Apple currently offers the 256GB iPhone X for $1,149. That may strike some as a ridiculous amount of money to pay for a smartphone. On the other hand, you get what you pay for. Right? Okay, Siri is dumb and some of Apple’s apps, like Maps, are not very good, but surely, for $1,149, the iPhone X hardware is state-of-the-art. Or maybe not. Speedtest compared the iPhone X to Samsung’s Galaxy S9 and found the iPhone X is substantially slower. In fact, it was no contest.
Speedtest compared the iPhone X and Galaxy S9 with their Speed Score metric. The Speed Scores used for the comparison are based on user-initiated cellular network speed tests during Q1 and Q2 2018 in the US. Only speed tests on networks that have 3% or more of the tests carried out during that time period are included. The carriers that made the cut are T-Mobile, Verizon, AT&T and Sprint.
The Speed Score is based on both download and upload speeds with download given 90% of the weight. Speeds are taken at the 10th, 50th and 90th percentiles and combined in a 1:2:1 weighted average. The weights emphasize median speed and download speed on the assumption that those two factors best represent the average customer mobile phone experience.
Here are the Speed Scores for the Galaxy S9 and iPhone X. The table also shows how much faster the S9 is expressed as a percentage of the iPhone X’s Speed Score.
| Carrier | Galaxy S9 | iPhone X | S9 percent faster |
| Verizon | 35.24 | 29.36 | 20% |
| AT&T | 33.25 | 26.20 | 27% |
| T-Mobile | 39.48 | 28.93 | 36.5% |
| Sprint | 30.19 | 21.79 | 38.5% |
Speedtest’s results are very clear. The iPhone X was more than 25% slower for every major carrier except Verizon where it was “only” 20% slower. These aren’t small differences. The Galaxy S9 is substantially faster than the iPhone X.
The 256GB iPhone X costs 37% more and is 20 to 38.5% slower than the equivalent Galaxy S9 which is priced at $839.99. Do you get what you pay for with an iPhone X? If you’re paying for basic performance, definitely not.
