Apple's iPhone 18 Pro Max and Samsung's Galaxy S26 Ultra are the two most powerful phones from their makers this year. GSMArena has now put them head to head. Its verdict is that neither phone clearly beats the other, and the better choice depends on how you use your phone.
Design and display: Samsung's edge
The two phones are almost the same size, but the Galaxy S26 Ultra is much lighter and thinner. It weighs 214g and is 7.9mm thick, against 249g and 8.8mm for the iPhone. Both are rated IP68 for dust and water resistance. Both have a 6.9-inch, 120Hz OLED screen. Samsung's panel has a higher resolution (1440 x 3120 versus 1320 x 2868) and a higher maximum automatic brightness of about 1,480 nits, against roughly 969 for Apple. Samsung also includes a Privacy Display feature and a smaller front-camera cutout. GSMArena gave the display and design categories to Samsung.
Battery and performance: Apple's edge
The iPhone holds a 5,391mAh battery against 5,000mAh in the Samsung. In GSMArena's testing, the iPhone recorded an active-use score of 19 hours 20 minutes, compared with 16 hours 22 minutes for the Galaxy. The iPhone also led in web browsing, video streaming and gaming. Charging is close. Both phones reach about 50% in 15 minutes and more than 80% in 30 minutes. The Galaxy supports 60W wired charging against 54W for the iPhone, and it fills the battery completely in 43 minutes versus 55. Samsung also offers reverse wireless charging, which the iPhone lacks. For performance, the iPhone runs Apple's 2nm A20 Pro chip and the Galaxy runs a boosted Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5. The iPhone scored higher in Geekbench 6 (12,794 versus 11,566), and GSMArena says it also holds its speed better under sustained load. The Galaxy led in AnTuTu 11 (3,892,165 versus 3,463,072).
Price
GSMArena listed Amazon prices for the 256GB models. The iPhone 18 Pro Max was £1,299 in the UK and €1,599 in Germany. The Galaxy S26 Ultra was $919.99 in the US and £792.49 in the UK. On UK listings, the Samsung is cheaper by about £500. Prices vary by market, and the review did not cover Maldivian retail prices.
