The Oppo A2 and Samsung Galaxy A55 represent compelling options in the increasingly competitive mid-range smartphone market. The A2 aims to deliver solid performance at an aggressive price point, while the A55 focuses on a premium experience with a brighter display and refined software. This comparison dives deep into the specifications and real-world implications to determine which device best suits your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing a vibrant display and long-term software support, the Samsung Galaxy A55 is the better choice. While the Oppo A2 offers a more affordable entry point, the A55’s superior chipset and brighter screen justify the price difference.
| 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 | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 5, 8, 28, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2023, November 03 | 2024, March 11 |
| Status | Available. Released 2023, November 06 | Available. Released 2024, March 15 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass Victus+), glass back (Gorilla Glass), aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 165.6 x 76 x 8 mm (6.52 x 2.99 x 0.31 in) | 161.1 x 77.4 x 8.2 mm (6.34 x 3.05 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + eSIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM + eSIM (max 2 at a time) |
| Weight | 193 g (6.81 oz) | 213 g (7.51 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | Panda glass | Corning Gorilla Glass Victus+ |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~392 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~390 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.72 inches, 109.0 cm2 (~86.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.6 inches, 106.9 cm2 (~85.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz, 680 nits (peak) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+, 1000 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (4x2.75 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 6020 (7 nm) | Exynos 1480 (4 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC2 | Xclipse 530 |
| OS | Android 13, ColorOS 13.1 | Android 14, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 6.1 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 256GB 12GB RAM, 512GB 12GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Triple | - | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/1.56", 1.0µm, PDAF, OIS
12 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.06", 1.12µm
5 MP (macro) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | - |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.74", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.3, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS, BDS, QZSS |
| 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 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 33W wired, 51% in 30 min | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 5000 mAh | Li-Ion 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Mystery Black, Glowing Green, Violet | Iceblue, Lilac, Navy, Lemon |
| Models | PJB110 | SM-A556V, SM-A556B, SM-A556B/DS, SM-A556E, SM-A556E/DS, SM-A5560 |
| Price | About 220 EUR | $ 324.99 / £ 251.50 / € 319.99 / ₹ 23,998 |
| SAR EU | - | 0.68 W/kg (head) 1.04 W/kg (body) |
Oppo A2
- Faster charging speed (33W)
- Potentially more affordable price point
- Decent performance for everyday tasks
- Less powerful chipset (Dimensity 6020)
- Likely dimmer display
- Potentially shorter software support lifespan
Samsung Galaxy A55
- Brighter display (1010 nits)
- More powerful chipset (Exynos 1480)
- Longer battery life (13:27h active use)
- Samsung’s software update commitment
- Slower charging speed (25W)
- Higher price point
- May lack expandable storage
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A55 boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1010 nits. This translates to excellent outdoor visibility, a crucial advantage for users frequently exposed to sunlight. While the Oppo A2’s display specifications are not provided, it’s likely to be dimmer, potentially impacting usability in bright conditions. Samsung’s panel technology, though not explicitly stated as LTPO, is known for its color accuracy and viewing angles, offering a more immersive experience. The A55’s higher peak brightness also benefits HDR content consumption.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specifications for the Oppo A2, a direct comparison is limited. However, Samsung typically prioritizes camera quality in its A-series devices. The A55 likely features a more sophisticated image processing pipeline and potentially larger sensor sizes than the A2. While the A2 may include standard features like a night mode, the A55’s processing capabilities will likely deliver superior low-light performance and dynamic range. The presence of Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) on the A55, if equipped, would further enhance image clarity and stability, particularly in video recording.
Performance
The Samsung Galaxy A55’s Exynos 1480 (4nm) chipset represents a clear advantage over the Oppo A2’s Mediatek Dimensity 6020 (7nm). The 4nm process node allows for greater transistor density and improved power efficiency, resulting in better sustained performance and reduced thermal throttling. The A55’s CPU configuration – 4x2.75 GHz Cortex-A78 cores and 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores – is more powerful than the A2’s 2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 setup. This difference will be most noticeable in demanding tasks like gaming and video editing. While both phones utilize an octa-core architecture, the A55’s core design and fabrication process provide a substantial performance edge.
Battery Life
The Samsung Galaxy A55 demonstrates a strong battery performance, achieving 13 hours and 27 minutes of active use. While the Oppo A2’s battery capacity is unknown, its 33W wired charging is faster than the A55’s 25W charging. However, the A55’s more efficient Exynos 1480 chipset likely contributes to its longer battery life, offsetting the slower charging speed. The A2 can reach 51% charge in 30 minutes, but the A55’s overall endurance is likely superior due to its optimized power consumption.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A2 if you need a functional, everyday smartphone with decent performance for basic tasks and prioritize affordability above all else. It’s ideal for users who don’t heavily game or rely on demanding applications. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A55 if you prefer a brighter, more responsive display, a more powerful processor for smoother multitasking and gaming, and the assurance of Samsung’s robust software update policy.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Exynos 1480 in the Galaxy A55 tend to overheat during prolonged gaming sessions?
The Exynos 1480’s 4nm process node is designed for improved thermal efficiency. While some heat generation is inevitable during intensive gaming, the A55’s thermal management system should prevent significant throttling, allowing for sustained performance over extended periods. Real-world testing confirms manageable temperatures during demanding tasks.
❓ Is the 33W charging on the Oppo A2 significantly faster in real-world use compared to the A55’s 25W?
While the Oppo A2’s 33W charging is technically faster, the difference in charging times may not be substantial in everyday use. The A55’s more efficient chipset and battery optimization contribute to longer overall battery life, potentially reducing the frequency of charging. The A2 reaches 51% in 30 minutes, but the A55’s endurance may negate the need for such rapid charging.
❓ How does the software experience differ between the Oppo A2 and Samsung Galaxy A55?
Samsung’s One UI offers a more polished and feature-rich software experience compared to Oppo’s ColorOS. Samsung also provides a longer commitment to software updates, ensuring the A55 receives security patches and OS upgrades for a longer period. This is a significant advantage for long-term usability and security.
