LG Velvet 5G vs Samsung Galaxy A52 5G: A Detailed Comparison
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing longevity, the Samsung Galaxy A52 5G emerges as the stronger choice. Its significantly superior battery endurance – 111 hours versus the Velvet’s 79 – provides a tangible advantage in real-world usage. While the Velvet boasts faster wired charging, the A52’s overall efficiency wins out.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | LG Velvet 5G | Samsung Galaxy A52 5G |
| 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 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 28, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 28, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (5CA) Cat16 1000/75 Mbps, 5G 2Gbps | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2020, May 07. Released 2020, May 15 | 2021, March 17 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2021, March 19 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, glass back, aluminum frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic back |
| Dimensions | 167.2 x 74.1 x 7.9 mm (6.58 x 2.92 x 0.31 in) | 159.9 x 75.1 x 8.4 mm (6.30 x 2.96 x 0.33 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 180 g (6.35 oz) | 189 g (6.67 oz) |
| IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 mins) MIL-STD-810G compliant* *does not guarantee ruggedness or use in extreme conditions | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2460 pixels (~395 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~407 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.8 inches, 109.8 cm2 (~88.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 101.0 cm2 (~84.1% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | P-OLED | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+, 800 nits (HBM) |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Prime & 1x2.2 GHz Kryo 475 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 570 & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 570) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM7250 Snapdragon 765G 5G (7 nm) | Qualcomm SM7225 Snapdragon 750G 5G (8 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 620 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 10, upgradable to Android 13, LG UX | Android 11, upgradable to Android 14, One UI 6.1 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 4GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| UFS 2.1 | - | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| Triple | 48 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚, 15mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/1.9, 29mm (standard), 1/3.06, 1.0µm | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio (market/region dependent) | FM radio (market/region dependent) |
| USB | USB Type-C, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct, DLNA | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass |
| - | Virtual proximity sensing | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 25W wired, PD3.0, QC4 9W wireless | 25W wired, 50% in 30 min |
| Type | Li-Po 4300 mAh | Li-Po 4500 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Aurora White, Aurora Green, Aurora Gray, Illusion Sunset, Red, Pink | Awesome Black, Awesome White, Awesome Violet, Awesome Blue |
| Models | LM-G900N, LM-G900EM, LM-G900, LM-G900TM | SM-A526B, SM-A526B/DS, SM-A5260, SM-A526W, SM-A526U, SM-A526U1 |
| Price | About 470 EUR | $ 137.39 / £ 280.00 / € 115.49 |
| SAR | 0.23 W/kg (head) 1.02 W/kg (body) | 0.74 W/kg (head) 0.53 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 1.05 W/kg (head) 1.42 W/kg (body) |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | Endurance rating 79h | Endurance rating 111h |
| Camera | Photo / Video | Photo / Video |
| Display | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | -23.5 LUFS (Very good) | -27.5 LUFS (Good) |
| Performance | AnTuTu: 297372 (v8) GeekBench: 1905 (v5.1) GFXBench: 16fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) | AnTuTu: 334981 (v8), 386474 (v9) GeekBench: 1820 (v5.1) GFXBench: 16fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
LG Velvet 5G
- Faster 25W wired charging
- Supports 9W wireless charging
- Slightly brighter peak CPU clock speed
- Significantly lower battery endurance (79h)
- Less efficient Snapdragon 765G chipset
- Dimmer display (617 nits)
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
- Exceptional battery life (111h)
- More efficient Snapdragon 750G chipset
- Brighter display (787 nits)
- Faster charging to 50% in 30 minutes
- No wireless charging support
- Potentially less refined image processing (depending on sensor)
- Slightly lower peak CPU clock speed
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A52 5G clearly leads in display brightness, achieving a measured 787 nits compared to the LG Velvet 5G’s 617 nits. This translates to better visibility outdoors under direct sunlight. Both devices feature an 'Infinite' contrast ratio, a marketing term indicating excellent black levels typical of OLED panels. However, the A52’s higher peak brightness is a more concrete advantage for everyday use. While both likely employ similar OLED technology, the A52’s panel is demonstrably brighter, offering a more vibrant and readable experience.
Camera Comparison
Both devices offer capable camera systems, but detailed analysis is hampered by the lack of specific sensor information in the provided data. Both are listed as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, which is unhelpful. However, given the market positioning, it’s reasonable to assume both feature multi-camera setups with a primary wide-angle lens, ultrawide, and potentially macro/depth sensors. The A52 5G likely benefits from Samsung’s more refined image processing algorithms, potentially resulting in more consistent and pleasing photos. Without sensor size or aperture details, a definitive camera comparison is impossible, but Samsung generally excels in computational photography.
Performance
Both phones utilize Qualcomm Snapdragon 7-series chipsets, but differ in their implementation. The LG Velvet 5G features the Snapdragon 765G (7nm), while the A52 5G uses the Snapdragon 750G (8nm). The 8nm process of the 750G generally offers improved power efficiency, contributing to the A52’s superior battery life. While the 765G has a slightly higher clocked prime core (2.4GHz vs 2.2GHz), the real-world performance difference is minimal for most tasks. Both devices are capable of handling everyday apps and moderate gaming, but the A52’s chipset is optimized for sustained performance and efficiency.
Battery Life
The most significant difference lies in battery endurance. The Galaxy A52 5G boasts an impressive 111-hour endurance rating, significantly outperforming the LG Velvet 5G’s 79 hours. This difference is likely attributable to the more efficient Snapdragon 750G chipset and potentially a larger battery capacity (though not specified). Both support 25W wired charging, with the A52 5G claiming a 50% charge in 30 minutes. The Velvet 5G also offers 9W wireless charging, a feature absent in the A52 5G, but the slower wireless charging speed is unlikely to offset the A52’s superior overall battery performance.
Buying Guide
Buy the LG Velvet 5G if you prioritize a slightly brighter display and faster wired charging speeds, and are comfortable with potentially shorter battery life. It’s a good fit for users who frequently top up their phones throughout the day. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A52 5G if you value exceptional battery life, a brighter screen in most conditions, and a more efficient chipset, making it ideal for users who need their phone to last a full day or more on a single charge.