and music, and take scores of photos.

I tested the performance of the phone’s display, chipset, cameras, and battery life for this review, comparing results with Poco’s claims as well as my decade of experience reviewing Android smartphones professionally. I’ve used many of the most recent Android flagship devices the F9 Ultra is gunning for.

I also ran benchmark tests using the Geekbench 6 and 3DMark apps to qualify my performance assessments of the phone.

Read more about how we test here.

• First tested September 2026