Samsung Galaxy A72 vs A53 5G: A Detailed Comparison
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing longevity and consistent performance, the Samsung Galaxy A72 emerges as the better choice. Its superior endurance rating of 117 hours, coupled with a comparable display, outweighs the A53 5G’s newer processor, especially considering the A53’s slightly lower battery stamina.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Samsung Galaxy A72 | Samsung Galaxy A53 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 14, 20, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 48, 66 - SM-A536U |
| 5G bands | - | 2, 5, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536U |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| - | 2, 5, 48, 66, 77, 78, 260, 261 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536V | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2021, March 17 | 2022, March 17 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, March 26 | Available. Released 2022, March 24 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 165 x 77.4 x 8.4 mm (6.50 x 3.05 x 0.33 in) | 159.6 x 74.8 x 8.1 mm (6.28 x 2.94 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 203 g (7.16 oz) | 189 g (6.67 oz) |
| IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~394 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.7 inches, 107.8 cm2 (~84.4% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~85.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | Super AMOLED, 90Hz, 800 nits (HBM) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Always-on display | - | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.3 GHz Kryo 465 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 465 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM7125 Snapdragon 720G (8 nm) | Exynos 1280 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 618 | Mali-G68 |
| OS | Android 11, upgradable to Android 12, One UI 4.1 | Android 12, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 8 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | LED flash, panorama, HDR | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | 64 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/1.7", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS 8 MP, f/2.4, (telephoto), 1.0µm, PDAF, OIS, 3x optical zoom 12 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1.12µm 5 MP (macro) | 64 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/1.7X", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS 12 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1.12µm 5 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens |
| Single | - | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes (market/region dependent) | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | 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, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer (market/region dependent) |
| Virtual proximity sensing | Virtual proximity sensing | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 25W wired | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Ion 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Awesome Black, Awesome White, Awesome Violet, Awesome Blue | Black, White, Blue, Peach |
| Models | SM-A725F, SM-A725F/DS, SM-A725M, SM-A725M/DS | SM-A536B, SM-A536B/DS, SM-A536U, SM-A536U1, SM-A5360, SM-A536E, SM-A536E/DS, SM-A536V, SM-A536W, SM-A536N, SM-S536DL |
| Price | £ 174.89 / € 359.99 | $ 151.42 / £ 185.00 / € 169.14 |
| SAR | - | 0.75 W/kg (head) 1.58 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | 0.23 W/kg (head) 1.17 W/kg (body) | 0.89 W/kg (head) 1.60 W/kg (body) |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | Endurance rating 117h | Endurance rating 113h |
| Camera | Photo / Video | Photo / Video |
| Display | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | -26.4 LUFS (Good) | -26.5 LUFS (Good) |
| Performance | AnTuTu: 279342 (v8) GeekBench: 6483 (v4.4), 1627 (v5.1) GFXBench: 15fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) | AnTuTu: 329802 (v8), 379313 (v9) GeekBench: 1891 (v5.1) GFXBench: 19fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Samsung Galaxy A72
- Exceptional battery life (117h endurance)
- Bright and vibrant display (825 nits)
- Proven Snapdragon 720G chipset offers stable performance
- Older chipset compared to the A53 5G
- Lacks 5G connectivity
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
- 5G connectivity for faster data speeds
- More efficient Exynos 1280 chipset
- Slightly brighter display (830 nits)
- Shorter battery life (113h endurance)
- Potential for thermal throttling under heavy load
Display Comparison
Both the A72 and A53 5G feature displays with an 'Infinite' contrast ratio, suggesting excellent black levels. However, the A53 5G marginally edges out the A72 with a peak brightness of 830 nits compared to the A72’s 825 nits. While the difference is minimal, it could be noticeable in direct sunlight. Both likely utilize AMOLED panels, but neither specification sheet details refresh rate or PWM dimming frequency, which are crucial for motion smoothness and eye comfort. Given the A72’s earlier release, it’s less likely to feature the higher refresh rates becoming standard in the A53’s generation.
Camera Comparison
Both phones are listed with 'Photo / Video' capabilities, lacking specific details. The A72 and A53 5G likely share similar camera setups, including a primary sensor, ultrawide, macro, and depth sensor. However, without sensor size or aperture information, a definitive comparison is impossible. The Exynos 1280’s ISP (Image Signal Processor) in the A53 5G *should* offer improved image processing capabilities, potentially resulting in better dynamic range and low-light performance. The inclusion of Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) on the main sensor, if present on both, would be a significant advantage for video recording and low-light photography. The ubiquitous 2MP macro lens on both devices is unlikely to deliver significant photographic value.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipset: the A72 utilizes the Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (8nm), while the A53 5G features Samsung’s in-house Exynos 1280 (5nm). The 5nm process of the Exynos 1280 theoretically offers better power efficiency and thermal performance compared to the 8nm Snapdragon 720G. The A53’s CPU configuration – 2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 – represents a generational leap over the A72’s 2x2.3 GHz Kryo 465 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 465 Silver. This translates to faster app loading and smoother multitasking on the A53 5G, but the real-world difference may be subtle for everyday tasks. Both devices likely feature similar RAM configurations, but the A53 5G benefits from potentially faster LPDDR5 RAM, further enhancing performance.
Battery Life
The A72 boasts an endurance rating of 117 hours, while the A53 5G achieves 113 hours. This indicates the A72 provides noticeably longer battery life under typical usage. Both support 25W wired charging, meaning 0-100% charge times will be comparable, likely around 1 hour 30 minutes. The A53 5G’s more efficient Exynos 1280 chipset attempts to offset the slightly smaller battery capacity, but the A72’s larger battery and optimized power management ultimately deliver superior endurance.
Buying Guide
Buy the Samsung Galaxy A72 if you need exceptional battery life for all-day use and value a consistently bright display for outdoor visibility. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G if you prioritize 5G connectivity and a slightly more modern chipset, potentially benefiting from future software updates and marginally improved app loading times, understanding that this comes with a slight trade-off in battery endurance.