Samsung Galaxy M53 vs. Motorola Edge 30 Neo: A Deep Dive into Battery, Performance, and Value
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For users prioritizing all-day battery life and aren't concerned with the absolute fastest charging, the Samsung Galaxy M53 is the better choice. However, the Motorola Edge 30 Neo’s 68W charging and brighter display make it ideal for those who value convenience and a more vibrant viewing experience, even if it means slightly less endurance.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Samsung Galaxy M53 | Motorola Edge 30 Neo |
| 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, 38, 40, 41, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43 |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 78 SA/NSA |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2022, April 07 | 2022, September 08 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022, April 22 | Available. Released 2022, October 07 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front, plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 164.7 x 77 x 7.4 mm (6.48 x 3.03 x 0.29 in) | 152.9 x 71.2 x 7.8 mm (6.02 x 2.80 x 0.31 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 176 g (6.21 oz) | 155 g (5.47 oz) |
| - | Splash and dust resistant | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 | - |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~394 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~419 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.7 inches, 108.1 cm2 (~85.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.28 inches, 95.2 cm2 (~87.5% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | Super AMOLED Plus, 120Hz | P-OLED, 120Hz |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 900 (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G68 MC4 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 12, upgradable to Android 13, One UI 5.1 | Android 12, planned upgrade to Android 15 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | No |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 64 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/1.97", 0.7µm, PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.0", 1.12µm, AF |
| Features | LED flash, panorama, HDR | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | 108 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm 2 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps | 1080p@30/60/120fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.4, (wide), 1/3.0", 0.7µm |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | No |
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.2, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive |
| NFC | Yes (market/region dependent) | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 3.1, 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, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 25W wired | 68W wired 5W wireless |
| Type | Li-Ion 5000 mAh | Li-Po 4020 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Green, Blue, Brown | Very Peri, Black Onyx, Ice Palace, Aqua Foam |
| Models | SM-M536B, SM-M536B/DS, SM-M536B/DSN | XT2245-1 |
| Price | € 249.98 | € 156.44 / $ 185.00 / £ 229.00 |
| SAR | 1.31 W/kg (head) | - |
| SAR EU | 0.60 W/kg (head) 1.53 W/kg (body) | - |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | Endurance rating 114h | Endurance rating 104h |
| Camera | Photo / Video | Photo / Video |
| Display | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | -29.3 LUFS (Average) | -26.4 LUFS (Good) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 380818 (v9) GeekBench: 1964 (v5.1) GFXBench: 16fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Samsung Galaxy M53
- Longer battery life (114h endurance)
- Potentially better CPU performance with Dimensity 900
- More affordable price point (likely)
- Slower charging speed (25W)
- Dimmer display (802 nits)
- Older model, potentially fewer software updates
Motorola Edge 30 Neo
- Much faster charging (68W wired, 5W wireless)
- Brighter display (1004 nits)
- More modern design and features
- Shorter battery life (104h endurance)
- Snapdragon 695 may offer slightly lower CPU performance
- Potentially higher price
Display Comparison
The Motorola Edge 30 Neo boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1004 nits compared to the Galaxy M53’s 802 nits. This translates to better visibility outdoors under direct sunlight. Both displays share an 'Infinite' (nominal) contrast ratio, suggesting similar black levels, but the Neo’s higher peak brightness is a clear advantage. While both are likely LCD panels (given the price points), the brighter panel on the Neo will provide a more immersive viewing experience. The lack of refresh rate information for both devices makes it difficult to assess smoothness.
Camera Comparison
Both phones feature 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details regarding sensor size or megapixel count. Given the market positioning, it’s reasonable to assume both employ multi-camera systems with a primary sensor, ultrawide, and potentially a macro lens. However, without concrete sensor specifications, a detailed camera comparison is impossible. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on either device is unlikely to significantly impact image quality. Image processing styles will likely differ, with Samsung typically favoring vibrant, saturated colors and Motorola aiming for a more natural look.
Performance
The Galaxy M53 utilizes the Mediatek Dimensity 900 (6nm), featuring a dual-cluster CPU with 2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 cores and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. The Motorola Edge 30 Neo is powered by the Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (6nm), employing 2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold cores and 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver cores. While both are 6nm chips, the Dimensity 900 generally offers slightly better CPU performance due to its higher clocked A78 cores. However, the Snapdragon 695 often excels in modem efficiency and 5G connectivity. Real-world performance differences will likely be noticeable in demanding tasks, favoring the M53, but the Edge 30 Neo’s optimized power efficiency could lead to comparable sustained performance.
Battery Life
The Samsung Galaxy M53 claims an endurance rating of 114 hours, while the Motorola Edge 30 Neo achieves 104 hours. This suggests the M53 offers superior battery life, despite having a similar battery capacity (not specified in the data). However, the Edge 30 Neo compensates with significantly faster charging: 68W wired and 5W wireless, compared to the M53’s 25W wired charging. This means the Edge 30 Neo can replenish its battery much more quickly, potentially mitigating the slightly lower endurance. A full charge on the M53 will take considerably longer than on the Neo.
Buying Guide
Buy the Samsung Galaxy M53 if you need exceptional battery life and frequently find yourself away from a power outlet for extended periods. It’s a solid option for users who prioritize longevity over cutting-edge features. Buy the Motorola Edge 30 Neo if you prefer a phone that can rapidly replenish its battery, boasts a brighter, more visually appealing display, and offers a more modern design aesthetic, even if it means sacrificing some overall endurance.