Oppo Reno13 vs Samsung Galaxy A55: A Detailed Comparison of Mid-Range Powerhouses
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing performance and fast charging, the Oppo Reno13 is the stronger choice. Its Dimensity 8350 chipset and 80W charging significantly outperform the Galaxy A55’s Exynos 1480 and 25W charging. However, Samsung’s software and brand recognition remain strong advantages for those within the ecosystem.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Oppo Reno13 | Samsung Galaxy A55 |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 - International | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 - International | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA - International | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2024, November 25 | 2024, March 11 |
| Status | Available. Released 2024, November 29 | Available. Released 2024, March 15 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 7i), aluminum alloy frame, glass back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass Victus+), glass back (Gorilla Glass), aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 157.9 x 74.7 x 7.2 mm (6.22 x 2.94 x 0.28 in) | 161.1 x 77.4 x 8.2 mm (6.34 x 3.05 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | · Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM + eSIM (max 2 at a time)· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + eSIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM + eSIM (max 2 at a time) |
| Weight | 181 g (6.38 oz) | 213 g (7.51 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass 7i, Mohs level 4 | Corning Gorilla Glass Victus+ |
| Resolution | 1256 x 2760 pixels (~460 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~390 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.59 inches, 105.6 cm2 (~89.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.6 inches, 106.9 cm2 (~85.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, 3840Hz PWM, HDR10+, 1200 nits (peak) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+, 1000 nits (HBM) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x3.35 GHz Cortex-A715 & 3x3.20 GHz Cortex-A715 & 4x2.20 GHz Cortex-A510) | Octa-core (4x2.75 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 8350 (4 nm) | Exynos 1480 (4 nm) |
| GPU | Mali G615-MC6 | Xclipse 530 |
| OS | Android 15, ColorOS 15 | Android 14, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 6.1 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM, 256GB 16GB RAM, 512GB 12GB RAM, 512GB 16GB RAM, 1TB 16GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Color spectrum sensor, LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Triple | 50 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/1.95", 0.8µm, multi-directional, PDAF, OIS 8 MP, f/2.2, 15mm, 115˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm, AF Auxiliary lens | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/1.56", 1.0µm, PDAF, OIS 12 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.06", 1.12µm 5 MP (macro) |
| Video | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Panorama, HDR | - |
| Single | 50 MP, f/2.0, 21mm (wide), 1/2.75", AF | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.74", 0.8µm |
| Video | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.4, A2DP, LE, aptX HD, LHDC 5 | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | Yes | - |
| NFC | Yes | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS, 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/6, dual-band | 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 |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 80W wired, PD, UFCS 33W, PPS 33W Reverse wired | 25W wired |
| Type | 5600 mAh | Li-Ion 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Plume White, Luminous Blue, Black, Purple, Blue | Iceblue, Lilac, Navy, Lemon |
| Models | CPH2689, PKM110 | SM-A556V, SM-A556B, SM-A556B/DS, SM-A556E, SM-A556E/DS, SM-A5560 |
| Price | € 409.95 / $ 470.00 / £ 344.99 / ₹ 23,999 | $ 324.99 / £ 251.50 / € 319.99 / ₹ 23,998 |
| SAR EU | - | 0.68 W/kg (head) 1.04 W/kg (body) |
| EU LABEL | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery | 64:19h endurance, 1600 cycles | - |
| Energy | Class A | - |
| Free fall | Class C (120 falls) | - |
| Repairability | Class B | - |
Oppo Reno13
- Significantly faster charging (80W)
- More powerful processor (Dimensity 8350)
- Brighter display for outdoor visibility
- Oppo’s ColorOS may not appeal to all users
- Potentially less refined software experience compared to Samsung
Samsung Galaxy A55
- Samsung’s One UI offers a polished software experience
- Strong brand recognition and ecosystem integration
- Reliable and consistent performance
- Slower charging speed (25W)
- Less powerful processor (Exynos 1480)
- Dimmer display compared to the Oppo Reno13
Display Comparison
The Oppo Reno13 boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1204 nits compared to the Galaxy A55’s 1010 nits. This translates to superior visibility in direct sunlight. While both feature a 4nm chipset, the Reno13’s brighter panel will consume more power. The lack of LTPO technology on either device means refresh rate scaling isn’t as efficient as on higher-end phones, but the Reno13’s brightness advantage is a clear win for outdoor usability.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specs, a direct comparison is limited. However, the focus should be on the main sensor and image processing. Assuming similar sensor sizes (which is unknown), the Reno13’s more powerful chipset will likely enable faster image processing and potentially better low-light performance. The Galaxy A55 benefits from Samsung’s established camera software, known for its vibrant colors and user-friendly interface. The inclusion of a 2MP macro camera on both devices is largely inconsequential; image quality from these sensors is typically poor.
Performance
The Mediatek Dimensity 8350 in the Reno13 represents a substantial performance leap over the Samsung Galaxy A55’s Exynos 1480. The Dimensity 8350’s octa-core configuration (1x3.35 GHz Cortex-A715, 3x3.20 GHz Cortex-A715, 4x2.20 GHz Cortex-A510) is architecturally more advanced than the Exynos 1480’s (4x2.75 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55), resulting in faster CPU and GPU performance. This difference will be most noticeable in demanding games and multitasking scenarios. While both are built on a 4nm process, the Dimensity 8350’s newer architecture provides a performance edge.
Battery Life
The Oppo Reno13 delivers a measured 16:50h of active use, while the Galaxy A55 achieves 13:27h. This difference, coupled with the Reno13’s impressive 80W wired charging (compared to the A55’s 25W), makes a significant impact on the user experience. The Reno13’s 80W charging can replenish the battery from 0-100% much faster, minimizing downtime. The Reno13 also boasts a claimed 1600 battery cycles, suggesting greater long-term battery health. While the A55’s battery life is respectable, the Reno13’s combination of endurance and charging speed is superior.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo Reno13 if you need raw processing power for gaming or demanding applications, and value incredibly fast charging speeds. This phone is ideal for users who frequently use their phone for extended periods and need a battery that can keep up. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A55 if you prefer a more polished software experience, prioritize Samsung’s ecosystem integration, and value a consistently reliable, albeit less powerful, performance profile. It’s a great choice for everyday users who appreciate a streamlined experience.