The BLU G71+ and Samsung Galaxy A03 represent the extreme end of the smartphone price spectrum. Both aim to deliver essential smartphone functionality at a minimal cost, but they take different approaches to achieving this. This comparison dissects their core specifications to determine which device offers the best value for users prioritizing performance, battery life, and overall usability.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user seeking the best performance in this price bracket, the BLU G71+ emerges as the winner. Its octa-core 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 CPU provides a noticeable advantage over the Galaxy A03’s Unisoc T606, translating to smoother multitasking and app loading. However, the A03 benefits from Samsung’s brand recognition and software support.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 17, 28, 66 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2022, January | 2021, November 26 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022, January | Available. Released 2022, January 21 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 160.2 x 76.7 x 9 mm (6.31 x 3.02 x 0.35 in) | 164.2 x 75.9 x 9.1 mm (6.46 x 2.99 x 0.36 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 175 g (6.17 oz) | 196 g (6.91 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~270 ppi density) | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~270 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~83.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~81.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | PLS LCD |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 | Octa-core (2x1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | - | Unisoc T606 (12 nm) |
| GPU | - | Mali-G57 MP1 |
| OS | Android 11 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 13, One UI core 5 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM | 32GB 2GB RAM, 32GB 3GB RAM, 32GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 3GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM |
| | - | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | - | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), AF
Auxiliary lens |
| Features | LED flash | LED flash |
| Single | - | 5 MP, f/2.2 |
| Triple | 13 MP, (wide)
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Single | 13 MP | 5 MP, f/2.2 |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | Yes |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.2, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | No |
| Positioning | GPS | GPS |
| Radio | FM radio | Unspecified |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | microUSB 2.0 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity | Accelerometer, proximity |
| Battery |
|---|
| Type | Li-Po 4900 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Bronze, Blue, Green, White | Black, Blue, Red |
| Models | - | SM-A035F, SM-A035F/DS, SM-A035M, SM-A035G |
| Price | - | € 119.90 / £ 88.00 / ₹ 11,990 |
| SAR EU | - | 0.20 W/kg (head) 1.35 W/kg (body) |
BLU G71+
- Potentially faster processor (Cortex-A75 at 1.8 GHz)
- May offer a more responsive user experience
- Competitive price point
- Brand recognition is lower than Samsung
- Software update support is likely limited
- Display specifications are largely unknown
Samsung Galaxy A03
- Large 5000mAh battery for extended usage
- Samsung’s brand reliability and software ecosystem
- Potentially longer software support lifecycle
- Slower processor (Unisoc T606)
- May struggle with demanding tasks
- Basic display technology (PLS LCD)
Display Comparison
Neither device boasts a standout display. Specifics regarding panel type (IPS vs. TFT) and resolution are missing for the BLU G71+, but given the price point, it’s likely a basic TFT panel. The Samsung Galaxy A03 features a 6.6-inch PLS LCD, which is a step up from TFT but still lacks the vibrancy and viewing angles of IPS. Both will likely suffer from limited outdoor visibility. The absence of high refresh rates on either device is expected at this price, focusing on power conservation rather than visual fluidity.
Camera Comparison
Camera performance is likely to be similar on both devices, leaning towards basic functionality. Details on sensor sizes are unavailable, but both will likely feature a primary camera paired with low-resolution auxiliary lenses (often 2MP macro or depth sensors). The image processing capabilities of Samsung’s software are generally more refined, potentially leading to slightly better image quality in favorable conditions. However, the G71+'s processor might offer faster image processing speeds, reducing shutter lag. The usefulness of the auxiliary cameras on both devices is questionable, offering limited practical benefit.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipset. The BLU G71+ utilizes an octa-core processor clocked at 1.8 GHz, based on the Cortex-A75 architecture. The Samsung Galaxy A03 employs the Unisoc T606, also an octa-core chip, but with a slightly different configuration: two Cortex-A75 cores at 1.6 GHz and six Cortex-A55 cores, also at 1.6 GHz. While both have A75 cores, the higher clock speed of the G71+'s processor suggests superior single-core performance, crucial for app responsiveness. The Unisoc T606’s 12nm process node is standard for this segment, but the G71+’s processor details lack node information, potentially indicating a less efficient manufacturing process. This could impact thermal performance under sustained load.
Battery Life
Battery capacity is a critical factor for budget phones. While specific mAh ratings are missing for the BLU G71+, the Samsung Galaxy A03 packs a 5000mAh battery. This large capacity should provide all-day battery life for moderate users. Charging speeds are likely to be slow on both devices, with the A03 supporting 15W charging. The G71+'s charging capabilities are unknown, but it’s unlikely to exceed the A03’s rate. The larger battery of the A03 provides a clear advantage in longevity, even if the G71+'s processor is more efficient.
Buying Guide
Buy the BLU G71+ if you need a phone that can handle everyday tasks with relative ease and appreciate a more responsive user experience. It’s ideal for users who frequently switch between apps or enjoy light gaming. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A03 if you prioritize brand reliability, a potentially longer software support lifecycle, and are comfortable with a more basic level of performance. It’s a solid choice for first-time smartphone users or those with very limited needs.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Is the Unisoc T606 in the Galaxy A03 powerful enough for social media and basic apps?
Yes, the Unisoc T606 is sufficient for everyday tasks like browsing social media, checking email, and using basic apps. However, it may struggle with more demanding applications or multitasking. Expect some lag when switching between numerous apps.
❓ How does the BLU G71+'s processor compare to the Snapdragon 480, a common chip in this price range?
The Cortex-A75 based processor in the BLU G71+ generally outperforms the Snapdragon 480 in CPU-intensive tasks. While the Snapdragon 480 has a more modern GPU, the G71+ offers a better experience for general app responsiveness and multitasking.
❓ Will the Samsung Galaxy A03 receive major Android updates?
Samsung typically provides at least one major Android update and several years of security patches for its Galaxy A series phones. However, the A03 is an entry-level model, so its update support may be shorter than more expensive devices.
❓ Is the camera on either phone good enough for casual photos and videos?
Both phones are capable of taking casual photos and videos in good lighting conditions. However, don't expect high-quality images, especially in low light. The auxiliary cameras (macro/depth) are likely to produce subpar results.
