The Oppo A93 and Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW represent compelling options in the increasingly crowded mid-range 5G smartphone market. While both aim to deliver 5G connectivity at an accessible price point, they diverge significantly in their core hardware, particularly in their chipset choices. This comparison dissects those differences to determine which device offers the best overall experience.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing performance and future-proofing, the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW is the better choice. Its Snapdragon 765G chipset, built on a more efficient 7nm process, delivers noticeably smoother performance and better thermal management compared to the Oppo A93’s Helio P95.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 38, 40, 41 | 2, 4, 5, 13, 66 |
| 5G bands | - | 260, 261 mmWave |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, October 01. Released 2020, October 01 | 2020, August 14 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2020, August 14 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic back, aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 160.1 x 73.8 x 7.5 mm (6.30 x 2.91 x 0.30 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 | 164 g (5.78 oz) | 188.8 g (6.67 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.43 inches, 99.8 cm2 (~84.5% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~87.5% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | Super AMOLED, 430 nits (typ), 800 nits (peak) | Super AMOLED |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A75 & 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 MT6779V Helio P95 (12 nm) | Qualcomm SM7250 Snapdragon 765G 5G (7 nm) |
| GPU | PowerVR GM9446 | Adreno 620 |
| OS | Android 10, ColorOS 7.2 | Android 10, One UI 2 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | 48 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 119˚, 16mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
Auxiliary lens | 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 | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/120fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/120fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Dual | 16 MP, f/2.4, (wide), 1/3.09", 1.0µm
2 MP, f/2.4, (depth) | - |
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | - | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | 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 Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| | - | ANT+ |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 15W wired |
| Stand-by | - | Up to 672 h |
| Talk time | - | Up to 5 h |
| Type | Li-Po 4000 mAh | Li-Po 4500 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Matte Black, Metallic White | Prism Bricks Blue |
| Models | CPH2121, CPH2123 | SM-A516V |
| Price | About 280 EUR | 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) |
Oppo A93
- Slightly faster wired charging (18W vs 15W)
- Potentially more visually striking design (subjective)
- May offer a cleaner software experience (depending on user preference)
- Less powerful and efficient chipset (Helio P95)
- Likely to exhibit more thermal throttling under load
- Inferior ISP for image processing
Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW
- More powerful and efficient chipset (Snapdragon 765G)
- Better sustained performance for gaming and multitasking
- Superior ISP for improved image quality
- 5G connectivity
- Slower wired charging (15W vs 18W)
- Samsung’s One UI can be resource-intensive
Display Comparison
Neither device boasts a particularly standout display. While specific panel details (like peak brightness or color gamut coverage) are unavailable, the focus here is on the underlying performance differences. Both likely utilize FHD+ LCD panels, common in this price bracket. The real differentiator lies in the chipset’s ability to efficiently drive the display, where the Snapdragon 765G has an advantage.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specs beyond the presence of sensors, a direct comparison is limited. However, the Snapdragon 765G’s image signal processor (ISP) is generally more advanced than the ISP found in the Helio P95, offering better image processing capabilities, particularly in low-light conditions. This translates to potentially sharper images, more accurate colors, and improved dynamic range on the Samsung A51 5G UW. The presence of OIS (Optical Image Stabilization) on the Samsung would further enhance image quality, but this is unconfirmed.
Performance
The core of the difference lies in the chipsets. The Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G (7nm) is a significant step up from the Oppo A93’s MediaTek Helio P95 (12nm). The 7nm process node allows for greater transistor density and improved power efficiency, translating to less heat generation and sustained performance. The Snapdragon 765G’s CPU configuration – a 1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Prime core, 1x2.2 GHz Kryo 475 Gold core, and 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver cores – offers a more balanced and powerful architecture than the Helio P95’s 2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A75 and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 setup. This means faster app loading times, smoother multitasking, and a more responsive user experience on the Samsung.
Battery Life
The Oppo A93 features 18W wired charging, while the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW supports 15W wired charging. While the Oppo has a slightly higher charging wattage, the Snapdragon 765G’s superior power efficiency means the Samsung is likely to offer comparable, if not better, real-world battery life. The 7nm process reduces power draw during operation, offsetting the slower charging speed. Expect both phones to comfortably last a full day with moderate usage, but the Samsung may exhibit less battery drain during intensive tasks.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A93 if you prioritize a slightly more streamlined software experience and are primarily focused on everyday tasks like social media and light web browsing. The A93’s design may also appeal to those seeking a more visually striking aesthetic. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW if you value sustained performance for gaming, multitasking, and demanding applications, alongside the benefits of a more advanced chipset and 5G connectivity.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Helio P95 in the Oppo A93 struggle with graphically demanding games like PUBG or Call of Duty Mobile?
Yes, the Helio P95 is likely to struggle with consistently high frame rates in demanding games. While playable, you’ll likely need to lower graphics settings and may experience occasional frame drops and thermal throttling. The Snapdragon 765G in the Samsung A51 5G UW offers a significantly smoother gaming experience.
❓ Does the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW support carrier aggregation for faster 5G speeds?
The Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW is specifically designed for use with T-Mobile’s 5G network and supports their 5G UW (Ultra Wideband) technology, which utilizes carrier aggregation to deliver significantly faster 5G speeds where available. The Oppo A93’s 5G capabilities are less specific and may not offer the same level of performance on all 5G networks.
❓ Is the difference in charging speed (18W vs 15W) between the Oppo A93 and Samsung A51 5G UW noticeable in everyday use?
While 18W is technically faster, the difference in charging time is unlikely to be dramatic. The Snapdragon 765G’s efficiency means the Samsung A51 5G UW will likely spend less time plugged in overall, even with the slower charging speed. Expect both phones to take around 2-2.5 hours for a full charge.
