The Oppo A5 and Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW represent distinct approaches to the mid-range 5G market. The A5, a newer entrant, prioritizes charging speed and a modern chipset, while the A51 5G UW leverages Samsung’s established 5G infrastructure and brand recognition. This comparison dissects their core components to determine which device delivers the best value.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing rapid replenishment, the Oppo A5 is the clear winner thanks to its 45W charging. However, the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW offers a more refined 5G experience and a proven track record, making it a solid choice for those heavily reliant on 5G connectivity.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 - International | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 - version 1 | 2, 4, 5, 13, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA - version 1 | 260, 261 mmWave |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2025, May 15 | 2020, August 14 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, May 15 | Available. Released 2020, August 14 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic back, aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 165.7 x 76.2 x 8 mm (6.52 x 3.00 x 0.31 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 (pre-installed) |
| Weight | 194 g (6.84 oz) | 188.8 g (6.67 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass 7i, Mohs level 4 | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1604 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~264 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.67 inches, 107.2 cm2 (~84.9% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~87.5% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 120Hz, 1000 nits (HBM) | Super AMOLED |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Prime & 1x2.2 GHz Kryo 475 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 6300 (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM7250 Snapdragon 765G 5G (7 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC2 | Adreno 620 |
| OS | Android 15, ColorOS 15 | Android 10, One UI 2 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | - | UFS 2.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF
2 MP, f/2.4, (wide) | - |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | 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 |
| Video | 1080p@30fps (6/8GB RAM models only) | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/120fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | Panorama | HDR |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.4, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes, (market/region dependent) | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | Unspecified | FM radio, RDS, recording |
| 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, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| | - | ANT+ |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 45W wired, 33W PPS, 13.5W PD, 50% in 37 min | 15W wired |
| Stand-by | - | Up to 672 h |
| Talk time | - | Up to 5 h |
| Type | 6000 mAh | Li-Po 4500 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Aurora Green, Mist White | Prism Bricks Blue |
| Models | CPH2735, PKW120 | SM-A516V |
| Price | $ 231.00 / £ 99.00 / € 99.99 / ₹ 15,498 | About 470 EUR |
| SAR | - | 0.70 W/kg (head) 1.25 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.59 W/kg (head) 1.32 W/kg (body) |
| EU LABEL |
|---|
| Battery | 85:05h endurance, 1600 cycles | - |
| Energy | Class A | - |
| Free fall | Class A (270 falls) | - |
| Repairability | Class B | - |
Oppo A5
- Significantly faster 45W charging
- Modern Mediatek Dimensity 6300 chipset
- Potentially longer battery lifespan (1600 cycles)
- Display technology unknown (likely LCD)
- 5G implementation may be less mature than Samsung's
Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW
- Established Samsung 5G infrastructure
- Likely superior display quality (Samsung AMOLED)
- Proven software support and updates
- Slow 15W charging
- Older Snapdragon 765G chipset
- Potentially lower battery longevity
Display Comparison
While display specifications aren't provided, the A51 5G UW, being a Samsung, likely benefits from the company’s expertise in AMOLED technology, potentially offering superior color accuracy and contrast. The A5, given its price point, may utilize an LCD panel. The absence of refresh rate data suggests both likely operate at 60Hz. The A51 5G UW’s brand reputation suggests a higher likelihood of Gorilla Glass protection.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specs, it’s difficult to make a definitive judgment. However, Samsung generally excels in image processing, potentially giving the A51 5G UW an edge in dynamic range and color reproduction. The absence of sensor size information makes it hard to assess low-light performance. Both phones likely feature multiple rear cameras, but the A5’s newer chipset might offer more advanced computational photography features.
Performance
The Oppo A5’s Mediatek Dimensity 6300 (6nm) and octa-core CPU (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) represent a newer architecture, potentially offering improved efficiency compared to the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G (7nm). The Snapdragon 765G utilizes a tri-cluster configuration (1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Prime & 1x2.2 GHz Kryo 475 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver), which can be effective for task scheduling, but the 6nm process of the Dimensity 6300 suggests better thermal management under sustained load. The A5’s newer chipset may translate to smoother multitasking and slightly faster app loading times.
Battery Life
The Oppo A5 boasts an impressive 85:05h endurance and 1600 charge cycles, indicating a long-lasting battery and excellent longevity. While the A51 5G UW’s battery capacity is unknown, its 15W charging is significantly slower than the A5’s 45W wired, 33W PPS, and 13.5W PD capabilities. The A5 can reach 50% charge in just 37 minutes, a substantial advantage for users who need a quick power boost. The A5’s superior charging speed effectively mitigates any potential capacity disadvantage.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A5 if you need consistently fast charging and a modern processor for everyday tasks and light gaming. Its 45W charging and Dimensity 6300 chipset are ideal for users who frequently top up their phones. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW if you prioritize a stable 5G connection, particularly on UW networks, and prefer a brand with a long history of software support, even if it means sacrificing charging speed.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Oppo A5's Dimensity 6300 chipset handle demanding games like PUBG Mobile smoothly?
The Mediatek Dimensity 6300 is a capable mid-range chipset. While it won't deliver flagship-level performance, it should handle PUBG Mobile at medium settings with reasonable frame rates. The 6nm process should also help mitigate thermal throttling during extended gaming sessions.
❓ How does the 15W charging on the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW compare to the Oppo A5's 45W charging in real-world usage?
The difference is substantial. The Oppo A5 can reach 50% charge in approximately 37 minutes, while the A51 5G UW will take significantly longer – likely over two hours for a full charge. This makes the A5 ideal for users who need a quick top-up before leaving the house.
❓ Is the 5G connectivity on the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW more reliable than on the Oppo A5, especially on mmWave networks?
Samsung has a longer history and more established partnerships with carriers for 5G implementation, particularly on mmWave networks (UW). While the Oppo A5 supports 5G, the A51 5G UW likely offers a more consistent and reliable 5G experience, especially in areas with strong mmWave coverage.
