The Oppo A35 and Samsung Galaxy A13 (SM-A137) represent the fiercely competitive sub-$150 smartphone market. Both aim to deliver essential smartphone functionality at an accessible price, but they take different approaches to achieving this. This comparison dives deep into their core specifications, focusing on performance and charging to help you determine which device best suits your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Samsung Galaxy A13 emerges as the better choice. Its Mediatek Helio G80 chipset, featuring more modern Cortex-A75 cores, provides a noticeable performance uplift over the Oppo A35’s Helio P35, making it more capable for multitasking and light gaming. The 15W charging also offers a quicker top-up than the A35’s 10W.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | CDMA2000 1x | - |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2021, April 14 | 2022, June |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, April 26 | Available. Released 2022, July |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 164 x 75.4 x 7.9 mm (6.46 x 2.97 x 0.31 in) | 165.1 x 76.4 x 8.8 mm (6.5 x 3.01 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 177 g (6.24 oz) | 195 g (6.88 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~269 ppi density) | 1080 x 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~400 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.52 inches, 102.6 cm2 (~83.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.6 inches, 104.9 cm2 (~83.2% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 480 nits (typ) | PLS LCD |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.35 GHz Cortex-A53 & 4x1.8 GHz Cortex-A53) | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6765 Helio P35 (12 nm) | Mediatek MT6769V/CU Helio G80 (12 nm) |
| GPU | PowerVR GE8320 | Mali-G52 MC2 |
| OS | Android 10, ColorOS 7.2 | Android 12, upgradable to Android 14, One UI 6.1 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM | 32GB 3GB RAM, 32GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM |
| | eMMC 5.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF
5 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/5.0", 1.12µm
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.2, (wide) |
| Triple | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm, PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | - |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.2, (wide) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX | 5.2, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| USB | microUSB 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, compass |
| | - | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 10W wired | 15W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 4230 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black, White, Blue | Black, White, Blue |
| Models | PEHM00, PEFM00 | SM-A137F, SM-A137F/DSN, SM-A137F/DS |
| Price | - | About 180 EUR |
| SAR EU | - | 0.35 W/kg (head) 1.22 W/kg (body) |
Oppo A35
- Potentially lower price point.
- Reliable for basic smartphone tasks.
- Simple and straightforward user experience.
- Inferior chipset performance compared to the A13.
- Slower 10W charging.
- Less responsive for multitasking.
Samsung Galaxy A13 (SM-A137)
- More powerful Mediatek Helio G80 chipset.
- Faster 15W charging.
- Smoother multitasking and app performance.
- May be slightly more expensive than the A35.
- Similar display quality to the A35.
- Camera performance likely similar in low light.
Display Comparison
Neither device boasts a standout display. Both likely utilize LCD panels, common in this price bracket. While specific details like peak brightness and color gamut coverage are unavailable, the focus here is on processing power, not visual fidelity. Bezels are expected to be substantial on both, prioritizing cost reduction over an immersive viewing experience.
Camera Comparison
Both phones likely feature a multi-camera setup, but detailed sensor information is limited. It’s safe to assume both will include a primary camera and potentially depth/macro sensors. Given the price point, image quality will be adequate in good lighting conditions but will struggle in low light. The focus should be on the primary sensor; the 2MP macro cameras often found in this segment offer minimal practical benefit. Without specific sensor size or aperture data, the A13’s image processing capabilities, potentially benefiting from the more powerful chipset, may yield slightly better results.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Samsung Galaxy A13’s Mediatek Helio G80 (12nm) is a significant upgrade over the Oppo A35’s Helio P35 (12nm). The G80 utilizes a dual-core Cortex-A75 configuration clocked at 2.0 GHz alongside six Cortex-A55 cores at 1.8 GHz. This contrasts with the A35’s octa-core setup of four Cortex-A53 cores at 2.35 GHz and four at 1.8 GHz. While the A35 has more cores, the A75 cores in the G80 offer substantially higher single-core performance, crucial for app launch speeds and responsiveness. The A55 cores are also more efficient than the older A53 architecture. This translates to a smoother user experience on the A13, particularly when multitasking or running demanding applications.
Battery Life
Battery capacity is not specified for either device, but both likely fall in the 4000-5000 mAh range, typical for this class. However, the Samsung Galaxy A13’s 15W wired charging is a clear advantage over the Oppo A35’s 10W charging. This means the A13 will replenish its battery significantly faster, reducing downtime and offering greater convenience. While a larger battery capacity is desirable, faster charging can mitigate the impact of a slightly smaller battery.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A35 if your primary need is a basic, reliable smartphone for essential tasks like calls, texts, and light social media use, and you prioritize a potentially lower initial cost. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A13 (SM-A137) if you want a more responsive experience for everyday tasks, enjoy occasional gaming, or value faster charging speeds, even if it means a slightly higher price point.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Samsung Galaxy A13 handle popular games like PUBG Mobile or Call of Duty Mobile?
The Helio G80 in the A13 is capable of running PUBG Mobile and Call of Duty Mobile, but you’ll likely need to use lower graphics settings to maintain a stable frame rate. The Oppo A35’s Helio P35 will struggle with these titles, even on the lowest settings.
❓ Is the difference in performance between the Helio P35 and Helio G80 noticeable in everyday use?
Yes, the difference is noticeable. The A13 will feel snappier when opening apps, switching between tasks, and browsing the web. The A35 may exhibit slight lag or delays in these scenarios due to its less powerful processor.
❓ How long does it realistically take to fully charge each phone?
With 10W charging, the Oppo A35 will likely take around 3-4 hours to fully charge. The Samsung Galaxy A13’s 15W charging should reduce this to approximately 2-2.5 hours, offering a significant time saving.
