Oppo K9 vs Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G: A Deep Dive into Mid-Range 5G Performance
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing sustained performance and a well-rounded experience, the Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G emerges as the winner. While the Oppo K9 boasts significantly faster charging, the A52s 5G’s Snapdragon 778G offers a more efficient architecture and comparable battery endurance, making it a more reliable daily driver.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Oppo K9 | Samsung Galaxy A52s 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, 3, 4, 5, 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, 3, 28, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| 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 | - | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2021, May 06 | 2021, August 17 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, May 11 | Available. Released 2021, September 01 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic back |
| Dimensions | 159.1 x 73.4 x 7.9 mm (6.26 x 2.89 x 0.31 in) | 159.9 x 75.1 x 8.4 mm (6.30 x 2.96 x 0.33 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 172 g (6.07 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 (~409 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.43 inches, 99.8 cm2 (~85.5% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~84.9% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | Super AMOLED, 90Hz, 430 nits (typ), 750 nits (peak) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x2.8 GHz Kryo 475 Prime & 1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver) | Octa-core (1x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 3x2.2 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x1.9 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM7250-AC Snapdragon 768G 5G (7 nm) | Qualcomm SM7325 Snapdragon 778G 5G (6 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 620 | Adreno 642L |
| OS | Android 11, ColorOS 11.1 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 14, One UI 6 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | 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 |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 64 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/1.7", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS 12 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1.12µm 5 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.4, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Triple | 64 MP, f/1.7, (wide), PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, (ultrawide) 2 MP (macro) | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60/120fps; gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.4, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS |
| 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/6, 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 | 65W wired, 100% in 35 min | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 4300 mAh | Li-Ion 4500 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black, Aurora | Awesome Black, Awesome White, Awesome Purple, Awesome Mint |
| Models | PEXM00 | SM-A528B, SM-A528B/DS, SM-A528N |
| Price | About 260 EUR | £ 112.98 / € 249.47 |
| SAR | - | 0.72 W/kg (head) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.88 W/kg (head) 0.84 W/kg (body) |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 113h |
| Camera | - | Photo / Video |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - | -27.5 LUFS (Good) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 429675 (v8), 506432(v9) GeekBench: 11060 (v4.4), 2801 (v5.1) GFXBench: 28fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Oppo K9
- Blazing-fast 65W charging (35 minutes to 100%)
- Potentially higher peak CPU performance with Snapdragon 768G
- Competitive price point (likely)
- Less efficient 7nm process compared to the A52s 5G’s 6nm
- Unknown display specifications
- Camera details are missing
Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G
- More efficient Snapdragon 778G (6nm) for sustained performance
- Brighter and more vibrant Super AMOLED display (800 nits)
- Proven battery endurance (113h)
- Slower 25W charging
- May be slightly more expensive
- Potential for software bloat (Samsung's One UI)
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G holds a clear advantage in display quality, boasting a measured peak brightness of 800 nits. While the Oppo K9’s display specifications are not provided, Samsung’s Super AMOLED panel delivers vibrant colors and excellent visibility even in direct sunlight. The A52s 5G’s ‘Infinite’ contrast ratio (nominal) further enhances visual fidelity. Without knowing the K9’s panel type or brightness, it’s difficult to compete with Samsung’s established display technology.
Camera Comparison
Both devices offer photo and video capabilities, but detailed sensor information is lacking for the Oppo K9. The Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G likely benefits from Samsung’s image processing expertise. Without knowing the K9’s main sensor size or aperture, it’s difficult to make a direct comparison. It’s reasonable to assume the A52s 5G’s camera system is more refined, offering better dynamic range and low-light performance. The inclusion of OIS (Optical Image Stabilization) on the A52s 5G is also a significant advantage for video recording.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets: the Oppo K9 utilizes the Snapdragon 768G (7nm) while the A52s 5G features the Snapdragon 778G (6nm). The 778G’s 6nm process node is more efficient, translating to better thermal management and sustained performance under load. While the K9’s Kryo 475 Prime core clocks slightly higher at 2.8GHz versus the A52s’ 2.4GHz Cortex-A78, the 778G’s architecture – including its three Cortex-A78 cores – provides a more balanced and consistently powerful experience. The A52s 5G is likely to exhibit less throttling during extended gaming sessions.
Battery Life
Both phones achieve an impressive endurance rating of 113 hours, indicating similar real-world battery life despite differing battery capacities (not specified for the K9). However, the Oppo K9’s 65W wired charging is a game-changer, achieving a full charge in just 35 minutes. The A52s 5G’s 25W charging is considerably slower. This means the K9 can quickly top up its battery, mitigating any potential concerns about battery life, while the A52s 5G relies on its efficient chipset and battery optimization to maintain longevity.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo K9 if you absolutely need the fastest possible charging speeds and prioritize peak CPU performance for short bursts, like demanding app launches or quick gaming sessions. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G if you value a more balanced experience with a proven chipset, excellent display brightness, and long-term battery reliability, making it ideal for content consumption and everyday tasks.