The Nokia 6.2 and Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW represent different approaches to the budget smartphone market. The Nokia 6.2, released earlier, focuses on providing a solid, reliable experience at a lower price point. The A51 5G UW, leveraging Samsung’s scale and 5G connectivity, aims to deliver a more future-proof experience, albeit at a higher cost. This comparison dissects their key differences to help you decide which best suits your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing future-proofing and faster data speeds, the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW is the better choice. Its Snapdragon 765G chipset offers a significant performance uplift over the Nokia 6.2’s Snapdragon 636, and the inclusion of 5G connectivity adds long-term value. However, the Nokia 6.2 remains a viable option for those on a tighter budget who don't require 5G.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 - ROW | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - ROW | 2, 4, 5, 13, 66 |
| 5G bands | - | 260, 261 mmWave |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| | 1, 3, 5, 8, 40, 41 - IN | - |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2019, September 05. Released 2019, October 17 | 2020, August 14 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2020, August 14 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), glass back (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic back, aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 159.9 x 75.1 x 8.3 mm (6.30 x 2.96 x 0.33 in) | 158.8 x 73.4 x 8.6 mm (6.25 x 2.89 x 0.34 in) |
| SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM (pre-installed) |
| Weight | 180 g (6.35 oz) | 188.8 g (6.67 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2280 pixels, 19:9 ratio (~400 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.3 inches, 99.1 cm2 (~82.5% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~87.5% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, HDR10 | Super AMOLED |
| | Always-on display | - |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.6 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) | Octa-core (1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Prime & 1x2.2 GHz Kryo 475 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SDM636 Snapdragon 636 (14 nm) | Qualcomm SM7250 Snapdragon 765G 5G (7 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 509 | Adreno 620 |
| OS | Android 9.0 (Pie), upgradable to Android 10, Android One | Android 10, One UI 2 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 32GB 3GB RAM, 64GB 3GB RAM, 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | eMMC 5.1 | UFS 2.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, panorama, HDR | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 48 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
12 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide)
5 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Single | - | 5 MP, AF |
| Triple | 16 MP, f/1.8, 27mm (wide), 1.0µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/120fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, 1/4.0", 1.12µm | 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 | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, EDR, LE, aptX | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes (excl. India) | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio, RDS, recording |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 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 (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| | - | ANT+ |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 10W wired | 15W wired |
| Stand-by | - | Up to 672 h |
| Talk time | - | Up to 5 h |
| Type | Li-Po 3500 mAh, non-removable | Li-Po 4500 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Ceramic Black, Ice | Prism Bricks Blue |
| Models | TA-1200, TA-1198, TA-1201, TA-1187 | SM-A516V |
| Price | About 180 EUR | About 470 EUR |
| SAR | 1.04 W/kg (head) 1.05 W/kg (body) | 0.70 W/kg (head) 1.25 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | 0.97 W/kg (head) 1.42 W/kg (body) | 0.59 W/kg (head) 1.32 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Audio quality |
Noise -91.0dB / Crosstalk -94.8dB | - |
| Battery life |
Endurance rating 73h
| - |
| Camera |
Photo / Video | - |
| Display |
Contrast ratio: 1525:1 (nominal) | - |
| Loudspeaker |
Voice 65dB / Noise 70dB / Ring 79dB
| - |
| Performance |
AnTuTu: 114947 (v7), 140736 (v8)
GeekBench: 4882 (v4.4)
GFXBench: 5.7fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) | - |
Nokia 6.2
- Excellent 73-hour battery endurance
- Lower price point makes it more accessible
- Reliable and dependable performance for basic tasks
- Older Snapdragon 636 chipset struggles with demanding apps
- Lacks 5G connectivity
- Slower 10W charging
Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW
- Significantly faster Snapdragon 765G processor
- 5G connectivity for future-proof data speeds
- Faster 15W charging
- Battery endurance rating is unknown
- Higher price point
- Potential for more thermal throttling under sustained load
Display Comparison
The Nokia 6.2 boasts a display capable of reaching 580 nits of peak brightness and a 1525:1 contrast ratio, providing a reasonably vibrant viewing experience. However, the A51 5G UW’s display specifications are not provided, and we can assume it's a standard AMOLED panel, typical for Samsung's A-series. The Nokia 6.2’s contrast ratio suggests an IPS LCD panel, which generally offers wider viewing angles but less inky blacks compared to AMOLED. Without knowing the A51 5G UW’s peak brightness, it’s difficult to definitively say which display is superior, but Samsung’s AMOLED technology usually delivers a more visually appealing image.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are listed as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but specific details are absent. Given the market positioning, it’s likely the Nokia 6.2 features a more basic camera setup. The A51 5G UW, benefiting from Samsung’s camera expertise, likely offers a more refined image processing pipeline and potentially better low-light performance. Without sensor size or aperture information, a direct comparison is impossible, but the A51 5G UW’s chipset’s image signal processor (ISP) is more advanced, suggesting superior image quality.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Nokia 6.2 utilizes the Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, a 14nm processor with an octa-core configuration split between Kryo 260 Gold and Silver cores. This is a capable chip for everyday tasks, but it will struggle with demanding applications. The Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW, however, is powered by the Snapdragon 765G, a 7nm processor. This smaller node size translates to improved power efficiency and significantly higher performance. The 765G’s Kryo 475 cores, with a prime core clocked at 2.4 GHz, offer a substantial boost in CPU and GPU performance, making the A51 5G UW much better suited for gaming and multitasking.
Battery Life
The Nokia 6.2 achieves an impressive endurance rating of 73 hours, indicating excellent battery life. However, the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW’s battery capacity and endurance rating are unknown. The A51 5G UW supports 15W wired charging, while the Nokia 6.2 is limited to 10W. While the Nokia 6.2’s longer endurance is a strong point, the A51 5G UW’s faster charging could offset a potentially smaller battery capacity, allowing for quicker top-ups.
Buying Guide
Buy the Nokia 6.2 if you need a dependable smartphone for basic tasks, prioritize long battery life (with its 73h endurance rating), and are comfortable with a slower processor and lack of 5G. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW if you prioritize faster performance for multitasking and gaming, want access to 5G networks, and are willing to spend more for a more modern chipset and potentially faster charging.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Snapdragon 636 in the Nokia 6.2 struggle with modern mobile games like PUBG or Call of Duty?
Yes, the Snapdragon 636 is likely to struggle with graphically demanding games like PUBG or Call of Duty, even at medium settings. You'll likely experience frame drops and lag, especially during intense action sequences. The A51 5G UW’s Snapdragon 765G is far better equipped to handle these titles.
❓ How much faster is 5G on the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW compared to 4G LTE?
5G speeds on the A51 5G UW can be significantly faster than 4G LTE, potentially reaching several hundred megabits per second, or even gigabit speeds, depending on network availability and coverage. This translates to faster downloads, smoother streaming, and lower latency for online gaming. However, 5G coverage is still limited, so you won't always experience these speeds.
❓ Is the 10W charging on the Nokia 6.2 noticeably slow compared to the A51 5G UW's 15W?
Yes, 10W charging is considerably slower than 15W. Expect a much longer time to fully charge the Nokia 6.2 from 0% to 100%. While the Nokia 6.2 compensates with excellent battery endurance, the A51 5G UW’s faster charging offers more convenience.
