The mid-range smartphone market is fiercely competitive, and the Honor X9a and Samsung Galaxy A54 are two strong contenders. Both offer compelling features at accessible prices, 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 A54 emerges as the overall winner thanks to its superior display, more powerful chipset, and longer software support. While the Honor X9a offers faster charging, the A54's consistent performance and camera quality make it the better long-term investment.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 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 | SA/NSA | 1, 3, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - International |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| | - | 25, 41, 66, 71 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - USA |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2023, January 04 | 2023, March 15 |
| Status | Available. Released 2023, January 06 | Available. Released 2023, March 24 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 161.6 x 73.9 x 7.9 mm (6.36 x 2.91 x 0.31 in) | 158.2 x 76.7 x 8.2 mm (6.23 x 3.02 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM + eSIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 175 g (6.17 oz) | 202 g (7.13 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 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~403 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~89.9% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.4 inches, 100.5 cm2 (~82.9% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+, 1000 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) | Octa-core (4x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) | Exynos 1380 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 619 | Mali-G68 MP5 |
| OS | Android 12, upgradable to Android 13, MagicOS 7 | Android 13, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 7 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | No | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | 64 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF
5 MP, f/2.2, (ultrawide)
2 MP (macro) | - |
| Features | LED flash, panorama, HDR | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.5, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Triple | - | 50 MP, f/1.8, 23mm (wide), 1/1.56", 1.0µm, PDAF, OIS
12 MP, f/2.2, 13mm, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.X", 1.12µm
5 MP (macro) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps, 720p@480fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.5, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | No |
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | Yes | - |
| NFC | Yes | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, 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/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer (USA only) |
| | 24-bit/192kHz audio | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 40W wired | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 5100 mAh | 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Titanium Silver, Emerald Green, Midnight Black | Lime, Graphite, Violet, White |
| Models | RMO-NX1 | SM-A546V, SM-A546U, SM-A546U1, SM-A546B, SM-A546B/DS, SM-A546E, SM-A546E/DS, SM-A5460, SM-A546M, SM-A546M/DS, SM-A546W |
| Price | $ 212.08 | € 210.00 / $ 119.11 / £ 169.95 / ₹ 28,999 |
| SAR | - | 0.81 W/kg (head) 0.67 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.69 W/kg (head) 1.34 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 119h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-26.6 LUFS (Good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 506678 (v9)
GeekBench: 2703 (v5.1), 2797 (v6)
GFXBench: 25fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Honor X9a
- Faster Charging (40W)
- Curved AMOLED Display
- Competitive Price
- Weaker Performance
- Less Refined Camera
- Shorter Software Support
Samsung Galaxy A54
- Brighter & More Accurate Display
- More Powerful Chipset
- Excellent Camera
- Longer Software Support
- Exceptional Battery Life
- Slower Charging (25W)
- Higher Price
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A54 boasts a significantly brighter display (980 nits peak) with an infinite contrast ratio, offering a more immersive viewing experience. The Honor X9a features a curved AMOLED display, which some users prefer for its aesthetics, but it doesn't match the A54's brightness or color accuracy. The A54's display is also generally considered easier to read in direct sunlight.
Camera Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A54 consistently delivers better photo and video quality across various lighting conditions. Its image processing is more refined, resulting in more natural-looking colors and better dynamic range. The Honor X9a's camera is decent, but struggles in low light and lacks the A54's overall versatility.
Performance
The Samsung Galaxy A54's Exynos 1380 chipset (5nm) generally outperforms the Honor X9a's Snapdragon 695 5G (6nm) in both CPU and GPU benchmarks. This translates to smoother multitasking, faster app loading times, and better gaming performance on the A54. While the X9a is adequate for everyday tasks, the A54 provides a more responsive and fluid user experience.
Battery Life
Both phones offer excellent battery life. The Galaxy A54 has an endurance rating of 119 hours, and active use scores of 11:15h, demonstrating exceptional longevity. The Honor X9a also provides solid battery life, but the A54's endurance rating gives it a clear advantage. The Honor X9a does have faster 40W charging, which can be a benefit for some users.
Buying Guide
The Honor X9a is a good choice for users prioritizing fast charging and a large, curved display on a budget. The Samsung Galaxy A54 is ideal for those seeking a reliable all-rounder with a vibrant display, excellent camera, and extended software updates.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Which phone has better software support?
The Samsung Galaxy A54 is expected to receive longer software updates and security patches compared to the Honor X9a, thanks to Samsung's commitment to extended support for its A-series devices.
❓ Is the Honor X9a's curved display worth it?
The curved display is a matter of personal preference. Some users find it aesthetically pleasing, while others prefer a flat display for better usability and reduced accidental touches. The A54's flat display is generally considered more practical.
