Oppo A73 5G vs Samsung Galaxy A53 5G: A Detailed Comparison
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing display quality and long-term software support, the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is the better choice. Its brighter 830 nit display and more powerful Exynos 1280 chipset offer a smoother, more visually appealing experience, despite the Oppo A73 5G's slightly lower price.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Oppo A73 5G | Samsung Galaxy A53 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 14, 20, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 48, 66 - SM-A536U |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 2, 5, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536U |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| - | 2, 5, 48, 66, 77, 78, 260, 261 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536V | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2020, November 4. Released 2020, November 4 | 2022, March 17 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2022, March 24 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 162.2 x 75 x 7.9 mm (6.39 x 2.95 x 0.31 in) | 159.6 x 74.8 x 8.1 mm (6.28 x 2.94 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 177 g (6.24 oz) | 189 g (6.67 oz) |
| - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~83.9% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~85.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz, 480 nits (typ) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 720 (7 nm) | Exynos 1280 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC3 | Mali-G68 |
| OS | Android 10, upgradable to Android 12, ColorOS 12 | Android 12, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 8 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| UFS 2.1 | - | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 64 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/1.7X", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS 12 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1.12µm 5 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens |
| Single | - | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Triple | 16 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/3.06", PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 119˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (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 | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, aptX HD, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | - | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | Unspecified | No |
| 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 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer (market/region dependent) |
| - | Virtual proximity sensing | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 4040 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Navy Black, Neon | Black, White, Blue, Peach |
| Models | CPH2161 | SM-A536B, SM-A536B/DS, SM-A536U, SM-A536U1, SM-A5360, SM-A536E, SM-A536E/DS, SM-A536V, SM-A536W, SM-A536N, SM-S536DL |
| Price | About 240 EUR | $ 151.42 / £ 185.00 / € 169.14 |
| SAR | - | 0.75 W/kg (head) 1.58 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.89 W/kg (head) 1.60 W/kg (body) |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 113h |
| Camera | - | Photo / Video |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - | -26.5 LUFS (Good) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 329802 (v8), 379313 (v9) GeekBench: 1891 (v5.1) GFXBench: 19fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Oppo A73 5G
- Lower price point makes it more accessible.
- Functional 5G connectivity for budget users.
- Decent battery endurance (113h).
- Less powerful chipset (Dimensity 720) limits performance.
- Likely inferior display quality compared to the A53.
- Slower charging speed (18W).
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
- More powerful Exynos 1280 chipset for smoother performance.
- Brighter and higher-quality display (830 nits).
- Faster 25W wired charging.
- Higher price compared to the Oppo A73 5G.
- Similar battery endurance rating to the A73.
- May be overkill for basic smartphone users.
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured peak of 830 nits, compared to an unstated brightness for the Oppo A73 5G. This translates to superior visibility outdoors under direct sunlight. While both displays are likely to utilize AMOLED technology (based on brand trends), the A53’s higher brightness and 'Infinite' contrast ratio suggest a more immersive viewing experience. The A73 5G’s display specs are less defined, suggesting a more basic panel aimed at cost savings.
Camera Comparison
Both devices feature photo and video capabilities, but details are limited. The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G likely benefits from Samsung’s established image processing algorithms and potentially a larger main sensor (typical for the A-series). While the Oppo A73 5G will offer a functional camera experience, it’s unlikely to match the A53’s image quality, particularly in low-light conditions. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on the A73 5G is a common, but often underwhelming, addition that adds little practical value.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets: the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is powered by the Exynos 1280 (5nm), while the Oppo A73 5G uses the MediaTek Dimensity 720 (7nm). The Exynos 1280, built on a smaller 5nm process, offers greater transistor density and therefore, improved performance and efficiency. Its CPU configuration – 2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 cores and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores – is a step up from the A73’s 2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A76 and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 setup. This means the A53 will handle demanding tasks and games with noticeably less lag and better sustained performance. The 7nm Dimensity 720 in the A73 5G is adequate for everyday tasks but will struggle with graphically intensive applications.
Battery Life
Both phones share an endurance rating of 113 hours, indicating similar overall battery life. However, the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G supports 25W wired charging, significantly faster than the Oppo A73 5G’s 18W charging. This means the A53 can replenish its battery much quicker, minimizing downtime. While battery capacity isn't specified, the faster charging speed on the A53 provides a tangible advantage for users who frequently need to top up their devices.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A73 5G if you need a functional 5G phone on a very tight budget and aren't heavily invested in demanding applications or photography. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G if you prioritize a vibrant display, smoother performance for multitasking and gaming, and a more refined camera experience, even if it means spending a bit more.