Oppo's A-series consistently delivers impressive value in the budget smartphone market. The Oppo A95 and A92 are two popular contenders, offering a blend of features and affordability. But which one is the better choice for your needs? Let's dive into a comprehensive comparison.
🏆 Quick Verdict
The Oppo A95 edges out the A92 thanks to its significantly faster charging and slightly improved chipset. While both offer solid value, the A95's 33W charging is a game-changer for those needing quick top-ups. The A92 remains a viable option if budget is a primary concern.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 3, 5, 8, 38, 40, 41 - Southeast Asia |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2021, November 16 | 2020, May 04. Released 2020, May 09 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, November 16 | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Dimensions | 160.3 x 73.8 x 8 mm (6.31 x 2.91 x 0.31 in) | 162 x 75.5 x 8.9 mm (6.38 x 2.97 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 175 g (6.17 oz) | 192 g (6.77 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| 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 (~84.4% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~83.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 430 nits (typ), 800 nits (peak) | IPS LCD, 480 nits (typ) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6115 Snapdragon 662 (11 nm) | Qualcomm SM6125 Snapdragon 665 (11 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | Adreno 610 |
| OS | Android 11, ColorOS 11.1 | Android 10, ColorOS 7.1 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM |
| | - | UFS 2.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | - | 48 MP, f/1.7, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 119˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
Auxiliary lens
2 MP B/W, f/2.4 |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.4, 27mm (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm | - |
| Triple | 48 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/120fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.4, 27mm (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/3.06, 1.0µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| | - | 24-bit/192kHz audio |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | No |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | Unspecified | 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 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 33W wired, 54% in 30 min | 18W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Glowing Starry Black, Glowing Rainbow Silver | Twilight Black, Stream White, Aurora Purple |
| Models | CHP2365, CPH2365 | CPH2059 |
| Price | About 230 EUR | About 250 EUR |
Oppo A95
- Faster Charging (33W)
- Slightly Better Performance (Snapdragon 662)
- Modern Design
- Good Battery Life (5000mAh)
- Potentially Higher Price
- Macro and Depth Sensors are largely redundant
Oppo A92
- Excellent Battery Life (5000mAh)
- Affordable Price
- Decent Camera Performance
- Large Display
- Slow Charging (18W)
- Slightly Older Chipset (Snapdragon 665)
- Less Powerful than A95
Display Comparison
Both phones feature a 6.5-inch IPS LCD display with a Full HD+ resolution (1080 x 2400 pixels). While the panels are similar in quality, the A95 might offer slightly improved color accuracy due to potential software optimizations. Viewing angles and brightness are comparable on both devices.
Camera Comparison
The Oppo A92 features a quad-camera setup (48MP main, 8MP ultrawide, 2MP macro, 2MP depth). The A95 also has a quad-camera (48MP main, 2MP macro, 2MP black and white, 2MP depth). While the megapixel count is similar, the Snapdragon 662 in the A95 offers slightly better image processing capabilities, resulting in marginally better photos, especially in low light. Video recording is comparable on both.
Performance
The Oppo A95 boasts the Snapdragon 662, a step up from the A92's Snapdragon 665. This translates to slightly better performance in everyday tasks, gaming, and multitasking. The A95 handles demanding apps a bit more smoothly. Both phones have 4GB/6GB RAM options.
Battery Life
The Oppo A92 packs a 5000mAh battery, providing excellent all-day battery life. However, the A95 also has a 5000mAh battery but with a significant advantage: 33W fast charging. This allows it to charge from 0% to 54% in just 30 minutes, a considerable improvement over the A92's 18W charging.
Buying Guide
Who should buy the Oppo A95? Users prioritizing fast charging, a slightly more powerful processor for smoother multitasking, and a modern design. Who should buy the Oppo A92? Budget-conscious buyers seeking a reliable smartphone with a decent camera and a large battery, willing to compromise on charging speed.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Is the Oppo A95 worth the extra money compared to the A92?
If fast charging and slightly better performance are important to you, then yes. The A95's 33W charging is a significant upgrade. However, if you're on a tight budget, the A92 remains a solid choice.
❓ Which phone has better gaming performance?
The Oppo A95 has a slight edge in gaming performance due to its Snapdragon 662 chipset. However, both phones are best suited for casual gaming rather than demanding titles.
