The Honor X7 and Samsung Galaxy A23 5G represent compelling options in the increasingly competitive sub-$250 smartphone market. Both devices aim to deliver 5G connectivity and a modern smartphone experience without breaking the bank, but they achieve this through different approaches to chipset selection and feature prioritization. This comparison dissects their key specifications to determine which phone offers the best value.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing 5G connectivity and slightly better performance, the Samsung Galaxy A23 5G emerges as the winner. Its Snapdragon 695 offers a noticeable performance edge over the X7’s Snapdragon 680, and while battery life is comparable, the A23’s 25W charging provides a slight convenience advantage.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | LTE | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 66 - International |
| 5G bands | - | 1, 3, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - International |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| | - | 2, 5, 30, 66, 77 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - USA |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2022, March 30 | 2022, August 05 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022, April 14 | Available. Released 2022, September 02 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 167.6 x 77.2 x 8.6 mm (6.60 x 3.04 x 0.34 in) | 165.4 x 76.9 x 8.4 mm (6.51 x 3.03 x 0.33 in) |
| SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 198 g (6.98 oz) | 197 g (6.95 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~260 ppi density) | 1080 x 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~400 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.74 inches, 109.7 cm2 (~84.8% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.6 inches, 104.9 cm2 (~82.5% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz | PLS LCD, 120Hz |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.4 GHz Kryo 265 Gold & 4x1.9 GHz Kryo 265 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6225 Snapdragon 680 4G (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 11, Magic UI 4.2 | Android 12, upgradable to Android 14, One UI 6 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM |
| | eMMC 5.1 | - |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF
5 MP, f/2.2, (ultrawide)
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 50 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/2.76", 0.64µm, PDAF, OIS
5 MP, f/2.2, 13mm, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/5.0", 1.12µm
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.0, 25mm (wide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm - USA
8 MP, f/2.2, 25mm (wide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm - International |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes (market/region dependent) | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | No | FM radio (market/region dependent) |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0 |
| 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 (side-mounted), accelerometer, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer (USA only) |
| | Virtual proximity sensing | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 22.5W wired | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Ocean Blue, Titanium Silver | Black, White, Peach, Blue |
| Models | CMA-LX2, CMA-LX1, CMA-LX3 | SM-A236U, SM-A236U1, SM-A236B, SM-A236B/DS, SM-A236B/DSN, SM-A236E, SM-S236DL |
| Price | About 90 EUR | $ 84.44 / £ 129.00 / € 125.28 / ₹ 21,000 |
| SAR | - | 0.68 W/kg (head) 0.57 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 1.49 W/kg (head) 1.25 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 138h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: 1328:1 (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-25.9 LUFS (Very good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 318821 (v9)
GeekBench: 1940 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 16fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Honor X7
- Potentially smoother experience for basic tasks due to higher clocked cores.
- Competitive pricing.
- Efficient 6nm Snapdragon 680 chipset.
- Lacks 5G connectivity.
- Lower peak display brightness.
- Slower charging speed (22.5W).
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
- 5G connectivity for faster data speeds.
- Faster 25W wired charging.
- More modern Snapdragon 695 chipset with architectural advantages.
- Potentially less optimized software experience.
- Similar display brightness to the X7.
- May experience slightly more thermal throttling under sustained load.
Display Comparison
Both the Honor X7 and Samsung Galaxy A23 5G feature displays with a 1328:1 contrast ratio, suggesting similar visual pop. However, the A23 5G boasts a measured peak brightness of 508 nits, which is a significant advantage in outdoor visibility compared to the X7, whose brightness remains unspecified. While both likely utilize LCD panels, the A23’s higher brightness makes it the more practical choice for users frequently exposed to sunlight. The lack of high refresh rate support on either device is typical for this price bracket, but noticeable.
Camera Comparison
Both phones feature a 'Photo / Video' camera setup, but detailed sensor information is lacking. Without specifics, it’s difficult to make a definitive judgment. However, given Samsung’s generally more refined image processing algorithms, the A23 5G likely delivers more consistent and pleasing results, especially in challenging lighting conditions. The prevalence of low-resolution auxiliary cameras (often 2MP) in this segment suggests focusing on the main sensor’s quality is crucial, and Samsung’s history suggests a slight edge here. The absence of OIS on either device means image stabilization relies heavily on software.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets: the Honor X7 utilizes the Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (6nm), while the Samsung Galaxy A23 5G features the Snapdragon 695 5G (6nm). The 695, with its 2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold cores versus the X7’s 4x2.4 GHz Kryo 265 Gold cores, offers a more modern architecture and a performance uplift, particularly in multi-threaded tasks and gaming. The 695 also integrates a 5G modem, a feature absent in the X7. While both are 6nm chips, the architectural improvements in the 695 translate to a smoother experience for demanding applications. The X7’s CPU clock speed is higher on paper, but the 695’s core design and 5G capabilities provide a more well-rounded package.
Battery Life
Both the Honor X7 and Samsung Galaxy A23 5G achieve an endurance rating of 138 hours, indicating comparable battery life under similar usage scenarios. However, the A23 5G supports 25W wired charging, while the X7 is limited to 22.5W. This translates to a faster 0-100% charge time for the A23 5G, offering a convenience advantage for users who frequently need to top up their battery quickly. The similar endurance ratings suggest that despite the slightly lower charging wattage, the X7’s battery optimization is effective.
Buying Guide
Buy the Honor X7 if you prioritize a consistently smooth experience for everyday tasks like browsing, social media, and light video consumption, and are comfortable with a 4G-only connection. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A23 5G if you need 5G connectivity for faster data speeds, occasionally play mobile games, and value the slightly faster charging capabilities, even if it means a potentially less optimized software experience.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Snapdragon 695 in the Galaxy A23 5G get noticeably warmer during extended gaming sessions compared to the Snapdragon 680 in the Honor X7?
While both chipsets are 6nm and relatively efficient, the Snapdragon 695, due to its higher performance ceiling, is more likely to generate heat under sustained load. However, Samsung’s thermal management solutions are generally adequate, and throttling is unlikely to be severe. The Honor X7, with its lower performance, will likely remain cooler, but at the cost of frame rates in demanding games.
❓ Is the 5G connectivity on the Samsung Galaxy A23 5G actually useful in most areas, or is it mostly a marketing feature?
The usefulness of 5G depends heavily on your location and carrier coverage. In areas with robust 5G infrastructure, you’ll experience significantly faster download and upload speeds compared to 4G LTE. However, in areas with limited 5G coverage, the A23 5G will fall back to 4G, negating the benefit. Check your carrier’s coverage map to determine 5G availability in your area.
❓ How does the software experience differ between Honor's Magic UI and Samsung's One UI on these devices?
Samsung's One UI is generally considered more polished and feature-rich, with a wider range of customization options. Honor's Magic UI, while improving, can sometimes feel less refined and may include more pre-installed bloatware. Samsung also typically provides longer software support with more frequent updates.
