Choosing a new smartphone can be overwhelming, especially with so many options available. Today, we're pitting the budget-friendly Blackview A85 against the popular Samsung Galaxy A53 5G to see which device offers the best bang for your buck. This comparison will cover everything from display quality to performance and camera capabilities.
🏆 Quick Verdict
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is the clear winner overall, boasting a superior chipset, brighter display, and more refined camera system. However, the Blackview A85 provides impressive value for its price, making it a compelling option for budget-conscious buyers seeking basic smartphone functionality.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 7, 8, 20, 40 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 14, 20, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 48, 66 - SM-A536U |
| 5G bands | - | 2, 5, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536U |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| | - | 2, 5, 48, 66, 77, 78, 260, 261 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536V |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2022, November 22 | 2022, March 17 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022, November 25 | Available. Released 2022, March 24 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, aluminum frame, glass back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 164.3 x 76.1 x 8.7 mm (6.47 x 3.00 x 0.34 in) | 159.6 x 74.8 x 8.1 mm (6.28 x 2.94 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 193 g (6.81 oz) | 189 g (6.67 oz) |
| | - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1612 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~272 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.5 inches, 101.5 cm2 (~81.2% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~85.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Unisoc T606 (12 nm) | Exynos 1280 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MP1 | Mali-G68 |
| OS | Android 12, Doke OS 3.0 | Android 12, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 8 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| | UFS 2.1 | - |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | 50 MP, (wide), 1/2.76", 0.64µm, PDAF
8 MP, 120˚ (ultrawide) | - |
| Features | Dual-LED dual-tone flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 64 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/1.7X", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS
12 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1.12µm
5 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Single | 8 MP, (wide), 1/4", 1.12µm | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 8 MP, (wide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | Yes | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | Yes | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| USB | Yes, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Yes | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer (market/region dependent) |
| | - | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 25W wired |
| Type | 4480 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black, Blue, Sky | Black, White, Blue, Peach |
| Models | - | SM-A536B, SM-A536B/DS, SM-A536U, SM-A536U1, SM-A5360, SM-A536E, SM-A536E/DS, SM-A536V, SM-A536W, SM-A536N, SM-S536DL |
| Price | About 160 EUR | $ 151.42 / £ 185.00 / € 169.14 |
| SAR | - | 0.75 W/kg (head) 1.58 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.89 W/kg (head) 1.60 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 113h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-26.5 LUFS (Good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 329802 (v8), 379313 (v9)
GeekBench: 1891 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 19fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Blackview A85
- Extremely Affordable
- Decent Battery Life
- Lightweight Design
- Underpowered Chipset
- Lower Quality Display
- Basic Camera
- Slower Charging
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
- Powerful Exynos 1280 Chipset
- Bright and Vibrant Display
- Excellent Camera System
- 5G Connectivity
- Faster Charging
- Higher Price
- Can be bulky
- Software updates can be slow
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G takes a significant lead in the display department. Its 830 nits max brightness ensures excellent visibility even in direct sunlight, while the 'Infinite' contrast ratio (nominal) promises deep blacks and vibrant colors. The A85's display is likely adequate but lacks the same level of brightness and color accuracy. Expect a more immersive and enjoyable viewing experience with the A53 5G.
Camera Comparison
While both phones offer 'Photo / Video' capabilities, the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G's camera system is expected to be considerably better. Samsung's image processing is generally excellent, and the A53 5G likely features a higher-resolution sensor and more advanced features. The A85's camera is likely adequate for casual snapshots, but don't expect flagship-level image quality.
Performance
The Exynos 1280 in the Galaxy A53 5G is a vastly more powerful chipset than the Unisoc T606 in the A85. The A53 5G's Cortex-A78 cores offer significantly better performance for demanding tasks like gaming and video editing. The A85 will handle basic tasks fine, but expect noticeable lag when multitasking or running more intensive apps. The A53 5G's 5nm process also contributes to better power efficiency.
Battery Life
Both phones boast an impressive endurance rating of 113h, suggesting excellent battery life. However, the A53 5G's more efficient chipset (5nm vs 12nm) might give it a slight edge in real-world usage, especially considering its brighter display. Charging speeds are also slightly faster on the A53 5G with 25W wired charging compared to the A85's 18W.
Buying Guide
The Blackview A85 is ideal for users on a tight budget who prioritize affordability and basic features like calling, texting, and light social media use. The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is a better choice for those who want a smoother performance, a better camera, a vibrant display, and 5G connectivity, even if it means spending more.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Is the Blackview A85 good for gaming?
The Blackview A85's chipset is not ideal for demanding games. It can handle lighter titles, but expect reduced graphics settings and potential lag.
❓ Does the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G have a good camera?
Yes, the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is known for its capable camera system, offering good image quality and a variety of features.