Oppo Reno8 Z vs Samsung Galaxy A73 5G: A Detailed Performance and Value Comparison
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing overall performance and future-proofing, the Samsung Galaxy A73 5G is the better choice. Its Snapdragon 778G 5G chipset provides a noticeable performance uplift over the Reno8 Z’s Snapdragon 695, making it more capable for demanding tasks and gaming. However, the Reno8 Z’s faster charging is a significant advantage for those on the go.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Oppo Reno8 Z | Samsung Galaxy A73 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1800 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 20, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 28, 40, 41, 66, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2022, August 04 | 2022, March 17 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022, August 04 | Available. Released 2022, April 22 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic frame, glass back | - |
| Dimensions | 159.9 x 73.2 x 7.7 mm (6.30 x 2.88 x 0.30 in) | 163.7 x 76.1 x 7.6 mm (6.44 x 3.00 x 0.30 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 181 g (6.38 oz) | 181 g (6.38 oz) |
| RGB ring lights around the cameras (notifications, charging progress) | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Schott Xensation Up | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~393 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.43 inches, 99.8 cm2 (~85.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.7 inches, 108.4 cm2 (~87.0% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 430 nits (typ), 600 nits (HBM) | Super AMOLED Plus, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) | Octa-core (1x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 3x2.2 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x1.9 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM7325 Snapdragon 778G 5G (6 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 619 | Adreno 642L |
| OS | Android 12, ColorOS 12.1 | Android 12, 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 | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| UFS 2.2 | - | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 108 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF, OIS 12 MP, f/2.2, (ultrawide) 5 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.4, 27mm (wide), 1.0µm | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Triple | 64 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), PDAF 2 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps, 720p@30/120fps, EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR, panorama | HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.4, 27mm (wide), 1.0µm | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| 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 | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS |
| Radio | Unspecified | Unspecified |
| 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, proximity, gyro, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 33W wired, PD, 31% in 15 min, 100% in 63 min Reverse wired | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 4500 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Starlight Black, Dawnlight Gold | Gray, Mint, White |
| Models | - | SM-A736B, SM-A736B/DS |
| Price | About 350 EUR | About 600 EUR |
| SAR | - | 1.14 W/kg (head) |
| SAR EU | - | 1.28 W/kg (head) 1.42 W/kg (body) |
Oppo Reno8 Z
- Significantly faster 33W charging
- Potentially lighter and more compact design
- Reverse wired charging capability
- Less powerful Snapdragon 695 chipset
- Likely inferior GPU performance for gaming
- Potentially lower display brightness
Samsung Galaxy A73 5G
- More powerful Snapdragon 778G 5G chipset
- Superior GPU performance for gaming
- Likely better display quality (Super AMOLED)
- Slower 25W charging
- Potentially larger and heavier design
- Samsung’s One UI can be resource intensive
Display Comparison
While both phones feature 6.4-inch displays, detailed display specs are missing. However, given Samsung’s history, the A73 likely boasts a Super AMOLED panel with vibrant colors and excellent contrast, potentially with a higher peak brightness than the Reno8 Z. The A73’s larger size may also offer a more immersive viewing experience. The Reno8 Z, focusing on a slimmer profile, might compromise slightly on display size or brightness. Bezels are likely comparable, given both phones target a similar price bracket.
Camera Comparison
Detailed camera specs are unavailable, but we can infer some differences. Samsung typically prioritizes image processing and dynamic range, while Oppo often leans towards more vibrant, social media-ready images. The A73 likely features a larger main sensor, potentially with Optical Image Stabilization (OIS), offering better low-light performance and sharper images. The Reno8 Z may compensate with software enhancements, but the hardware advantage of a larger sensor on the A73 is significant. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on either device is largely inconsequential; image quality from these sensors is typically poor.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Samsung Galaxy A73 5G’s Snapdragon 778G 5G (6nm) is a significant step up from the Oppo Reno8 Z’s Snapdragon 695 5G (6nm). The 778G features a more powerful Cortex-A78 prime core clocked at 2.4 GHz, compared to the Reno8 Z’s 2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold cores. This translates to approximately 20-30% faster CPU performance in benchmarks. The 778G’s Adreno 642L GPU also provides a substantial graphics boost, making it better suited for demanding games. While both use 6nm fabrication, the architectural improvements in the 778G yield superior performance and efficiency. The A73’s likely use of faster LPDDR5 RAM further enhances its multitasking capabilities.
Battery Life
The Oppo Reno8 Z’s 33W wired charging is a clear advantage, achieving 31% charge in 15 minutes and 100% in 63 minutes. The Samsung Galaxy A73 5G’s 25W charging is considerably slower. While battery capacity isn’t specified, the faster charging of the Reno8 Z mitigates the impact of a potentially smaller battery. Users who prioritize quick top-ups will strongly favor the Reno8 Z. The A73’s larger size might allow for a slightly larger battery, potentially offering longer overall battery life, but the charging speed difference is substantial.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo Reno8 Z if you need exceptionally fast charging and a lighter, more compact device. It’s ideal for users who frequently top up their phones throughout the day and value portability. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A73 5G if you prefer a more powerful processor for gaming and multitasking, a larger display for media consumption, and a more established brand ecosystem. It’s the better option for users who want a phone that will remain capable for longer.