Samsung's entry-level smartphone lineup can be confusing. The Galaxy F02s and A03s represent two very similar approaches to the ultra-budget market, but key differences in their chipsets and display characteristics create distinct user experiences. This comparison dives deep into the specifications to determine which device offers the best value.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Samsung Galaxy A03s is the better choice. While both phones share a 15W charging rate and similar battery endurance, the A03s’ Mediatek Helio P35 chipset, fabricated on a more efficient 12nm process, offers a slight performance advantage and potentially better thermal management over the F02s’ older Snapdragon 450.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | - | 2, 4, 5, 7, 12, 13, 14, 25, 26, 41, 66, 71 - SM-A037U |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2021, April 05 | 2021, August 18 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, April 09 | Available. Released 2021, August 18 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front, plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 164.2 x 75.9 x 9.1 mm (6.46 x 2.99 x 0.36 in) | 164.2 x 75.9 x 9.1 mm (6.46 x 2.99 x 0.36 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 196 g (6.91 oz) | 196 g (6.91 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~270 ppi density) | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~270 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~81.8% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~81.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | PLS LCD | PLS LCD |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 | Octa-core (4x2.35 GHz Cortex-A53 & 4x1.8 GHz Cortex-A53) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SDM450 Snapdragon 450 (14 nm) | Mediatek MT6765 Helio P35 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 506 | PowerVR GE8320 |
| OS | Android 10 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 13, One UI 5.1 Core |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 32GB 3GB RAM, 64GB 4GB RAM | 32GB 2GB RAM, 32GB 3GB RAM, 32GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 3GB RAM, 64GB 4GB RAM |
| | eMMC 5.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash | LED flash |
| Single | 5 MP, f/2.2 | 5 MP, f/2.2 |
| Triple | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), AF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), AF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Single | 5 MP, f/2.2 | 5 MP, f/2.2 |
| Video | - | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.2, A2DP | 5.0, A2DP |
| NFC | No | 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 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Accelerometer, proximity | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 15W wired | 15W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Ceramic Blue, Ceramic White, Ceramic Black | Black, Blue, White |
| Models | SM-E025F, SM-E025F/DS | SM-A037F, SM-A037F/DS, SM-A037M, SM-A037G, SM-A037U, SM-S134DL, SM-A037W, SM-A037U1, SM-S135DL |
| Price | About 100 EUR | $ 65.65 / £ 82.99 / ₹ 10,800 |
| SAR | 0.52 W/kg (head) | - |
| SAR EU | - | 0.36 W/kg (head) 1.09 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 122h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: 1718:1 (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-27.4 LUFS (Good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 103465 (v8), 101299 (v9)
GeekBench: 889 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 5.5fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Samsung Galaxy F02s
- Proven Qualcomm Snapdragon 450 chipset
- Familiar software experience
- Competitive price point
- Older 14nm fabrication process
- Potentially lower performance compared to Helio P35
- Less bright display
Samsung Galaxy A03s
- More efficient Mediatek Helio P35 chipset (12nm)
- Brighter display (488 nits)
- Potentially better thermal management
- Mediatek chipset may have less optimized software support
- Similar RAM configuration limits multitasking
- Camera quality likely comparable to F02s
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A03s boasts a brighter display, reaching a measured peak brightness of 488 nits, compared to the A03s’ nominal 1718:1 contrast ratio. Both displays share the same 1718:1 contrast ratio, suggesting similar panel technology. However, the higher brightness of the A03s will translate to better visibility outdoors and in brightly lit environments. Neither phone specifies refresh rate, implying standard 60Hz panels, which is typical for this price segment.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are listed as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details regarding sensor size or image processing. Given the price point, it’s safe to assume both rely on basic camera modules. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on both is largely a marketing feature with limited practical benefit. Without further information, it’s difficult to definitively declare a camera winner; image quality will likely be similar in good lighting conditions.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Galaxy F02s utilizes the Qualcomm Snapdragon 450 (14nm), while the A03s features the Mediatek Helio P35 (12nm). While both are octa-core CPUs using Cortex-A53 cores, the Helio P35’s architecture employs a big.LITTLE configuration (4x2.35 GHz & 4x1.8 GHz) offering a potential performance boost for demanding tasks. The 12nm fabrication process of the Helio P35 also suggests improved power efficiency compared to the 14nm Snapdragon 450, potentially leading to less throttling during sustained use. However, both phones likely share similar RAM configurations, limiting overall multitasking capabilities.
Battery Life
Both the Galaxy F02s and A03s achieve an endurance rating of 122 hours, indicating comparable battery life under typical usage scenarios. Both phones support 15W wired charging, meaning charge times from 0-100% will be similar. The slightly more efficient Helio P35 in the A03s *could* translate to marginally longer screen-on time, but the difference is unlikely to be significant in real-world use.
Buying Guide
Buy the Samsung Galaxy F02s if you prioritize a proven Qualcomm chipset and are comfortable with potentially slightly lower performance in demanding tasks. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A03s if you prefer a newer chipset architecture, a brighter display with a measured 488 nits, and a potentially smoother experience with everyday apps and light multitasking.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Helio P35 in the A03s struggle with demanding games like PUBG?
The Helio P35 is not a gaming powerhouse. While it can handle less intensive games, PUBG will likely require low graphics settings and may experience occasional frame drops. The Snapdragon 450 in the F02s will perform similarly, so gaming isn't a strong suit for either device.
❓ Does the Samsung Galaxy A03s overheat during prolonged use?
The 12nm fabrication process of the Helio P35 should result in better thermal efficiency compared to the 14nm Snapdragon 450 in the F02s. However, both phones are passively cooled, meaning sustained heavy use (like video recording or gaming) could lead to some throttling to prevent overheating.
❓ Are the 2MP macro cameras on either phone worth using?
Generally, 2MP macro cameras on budget phones offer limited image quality. They often lack detail and sharpness. While they can be fun to experiment with, don't expect professional-looking macro shots from either the F02s or A03s.
❓ Which phone is better for watching videos?
The Samsung Galaxy A03s is the better choice for video consumption due to its brighter display (488 nits). This increased brightness will make videos more visible in various lighting conditions, providing a more enjoyable viewing experience.
