The Nokia C2 and Samsung Galaxy A03 Core represent the absolute entry point into smartphone ownership. Both devices target users prioritizing affordability above all else, but significant differences in their core hardware – specifically the processor – dictate which phone delivers a more usable experience. This comparison dissects those differences to help you choose the best option for your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user, the Samsung Galaxy A03 Core is the better choice. While both phones share a similar price point and 28nm fabrication process, the A03 Core’s octa-core processor provides a substantial performance boost over the C2’s quad-core unit, making it noticeably smoother for everyday tasks and multitasking.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 - Africa, ME, APAC | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - Africa, ME, APAC | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps | HSPA 21.1/5.76 Mbps, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 38, 40, 41 - Saudi Arabia | - |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, March 16. Released 2020, March 22 | 2021, November 15 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2021, December 06 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Plastic back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 154.8 x 75.6 x 8.9 mm (6.09 x 2.98 x 0.35 in) | 164.2 x 75.9 x 9.1 mm (6.46 x 2.99 x 0.36 in) |
| SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 161 g (5.68 oz) | 211 g (7.44 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 720 x 1440 pixels, 18:9 ratio (~282 ppi density) | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~270 ppi density) |
| Size | 5.7 inches, 83.8 cm2 (~71.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~81.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | PLS LCD |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Quad-core 1.4 GHz | Octa-core (4x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55 & 4x1.2 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Unisoc (28 nm) | Unisoc SC9863A (28 nm) |
| GPU | - | IMG8322 |
| OS | Android 9.0 Pie (Go edition) | Android 11 (Go edition) |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 16GB 1GB RAM | 32GB 2GB RAM |
| | eMMC 5.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR | LED flash |
| Single | 5 MP, f/2.2, AF | 8 MP, f/2.0, AF |
| Video | 720p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash | - |
| Single | 5 MP | 5 MP, f/2.2 |
| Video | 720p@30fps | - |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.2, A2DP, LE | 4.2, A2DP |
| NFC | No | No |
| Positioning | GPS | GPS, GLONASS |
| Radio | FM radio | Unspecified |
| USB | microUSB 2.0 | microUSB 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Accelerometer, proximity | Accelerometer, proximity |
| Battery |
|---|
| Type | Li-Ion 2800 mAh, removable | Li-Ion 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Cyan, Black | Black, Blue |
| Models | - | SM-A032F, SM-A032F/DS, SM-A032M |
| Price | - | £ 74.99 |
| SAR | - | 0.30 W/kg (head) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.24 W/kg (head) 1.39 W/kg (body) |
Nokia C2
- Potentially cleaner software experience (near-stock Android)
- May be slightly more durable due to simpler construction
- Lower price point (potentially)
- Significantly slower performance due to quad-core processor
- Limited multitasking capabilities
- Likely inferior camera performance
Samsung Galaxy A03 Core
- Faster octa-core processor for smoother performance
- Better multitasking capabilities
- Potentially improved camera image processing
- Samsung’s One UI software may include bloatware
- May be slightly more expensive than the Nokia C2
- Potentially less durable build quality
Display Comparison
Neither Nokia nor Samsung provide detailed display specifications for these models. Given their price points, both likely utilize LCD panels with modest resolutions (likely 720p+). The absence of information suggests neither phone prioritizes display quality. Expect similar viewing angles and color accuracy, with neither offering features like high refresh rates or HDR support. Bezels are likely substantial on both devices to minimize production costs.
Camera Comparison
Camera details are sparse for both devices. Both are expected to feature basic rear camera setups, likely with a primary sensor and potentially a secondary depth or macro lens. Given the target market, image quality will be limited, particularly in low-light conditions. The A03 Core *may* benefit from slightly better image processing capabilities due to its more powerful processor, but significant improvements are unlikely. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on either device is largely a marketing tactic and offers minimal practical benefit.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipset. The Samsung Galaxy A03 Core features the Unisoc SC9863A, an octa-core processor comprised of four Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 1.6 GHz and four at 1.2 GHz. This contrasts sharply with the Nokia C2’s Unisoc chipset and quad-core 1.4 GHz CPU. The A03 Core’s octa-core configuration provides a significant advantage in multitasking and handling more complex applications. While both chips are built on a 28nm process, the additional cores and higher clock speeds of the A03 Core translate to a smoother, more responsive user experience. The A03 Core will likely exhibit less lag when switching between apps or loading heavier webpages. RAM configurations are not specified, but are likely limited on both devices, further emphasizing the importance of the CPU advantage.
Battery Life
Battery capacity is not specified for either device. However, given their budget nature, both likely house batteries in the 3000-4000 mAh range. Charging wattage is also unknown. Real-world battery life will depend heavily on usage patterns, but the A03 Core’s more efficient octa-core processor *could* offer slightly better endurance, especially during moderate use. Without specific charging wattage information, it’s difficult to assess 0-100% charging times.
Buying Guide
Buy the Nokia C2 if you need a supremely basic phone for calls, texts, and extremely light app usage, and prioritize a clean, near-stock Android experience. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A03 Core if you prefer a phone capable of handling more demanding tasks like social media browsing, video streaming, and light gaming, and don't mind Samsung's One UI software.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Samsung Galaxy A03 Core struggle with popular apps like Facebook or WhatsApp?
While the A03 Core won't deliver a flagship-level experience, its octa-core processor should handle Facebook and WhatsApp reasonably well. Expect some occasional lag when scrolling through image-heavy feeds or loading videos, but it should be usable for basic communication and social media browsing.
❓ Is the Nokia C2 a good choice for a first smartphone for an elderly user?
The Nokia C2's simplicity could be appealing to first-time smartphone users, particularly those less familiar with technology. However, its limited performance may lead to frustration if they attempt to use more demanding apps. The A03 Core offers a better balance of usability and performance, even for beginners.
❓ Can either of these phones play PUBG Mobile?
Playing PUBG Mobile on either the Nokia C2 or Samsung Galaxy A03 Core is not recommended. The processors lack the power to run the game smoothly, even at the lowest settings. Expect significant lag and frame rate drops, making the experience unplayable.
❓ Do either of these phones support fast charging?
Neither Nokia nor Samsung provide information on fast charging support for these models. It's highly unlikely that either phone supports fast charging, and charging times will likely be relatively slow.
