The Samsung Galaxy F52 5G and A52 5G represent Samsung’s aggressive push into affordable 5G connectivity. While both devices share a core chipset and 5G capabilities, subtle differences in display quality and charging speed create distinct user experiences. This comparison dissects these nuances to help you choose the best option for your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Samsung Galaxy A52 5G emerges as the slightly better choice. Its demonstrably brighter 787 nit display offers a superior viewing experience, especially outdoors, and the 25W charging with a reported 50% charge in 30 minutes provides a convenience the F52 5G lacks detailed charging data for.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 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, 28, 41, 78 Sub6 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 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 | 2021, May 20 | 2021, March 17 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, June 01 | Available. Released 2021, March 19 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic back |
| Dimensions | 164.6 x 76.3 x 8.7 mm (6.48 x 3.00 x 0.34 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 | 199 g (7.02 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 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~400 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~407 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.6 inches, 104.9 cm2 (~83.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 101.0 cm2 (~84.1% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | TFT LCD, 120Hz | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+, 800 nits (HBM) |
| | - | Always-on display |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 570 & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 570) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 570 & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 570) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM7225 Snapdragon 750G 5G (8 nm) | Qualcomm SM7225 Snapdragon 750G 5G (8 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 619 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 11, One UI 3.1 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 14, One UI 6.1 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 4GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, panorama, HDR | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | 64 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, (ultrawide), 1.12µm
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | 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 |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/120fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | No | FM radio (market/region dependent) |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | 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 (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass |
| | - | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 25W wired | 25W wired, 50% in 30 min |
| Type | Li-Po 4500 mAh | Li-Po 4500 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | White, Black | Awesome Black, Awesome White, Awesome Violet, Awesome Blue |
| Models | SM-E5260 | SM-A526B, SM-A526B/DS, SM-A5260, SM-A526W, SM-A526U, SM-A526U1 |
| Price | About 260 EUR | $ 137.39 / £ 280.00 / € 115.49 |
| SAR | - | 0.74 W/kg (head) 0.53 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 1.05 W/kg (head) 1.42 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 111h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-27.5 LUFS (Good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 334981 (v8), 386474 (v9)
GeekBench: 1820 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 16fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Samsung Galaxy F52 5G
- Potentially lower price point
- Shares the same Snapdragon 750G chipset for comparable performance
- Supports 5G connectivity
- Display brightness is unknown and likely lower than the A52 5G
- Charging speed details are limited
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
- Brighter 787 nit display for better outdoor visibility
- Faster charging: 50% in 30 minutes
- Higher endurance rating (111h)
- May be slightly more expensive than the F52 5G
- Shares the same Snapdragon 750G chipset, not a flagship processor
Display Comparison
The most significant difference lies in the display. The Galaxy A52 5G boasts a measured peak brightness of 787 nits, a substantial advantage over the F52 5G, which lacks published brightness data. This higher brightness translates to better visibility in direct sunlight. Both phones feature an 'Infinite' contrast ratio (nominal), suggesting similar black levels and color reproduction, but the A52 5G’s higher peak brightness will provide a more dynamic and engaging visual experience. The absence of refresh rate data for both devices suggests a standard 60Hz panel, limiting smoothness compared to higher refresh rate alternatives.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are listed as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details regarding sensor size, aperture, or OIS. This suggests a similar camera experience, likely focusing on versatility rather than exceptional image quality. The absence of information regarding the main sensor resolution makes a direct comparison difficult. It’s reasonable to assume both phones include a standard macro lens (often 2MP), which typically offers limited practical benefit due to low resolution and lack of optical image stabilization. Image processing will likely be similar, leveraging Samsung’s software algorithms.
Performance
Both the Galaxy F52 5G and A52 5G are powered by the Qualcomm SM7225 Snapdragon 750G 5G (8 nm) chipset, featuring an octa-core CPU configuration (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 570 & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 570). This means CPU performance will be virtually identical for everyday tasks and most gaming scenarios. The 8nm process node offers a good balance of performance and efficiency. However, without detailed thermal management data, it’s difficult to assess potential throttling under sustained load. RAM specifications are not provided, but both likely utilize LPDDR4X RAM, common for this price segment.
Battery Life
The Galaxy A52 5G has an endurance rating of 111 hours, indicating solid battery life. The F52 5G’s battery life is not specified. Both phones support 25W wired charging, but the A52 5G claims to reach 50% charge in 30 minutes, a feature not detailed for the F52 5G. This faster charging speed provides a significant convenience factor. While battery capacity (mAh) isn’t provided for either device, the A52 5G’s higher endurance rating suggests either a larger battery or more efficient power management.
Buying Guide
Buy the Samsung Galaxy F52 5G if you prioritize maximizing value and are comfortable with a potentially less vibrant display. It’s ideal for users who primarily consume content indoors and prioritize a lower price point. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A52 5G if you frequently use your phone outdoors, value a brighter, more visually appealing screen, and appreciate the faster charging capabilities, even if it comes at a slight premium.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Snapdragon 750G in either phone struggle with demanding games like PUBG or Genshin Impact?
The Snapdragon 750G is a capable mid-range chipset, but it's not designed for ultra-high settings in graphically intensive games. You'll likely need to lower graphics settings to achieve smooth frame rates in titles like PUBG or Genshin Impact. Both phones share the same chipset, so gaming performance will be very similar.
❓ Is the 25W charging on both phones truly fast, or is it just marketing?
While 25W charging isn't the fastest available, it's a respectable charging speed for this price range. The Galaxy A52 5G's claim of 50% charge in 30 minutes suggests a more efficient charging implementation. The F52 5G's charging speed is less defined, so it may take longer to reach a similar charge level.
❓ How does the 5G performance differ between the F52 5G and A52 5G, considering they both use the Snapdragon 750G?
The 5G performance will be largely identical, as both phones utilize the same Snapdragon 750G modem. Actual 5G speeds will depend on your carrier, network coverage, and the specific 5G bands supported by the phone, not the chipset itself.
