The Oppo A52 and Nokia 7.2 represent a shrinking breed of affordable smartphones focused on delivering a balanced experience. Both launched in a competitive mid-range segment, but now offer compelling value as prices have dropped. This comparison dives deep into their specifications to determine which device offers the best combination of performance, display quality, and battery life for today's user.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing slightly better performance and faster charging, the Oppo A52 emerges as the winner. While both phones boast identical 69-hour endurance ratings, the Snapdragon 665’s newer architecture and 18W charging provide a more responsive experience and quicker top-ups.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 - ROW |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - Version 1 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - ROW |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (2CA) Cat6 300/50 Mbps or LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | 1, 3, 5, 8, 34, 38, 40, 41 - China | 1, 3, 5, 8, 40, 41 - IN |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, April 20. Released 2020, April 20 | 2019, September 05. Released 2019, September 23 |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), glass back (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 162 x 75.5 x 8.9 mm (6.38 x 2.97 x 0.35 in) | 159.9 x 75.2 x 8.3 mm (6.30 x 2.96 x 0.33 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 192 g (6.77 oz) | 180 g (6.35 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) | 1080 x 2280 pixels, 19:9 ratio (~400 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~83.4% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.3 inches, 99.1 cm2 (~82.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 480 nits (typ) | IPS LCD, HDR10 |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) | Octa-core (4x2.2 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6125 Snapdragon 665 (11 nm) | Qualcomm SDM660 Snapdragon 660 (14 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | Adreno 512 |
| OS | Android 10, ColorOS 7.1 | Android 9.0 (Pie), upgradable to Android 11, Android One |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | UFS 2.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Zeiss optics, LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | 12 MP, f/1.7, (wide), 1/2.8", 1.25µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 119˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Triple | - | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
Auxiliary lens |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60/120fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps (gyro-EIS) |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | Zeiss optics, HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm - Global
or
8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) - China only | 20 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/3", 0.9µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes |
| | 24-bit/192kHz audio | - |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, EDR, LE, aptX |
| NFC | No | Yes (excl. India) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio |
| 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 Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 10W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 5000 mAh | Li-Po 3500 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Twilight Black, Stream White | Cyan Green, Charcoal, Ice |
| Models | CPH2061, CPH2069, PADM00, PDAM10 | TA-1193, TA-1178, TA-1196, TA-1181 |
| Price | About 240 EUR | About 240 EUR |
| SAR | - | 1.15 W/kg (head) 0.90 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.99 W/kg (head) 1.44 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Audio quality | - |
Noise -93.0dB / Crosstalk -93.4dB |
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 69h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: 1342:1 (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-29.6 LUFS (Average)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 139495 (v7), 164484 (v8)
GeekBench: 5440 (v4.4), 1398 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 8.1fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Oppo A52
- Faster 18W charging for quicker top-ups.
- More efficient Snapdragon 665 chipset.
- Potentially better thermal management due to 11nm process.
- Display brightness likely lower than Nokia 7.2.
- Camera specifications are unknown, potentially less capable.
Nokia 7.2
- Brighter display (585 nits) for outdoor visibility.
- Potentially more refined software experience (stock Android).
- Good battery endurance (69 hours).
- Slower 10W charging.
- Less efficient Snapdragon 660 chipset.
- Older 14nm manufacturing process.
Display Comparison
The Nokia 7.2 boasts a demonstrably brighter display, achieving a measured 585 nits of peak brightness, compared to an unstated value for the Oppo A52. Both share a 1342:1 contrast ratio, suggesting similar black levels and color depth. However, the Nokia 7.2’s higher brightness translates to better visibility outdoors under direct sunlight. While panel technology isn’t specified for either, the Nokia 7.2’s brightness advantage is a significant win for users who consume a lot of media outdoors.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are listed as having Photo/Video capabilities, but lack specific sensor details. Without knowing megapixel counts, sensor sizes, or aperture values, a direct comparison is difficult. However, the market positioning of the Nokia 7.2 suggests a greater emphasis on camera quality, potentially featuring a more sophisticated image processing pipeline. The absence of details on Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) for either device suggests reliance on software stabilization, which can introduce artifacts in low-light conditions. We can assume both phones will struggle in very low light without significant software intervention.
Performance
The Oppo A52’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, built on an 11nm process, offers a subtle advantage over the Nokia 7.2’s Snapdragon 660 (14nm). The 11nm node generally leads to improved power efficiency and potentially less thermal throttling under sustained load. Both CPUs feature the same Kryo 260 Gold (2.0 GHz vs 2.2 GHz) and Silver (1.8 GHz) core configuration, but the slightly higher clock speeds on the 660 are offset by the more efficient manufacturing process of the 665. This translates to a smoother experience for multitasking and moderately demanding applications on the Oppo A52.
Battery Life
Both the Oppo A52 and Nokia 7.2 achieve an impressive endurance rating of 69 hours, indicating similar battery life under typical usage. However, the Oppo A52’s 18W wired charging significantly outperforms the Nokia 7.2’s 10W charging. This means the Oppo A52 can replenish its battery much faster, reducing downtime. While battery capacity isn’t specified, the faster charging speed is a tangible benefit for users who frequently need to top up their devices.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A52 if you need a phone for everyday tasks, light gaming, and appreciate faster charging speeds. Its Snapdragon 665 chipset offers a slight performance edge. Buy the Nokia 7.2 if you prioritize a potentially more refined software experience (stock Android) and a display with proven high brightness, and are less concerned with raw processing power or charging speed.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Snapdragon 660 in the Nokia 7.2 struggle with demanding games like PUBG?
The Snapdragon 660 can run PUBG, but you'll likely need to lower graphics settings for a smooth experience. The 14nm process and slightly lower clock speeds compared to the 665 in the Oppo A52 mean it's more prone to thermal throttling during extended gaming sessions, potentially leading to frame drops.
❓ How long will it take to fully charge the Oppo A52 with the 18W charger?
While a precise 0-100% charge time isn't specified, the 18W charging on the Oppo A52 will significantly reduce charging time compared to the Nokia 7.2's 10W charging. Expect a full charge in approximately 1.5 to 2 hours, depending on usage during charging.
❓ Is the Nokia 7.2 a good choice for someone who values software updates?
Nokia historically provides relatively timely software updates for its devices, offering a cleaner, closer-to-stock Android experience. This is a key advantage for users who prioritize security patches and the latest Android features, potentially exceeding the update support offered by Oppo.
