The mid-range smartphone market is fiercely competitive, and the Oppo A96 and Samsung Galaxy A34 are two strong contenders. Both offer compelling features at accessible prices, but cater to slightly different needs. Let's dive into a detailed comparison to help you decide which one is right for you.
🏆 Quick Verdict
The Samsung Galaxy A34 emerges as the overall winner thanks to its brighter display, superior camera capabilities, and longer software support. While the Oppo A96 boasts faster charging, the A34's strengths outweigh its charging disadvantage, making it a more well-rounded choice.
| 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, 3, 5, 7, 8, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 8, 28, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| | CDMA2000 1xEV-DO | - |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2022, January 12 | 2023, March 14 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022, January 12 | Available. Released 2023, March 24 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 159.9 x 73.2 x 7.5 mm (6.30 x 2.88 x 0.30 in) | 161.3 x 78.1 x 8.2 mm (6.35 x 3.07 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 171 g (6.03 oz) | 199 g (7.02 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 (~409 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~390 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.43 inches, 99.8 cm2 (~85.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.6 inches, 106.9 cm2 (~84.9% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | OLED, 430 nits (typ), 600 nits (HDR) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 1000 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.6 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) | Mediatek Dimensity 1080 (6 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 619 | Mali-G68 MC4 |
| OS | Android 11, ColorOS 12 | Android 13, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 6.1 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| | UFS 2.2 | - |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | 48 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), PDAF
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.4, 27mm (wide), 1.0µm | - |
| Triple | - | 48 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS
8 MP, f/2.2, 123˚, (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
5 MP (macro) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps, 720p@480fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | - |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.4, 27mm (wide), 1.0µm | 13 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm |
| 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, LE, aptX HD | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | No | 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 (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass |
| | - | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 33W wired, PD, 100% in 63 min
Reverse wired | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 4500 mAh | Li-Ion 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black, Blue, Pink | Lime, Graphite, Violet, Silver |
| Models | PFUM10 | SM-A346E, SM-A346B, SM-A346B/DS, SM-A346B/DSN, SM-A346E/DS, SM-A346E/DSN, SM-A346M, SM-A346M/N, SM-A346M/DSN, SM-A3460 |
| Price | About 280 EUR | € 169.99 / $ 175.00 / £ 164.99 / ₹ 23,999 |
| SAR EU | - | 0.55 W/kg (head) 1.49 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 133h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-26.1 LUFS (Good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 472126 (v9)
GeekBench: 2316 (v5.5), 2518 (v6)
GFXBench: 23fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Oppo A96 (China)
- Faster Charging (33W)
- Slightly more compact design
- Decent Performance for everyday tasks
- Less Bright Display
- Weaker Camera
- Shorter Battery Life
- Less Software Support
Samsung Galaxy A34
- Brighter Display (1009 nits)
- Superior Camera System
- Excellent Battery Life (133h endurance)
- Longer Software Support
- Samsung Ecosystem
- Slower Charging (25W)
- Larger Size
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A34 takes a clear lead in the display department. Its 1009 nits peak brightness is significantly higher than the Oppo A96, offering better visibility in direct sunlight. While the A34 boasts an 'infinite' contrast ratio (nominal), the A96's display is still respectable, but lacks the same punch and outdoor usability.
Camera Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A34's camera system is noticeably better. While both offer Photo/Video capabilities, the A34 generally produces more detailed and vibrant images, especially in challenging lighting conditions. Samsung's image processing is also generally preferred by many users. The Oppo A96's camera is adequate, but doesn't match the A34's versatility.
Performance
Both phones utilize efficient 6nm chipsets. The Snapdragon 695 in the Oppo A96 and the Dimensity 1080 in the Samsung Galaxy A34 offer comparable performance for everyday tasks. The A34's Cortex-A78 cores provide a slight edge in demanding applications and gaming, but the difference is unlikely to be noticeable for most users.
Battery Life
The Samsung Galaxy A34 shines with its exceptional battery life, boasting an endurance rating of 133 hours. The Oppo A96's battery life is good, but falls short of the A34's longevity. The A96's 33W charging does offer a faster top-up, but the A34's longer runtime often negates this advantage.
Buying Guide
The Oppo A96 is a good choice for users prioritizing fast charging and a slightly more compact design. The Samsung Galaxy A34 is ideal for those who value a vibrant display, a versatile camera system, and the assurance of extended software updates and Samsung's ecosystem.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Which phone has better software support?
The Samsung Galaxy A34 offers significantly longer software support, including more years of OS updates and security patches, thanks to Samsung's commitment to their A-series devices.
❓ Is the Oppo A96 worth buying if fast charging is a priority?
If fast charging is your absolute top priority, the Oppo A96's 33W charging is faster than the A34's 25W. However, consider that the A34's longer battery life might offset the charging speed difference.
