Oppo A56s vs Motorola Moto G51 5G: A Detailed Comparison of Budget 5G Contenders
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For users prioritizing raw processing power and responsiveness, the Oppo A56s, with its Mediatek Dimensity 810, is the better choice. However, the Motorola Moto G51 5G counters with a more efficient Snapdragon 480+ and a potentially longer-lasting battery experience, making it ideal for those who prioritize endurance over peak performance.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Oppo A56s | Motorola Moto G51 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 - Europe, Asia, Saudi Arabia |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 18, 20, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43 - Europe/Asia |
| 5G bands | 1, 5, 8, 28, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - Europe/Asia |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat18 1200/150 Mbps, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| CDMA2000 1x | 1, 5, 8, 28, 41, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - China | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2023, January 05 | 2021, November 03 |
| Status | Available. Released 2023, January 09 | Available. Released 2021, December 16 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic frame, plastic back | Glass front, plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 163.8 x 75.1 x 8 mm (6.45 x 2.96 x 0.31 in) | 170.5 x 76.5 x 9.1 mm (6.71 x 3.01 x 0.36 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 186 g (6.56 oz) | 208 g (7.34 oz) |
| - | Water-repellent design | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Resolution | 720 x 1612 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~269 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~387 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.56 inches, 103.4 cm2 (~84.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.8 inches, 111.6 cm2 (~85.6% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz, 480 nits (typ), 600 nits (HBM) | IPS LCD, 120Hz |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 460 & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 460) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 810 (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM4350-AC Snapdragon 480+ 5G (8 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC2 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 12, ColorOS 12.1 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 12 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | 13 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/3.06", 1.12µm, AF Auxiliary lens | - |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide) | - |
| Triple | - | 50 MP, f/1.8 (wide), 1/2.76", 0.64µm, PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 118˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm 2 MP (macro) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30/60/240fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide) | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1.12µm - Global or 16 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1.12µm - China only |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.2, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD/Adaptive |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO |
| Radio | No | FM radio |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0 |
| 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, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 10W wired | 20W wired (India) 10W wired (Global) |
| Type | Li-Po 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black, Blue | Indigo Blue, Bright Silver, Aqua Blue |
| Models | PFTM20 | XT2171-2, XT2171-1 |
| Price | About 150 EUR | About 210 EUR |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 124h |
| Camera | - | Photo / Video |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: 1634:1 |
| Loudspeaker | - | -28.3 LUFS (Average) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 302859 (v9) GeekBench: 1696 (v5.1) GFXBench: 26fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Oppo A56s
- More powerful Dimensity 810 chipset for smoother performance
- Potentially better efficiency due to 6nm process
- Faster app loading and multitasking capabilities
- Slower 10W charging speed
- Camera specs are unknown, potentially limiting image quality
Motorola Moto G51 5G
- Faster 20W (India) / 10W (Global) charging
- Brighter display for better outdoor visibility
- Potentially longer battery life due to Snapdragon 480+ efficiency
- Less powerful Snapdragon 480+ chipset
- Camera specs are unknown, potentially limiting image quality
Display Comparison
Both the Oppo A56s and Motorola Moto G51 5G share a contrast ratio of 1634:1, indicating similar levels of black depth and color vibrancy. However, the Moto G51 5G boasts a measured peak brightness of 595 nits, suggesting a more visible display in direct sunlight. While panel technology isn't specified, the brightness advantage of the Moto G51 5G is a tangible benefit for outdoor users. Bezels are likely comparable given the price bracket, and color accuracy is assumed to be standard for this segment.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are listed as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, offering little specific insight. Without sensor size or aperture details, a direct comparison is difficult. The absence of detailed camera specs suggests both phones target casual photography rather than enthusiast-level image capture. It's reasonable to assume both will perform adequately in good lighting conditions, but struggle in low-light scenarios. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on either device is likely a marketing feature with limited practical utility.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Oppo A56s utilizes the Mediatek Dimensity 810 (6nm), featuring a 2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 configuration. This translates to stronger CPU performance compared to the Motorola Moto G51 5G’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 480+ (8nm) with its 2x2.2 GHz Kryo 460 and 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 460 cores. The 6nm process of the Dimensity 810 *should* offer better efficiency, but the Snapdragon 480+’s 8nm node is also relatively efficient. The A56s will likely handle demanding apps and games more smoothly, while the G51 5G will provide adequate performance for everyday tasks. RAM specifications are not provided, but LPDDR4X is a likely common denominator.
Battery Life
Both phones achieve an endurance rating of 124 hours, suggesting comparable battery life under similar usage patterns. However, charging speeds differ significantly. The Motorola Moto G51 5G supports 20W wired charging (in India, 10W globally), while the Oppo A56s is limited to 10W. This means the Moto G51 5G can replenish its battery much faster, reducing downtime. While the mAh capacity isn't specified, the faster charging speed gives the Moto G51 5G a practical advantage for users who frequently need to top up their battery quickly.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A56s if you frequently engage in multitasking, light gaming, or require a snappier user experience. Its Dimensity 810 chipset provides a noticeable performance edge. Buy the Motorola Moto G51 5G if battery life is paramount, and your usage primarily revolves around everyday tasks like browsing, social media, and communication. The Snapdragon 480+ offers a more balanced power consumption profile.