Google Pixel 4a 5G vs Oppo A53 5G: A Deep Dive into Mid-Range 5G Contenders
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Google Pixel 4a 5G emerges as the superior choice. Its Snapdragon 765G chipset provides a noticeable performance edge, coupled with Google’s renowned camera processing and guaranteed software updates. While the Oppo A53 5G offers a lower entry price, the trade-offs in performance and long-term support are significant.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Oppo A53 5G | Google Pixel 4a 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 46, 48, 66, 71 |
| 5G bands | 1, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 28, 41, 66, 71, 77, 78 Sub6, mmWave (market dependant) |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| CDMA2000 1xEV-DO | - | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2020, December 18. Released 2020, December 21 | 2020, September 30 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2020, November 05 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 162.2 x 75 x 7.9 mm (6.39 x 2.95 x 0.31 in) | 153.9 x 74 x 8.2 mm (Sub-6) or 8.5 mm (Sub-6 and mmWave) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + eSIM |
| Weight | 175 g (6.17 oz) | 168 g (5G Sub-6); 171 g ( 5G Sub-6 and mmWave) (5.93 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~413 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~83.9% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.2 inches, 95.7 cm2 (~84.1% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz, 480 nits (typ) | OLED, HDR |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 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 720 (7 nm) | Qualcomm SM7250 Snapdragon 765G 5G (7 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC3 | Adreno 620 |
| OS | Android 10, ColorOS 7.2 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 14 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM |
| UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 12.2 MP, f/1.7, 27mm (wide), 1/2.55", 1.4µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS 16 MP, f/2.2, 107˚ (ultrawide), 1.0µm |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama |
| Single | 5 MP, AF | - |
| Triple | 16 MP, f/2.2, (wide), PDAF 2 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/120fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX HD |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, QZSS, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 3.1 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 10W wired | 18W wired, PD2.0 |
| Stand-by | Up to 200 h | - |
| Talk time | Up to 3 h 30 min | - |
| Type | Li-Po 4040 mAh | Li-Po 3885 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black, Green, Purple | Just Black, Clearly White |
| Models | PECM30, PECT30 | GD1YQ, G025I, G025E, G025H, G6QU3 |
| Price | About 160 EUR | About 140 EUR |
| SAR | 0.85 W/kg (head) 0.79 W/kg (body) | - |
Oppo A53 5G
- Superior performance with Snapdragon 765G
- Exceptional camera quality thanks to Google’s processing
- Faster 18W charging with PD2.0
- Guaranteed software updates and long-term support
- Potentially higher price point
- May lack expandable storage
Google Pixel 4a 5G
- Lower price point
- 5G connectivity
- Potentially larger battery capacity (unconfirmed)
- May include a headphone jack (market dependent)
- Inferior performance compared to Snapdragon 765G
- Less refined camera experience
- Slower 10W charging
- Limited software update commitment
Display Comparison
Neither device boasts a particularly standout display. Both likely utilize LCD panels, a common cost-saving measure in this segment. The key difference lies in processing power; the Snapdragon 765G in the Pixel 4a 5G has a more powerful ISP, potentially leading to slightly better image processing for display output. While specific nit brightness figures aren't provided, the Pixel's generally superior image processing suggests a more vibrant and accurate viewing experience. Bezels are likely comparable, reflecting the budget nature of both devices.
Camera Comparison
Google’s computational photography prowess is a major differentiator. While sensor sizes aren’t specified, the Pixel 4a 5G leverages the Snapdragon 765G’s superior ISP to deliver exceptional image quality, particularly in challenging lighting conditions. Google’s image processing algorithms excel at dynamic range and noise reduction. The Oppo A53 5G, while capable, relies on MediaTek’s image signal processing, which typically doesn’t match Google’s sophistication. The Pixel’s camera is likely to produce more consistent and pleasing results across various scenarios. The absence of OIS on either device suggests a reliance on software stabilization.
Performance
The core of the difference lies in the chipsets. The Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G (7nm) in the Pixel 4a 5G features a Kryo 475 tri-cluster architecture (1x2.4 GHz Prime, 1x2.2 GHz Gold, 6x1.8 GHz Silver), designed for a balance of performance and efficiency. This contrasts with the MediaTek Dimensity 720 (7nm) in the Oppo A53 5G, utilizing a more traditional octa-core setup (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55). The Snapdragon’s Prime core provides a significant advantage in single-core tasks, translating to snappier app launches and smoother multitasking. While both are 7nm chips, Qualcomm’s architecture and GPU (Adreno 620 vs. Mali-G57 MC3 in the Oppo) deliver superior graphics performance, crucial for gaming. The Pixel 4a 5G will exhibit less throttling under sustained load.
Battery Life
Battery capacity isn’t provided for either device, but the charging speeds reveal a key difference. The Pixel 4a 5G supports 18W wired charging with PD2.0, allowing for a significantly faster 0-100% charge compared to the Oppo A53 5G’s 10W charging. While a larger battery capacity on the Oppo A53 5G could partially offset the slower charging, the Pixel’s faster charging is a tangible benefit for users who value convenience. The Snapdragon 765G’s efficiency also contributes to potentially better battery life under moderate usage.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A53 5G if your primary need is basic 5G connectivity at the absolute lowest price point and you're comfortable with a less refined software experience. Buy the Google Pixel 4a 5G if you prioritize camera quality, smoother performance for everyday tasks and light gaming, and guaranteed software updates for years to come. The Pixel offers a more complete and future-proof package.