Samsung · Reviewed by TECHOOB · Published 2026-05-19
Based on a review by TECHOOB (accessed 2026-05-19).
Based on this review alone: skip it — extremely poor and laggy performance, making basic navigation and app usage frustratingly slow., unless exterior design is visually very close to the original samsung s26 ultra. is your only priority.
The reviewer concludes that the clone Samsung S26 Ultra is a total fraud that looks deceptively similar but dramatically fails in actual performance, software authenticity, and core functionality. It is dangerous and not worth buying, serving only to scam unsuspecting customers.
The video provides a detailed comparison between a clone Samsung S26 Ultra and an original Samsung S26 Ultra. The reviewer performs side-by-side tests and visual inspections covering packaging, physical design, display quality, software, performance, and camera capabilities to highlight the differences.
This Samsung S26 Ultra clone is an absolute scam and dangerous, despite its eerily similar appearance to the original flagship. Performance is agonizingly slow, with the UI constantly lagging and applications taking an extremely long time to load. Crucially, the phone runs an outdated Android 4.1 disguised as Android 16 and lacks essential sensors like light and proximity, resulting in no auto-brightness. If you prioritize basic functionality and safety, absolutely avoid this device. If you're considering a budget alternative for the S26 Ultra, your money is better spent elsewhere on a legitimate, entry-level smartphone.
reviewer_claimmoderate
reviewer_claimstrong
reviewer_claimstrong
reviewer_claimstrong
reviewer_claimstrong
measurement_claimstrong
reviewer_claimstrong
reviewer_claimstrong
reviewer_claimstrong
reviewer_claimstrong
visual_inspectionneutral
The reviewer notes that the clone's box has a cooler, more 3D-like feel, which he finds appealing compared to the original Samsung box that lacks this textured finish.
visual_inspectionpositive
The original Samsung box contains detailed product data, MRP, and a Samsung Noida address, whereas the clone's box is empty of such crucial information.
hands_on_demonegative
The clone displays "Samsung S26 Ultra 5G Secured by Knox Powered by Android" on boot and takes longer to start, while the original only shows "Samsung Galaxy" and boots up within 20 seconds.
visual_inspectionmixed
The clone's physical design is very close to the original, with a similar matte feel, making differentiation difficult for an untrained eye. However, the original feels more premium, and there are subtle differences in button sizes: the original's power button is larger, while the clone's volume button is larger.
hands_on_demonegative
The original SIM tray does not fit into the clone, and the clone's SIM tray does not fit into the original, even when reversed, indicating different physical dimensions.
hands_on_demonegative
The official Samsung S26 Ultra cover fits perfectly on the original phone but does not fit the clone, indicating the clone has different dimensions (it's thicker and less curved) than the genuine device. The reviewer struggled and damaged the cover trying to fit it on the clone.
measurement_testnegative
The original S26 Ultra weighs 215 grams, while the clone weighs 228 grams. The reviewer states the official Samsung weight is 214 grams and any device over 225 grams is likely fake.
hands_on_demopositive
A blindfolded assistant successfully identifies the original S26 Ultra by feel, noting that the clone felt 'hollow' in comparison, despite their close visual resemblance.
hands_on_demonegative
The original phone's display offers a smooth touch experience, whereas the clone's display is extremely choppy, lacks animations, and experiences significant lag when navigating and opening apps like YouTube.
hands_on_demonegative
The clone's display brightness cannot be adjusted; it remains at a single, fixed level regardless of user input.
reviewer_claimnegative
The clone falsely reports "Android Version 16" and "One UI 8.0" with a March 1 security patch. However, its kernel version and build number (JZ054K) indicate it is actually running a much older Android 4.1 Jelly Bean.
hands_on_demonegative
The clone S26 Ultra lacks the 'Privacy Display' feature found on the original, which allows the screen to be visible or invisible from certain viewing angles.
measurement_testnegative
The CPU-Z app falsely reports a "Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5" processor in the clone. However, it reveals the actual CPU is a slow 1.0 GHz quad-core unit, contradicting the claimed specification.
measurement_testnegative
CPU-Z on the clone shows a false 12GB RAM, but only 31% is available, suggesting a much smaller actual RAM. The phone also lacks essential light and proximity sensors, meaning there is no auto-brightness functionality.
hands_on_demonegative
Despite the clone's camera app displaying multiple zoom options (1x, 2x, 10x, 100x), the reviewer demonstrates that only one physical camera module is actually functional, with the others being fake or non-working.
The reviewer demonstrates several ways to identify a clone: the boot screen will display "Samsung S26 Ultra 5G" fully instead of just "Samsung Galaxy," the clone is heavier (228g vs 215g for original), its SIM tray won't fit the original, and official covers won't fit due to different dimensions. Furthermore, the clone falsely reports Android 16 while actually running Android 4.1, and its CPU-Z details will show a fake processor and lack essential sensors.
The clone's display is extremely laggy and unresponsive with choppy animations, making basic usage frustrating. While it surprisingly has smaller bezels and decent video playback quality once loaded, a major flaw is that its brightness cannot be adjusted from a fixed level.
Gaming performance is severely lacking; BGMI failed to install and Subway Surfer was extremely slow to load and choppy when running. For calls, despite showing a 5G network, audio was heavily delayed and distorted, making conversations impossible.
The clone falsely reports "Android Version 16" and "Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5" processor. In reality, it runs an ancient Android 4.1 Jelly Bean and a slow 1.0 GHz quad-core CPU. It also fakes 12GB RAM and lacks essential sensors like light and proximity, which means no auto-brightness.
The camera app on the clone displays options for 1x, 2x, 10x, and even 100x zoom, mimicking the original. However, the reviewer found that only one physical camera module actually works, while all other camera lenses are non-functional and purely for aesthetics.
100/100 source quality
This video provides a detailed comparison between a fake Samsung S26 Ultra clone and the real Samsung S26 Ultra. The reviewer highlights significant differences in packaging, build quality, weight, display smoothness, software versions, internal specifications detected by CPU-Z, and camera functionality. Despite its close visual resemblance, the clone suffers from extreme lag, outdated Android versions misrepresented as Android 16, a slow processor, and non-functional sensors and cameras, confirming it as a fraudulent device.
Full transcript is not redistributed here to respect the original creator’s rights.
This page converts TECHOOB's review of the Samsung Samsung S26 Ultra Clone into structured evidence — timestamped claims, pros & cons, and buyer questions. It is not the original review and does not replace watching or reading the full source.