The mid-range smartphone market is fiercely competitive, and the Honor X40 and Samsung Galaxy A53 5G are two strong contenders. Both offer 5G connectivity and appealing features, but cater to slightly different needs. Let's dive into a detailed comparison to help you decide which one is right for you.
🏆 Quick Verdict
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G edges out the Honor X40 thanks to its brighter display, more refined software experience, and generally better camera performance. However, the Honor X40 offers faster charging and a potentially more attractive price point.
| 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 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | LTE | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 14, 20, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 48, 66 - SM-A536U |
| 5G bands | SA/NSA | 2, 5, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536U |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| | CDMA2000 1x | 2, 5, 48, 66, 77, 78, 260, 261 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536V |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2022, September 15 | 2022, March 17 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022, September 15 | Available. Released 2022, March 24 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 161.6 x 73.9 x 7.9 mm (6.36 x 2.91 x 0.31 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 | 172 g (6.07 oz) | 189 g (6.67 oz) |
| | - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~89.9% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~85.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) | Exynos 1280 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 619 | Mali-G68 |
| OS | Android 12, Magic UI 6.1 | Android 12, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 8 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | No | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF
2 MP (macro) | - |
| Features | LED flash, panorama, HDR | 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, f/2.0, (wide) | 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, f/2.0, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | No |
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | Yes | - |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer (market/region dependent) |
| | 24-bit/192kHz audio | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 40W wired | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 5100 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black, Green, Silver | Black, White, Blue, Peach |
| Models | RMO-AN00 | 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 210 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) |
Honor X40
- Faster 40W Charging
- Vibrant Display
- Competitive Price
- 5G Connectivity
- Slightly Less Powerful Processor
- Less Established Brand
- Potentially Shorter Software Support
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
- Brighter Display
- Better Camera Performance
- Premium Build Quality
- Longer Software Support
- Established Brand Reputation
- Slower 25W Charging
- Higher Price
- Exynos Chipset Performance (compared to some competitors)
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G boasts a significantly brighter display (830 nits peak) compared to the Honor X40, making it easier to see in direct sunlight. While the Honor X40's display is vibrant, the A53's higher brightness gives it a clear advantage. Both offer good color accuracy, but the A53's contrast ratio is theoretically infinite, suggesting deeper blacks.
Camera Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G typically delivers superior camera performance, especially in challenging lighting conditions. While both phones offer capable cameras, the A53's image processing and overall quality are generally considered better. The A53 also benefits from Samsung's established camera software and features.
Performance
The Exynos 1280 in the Galaxy A53 5G generally offers slightly better overall performance than the Snapdragon 695 in the Honor X40, particularly in demanding tasks. While both chipsets are capable of handling everyday use, the A53's Cortex-A78 cores provide a noticeable boost in responsiveness. The 6nm process of the Snapdragon 695 is more efficient, potentially impacting battery life slightly.
Battery Life
Both phones offer excellent battery life, with the Galaxy A53 5G achieving an endurance rating of 113 hours. The Honor X40's battery capacity is comparable, suggesting similar real-world usage. However, the Honor X40's 40W charging is significantly faster than the A53's 25W charging.
Buying Guide
The Honor X40 is ideal for budget-conscious users who prioritize fast charging and a vibrant display. The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is a better choice for those seeking a premium feel, a brighter screen for outdoor use, and a more established brand reputation with longer software support.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Which phone has better battery life?
Both phones offer exceptional battery life, with the Galaxy A53 5G achieving an endurance rating of 113 hours. Real-world usage will likely be similar.
❓ Is the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G worth the extra money?
If you prioritize a brighter display, better camera performance, and longer software support, then the Galaxy A53 5G is likely worth the investment. However, if you're on a tighter budget and value fast charging, the Honor X40 is a compelling alternative.
