The Tecno Camon 16 and Samsung Galaxy A32 represent compelling options in the crowded budget smartphone market. Both aim to deliver essential features at an accessible price point, but they take slightly different approaches. This comparison dives deep into their specifications to determine which device offers the best value for your money, focusing on performance, display quality, and overall user experience.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Samsung Galaxy A32 edges out the Tecno Camon 16. While both share the same Mediatek Helio G70/G80 series chipset, the A32’s significantly brighter display (814 nits) and established brand reputation provide a more polished experience, justifying a slight price premium.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, October 10. Released 2020, October 16 | 2021, February 25 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2021, February 25 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 170.9 x 77.2 x 9.2 mm (6.73 x 3.04 x 0.36 in) | 158.9 x 73.6 x 8.4 mm (6.26 x 2.90 x 0.33 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 207 g (7.30 oz) | 184 g (6.49 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1640 pixels (~263 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~411 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.8 inches, 109.8 cm2 (~83.2% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.4 inches, 98.9 cm2 (~84.6% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 480 nits (typ) | Super AMOLED, 90Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.7 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6769V/CB Helio G70 (12 nm) | Mediatek MT6769V/CU Helio G80 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G52 2EEMC2 | Mali-G52 MC2 |
| OS | Android 10, HIOS 6.0 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 13, One UI 5 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | Penta-LED flash, panorama, HDR | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | 64 MP, 26mm (wide), 1/1.73", 0.8µm, PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lenses | 64 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 123˚, (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
5 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Single | - | 20 MP, f/2.2, (wide) |
| Video | 1440p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | Dual-LED flash, HDR | - |
| Single | 16 MP, (wide), AF | 20 MP, f/2.2, (wide) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio, RDS, recording |
| USB | microUSB 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 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 (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass |
| | - | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | - | 15W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Ion 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Cloud White, Purist Blue, Misty Grey | Awesome Black, Awesome White, Awesome Blue, Awesome Violet |
| Models | CE7, CE7j, CE9h, MZ-TECNO CE7j | SM-A325F, SM-A325F/DS, SM-A325M, SM-A325N |
| Price | About 130 EUR | € 124.99 / £ 89.38 |
| SAR | 0.95 W/kg (head) 0.82 W/kg (body) | - |
| SAR EU | - | 0.45 W/kg (head) 1.30 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 119h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-30.3 LUFS (Below average)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 286666 (v8)
GeekBench: 1277 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 8.1fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Tecno Camon 16
- Potentially lower price point
- Comparable processor to the A32
- Similar battery endurance
- Less established brand reputation
- Likely lower display brightness
- Unspecified charging speed
Samsung Galaxy A32
- Significantly brighter display (814 nits)
- Samsung’s refined software experience
- 15W wired charging
- Slightly higher price
- Marginally faster processor only in multi-core tasks
- Similar battery endurance to Camon 16
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A32 boasts a substantial advantage in display quality, achieving a measured peak brightness of 814 nits. This is a critical difference for outdoor visibility, making the A32 far more usable in direct sunlight. While both phones lack high refresh rate panels, the A32’s higher brightness and 'Infinite' contrast ratio (nominal) contribute to a more vibrant and engaging viewing experience. The Camon 16’s display specifications are not provided, suggesting a potentially lower peak brightness and contrast, impacting outdoor usability and overall image quality.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are listed as having Photo/Video capabilities, but detailed camera specifications are absent. Given the market positioning, it’s likely both rely on multi-camera setups with a primary sensor and supporting lenses. Without sensor size or aperture information, it’s difficult to assess image quality. However, Samsung’s image processing algorithms are generally more refined, potentially leading to better dynamic range and color accuracy in the A32. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on either device is unlikely to significantly impact the overall camera experience.
Performance
Both the Tecno Camon 16 and Samsung Galaxy A32 utilize Mediatek Helio G series chipsets, but with a subtle difference. The Camon 16 features the Helio G70, while the A32 uses the Helio G80. The G80’s CPU clocks slightly higher on the Cortex-A55 cores (1.8 GHz vs 1.7 GHz), offering a marginal performance boost in multi-threaded tasks. Both chipsets share the same Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz, meaning single-core performance will be similar. Both phones will handle everyday tasks and light gaming adequately, but demanding titles may require reduced settings. The 12nm manufacturing process is consistent across both, suggesting similar thermal characteristics.
Battery Life
Both the Tecno Camon 16 and Samsung Galaxy A32 achieve an endurance rating of 119 hours, indicating comparable battery life under similar usage conditions. The A32 supports 15W wired charging, while the Camon 16’s charging speed is unspecified. While the battery capacity isn’t listed for either device, the similar endurance ratings suggest they are similarly sized. The A32’s 15W charging, while not fast, provides a reasonable recharge time, and is a known quantity, while the Camon 16’s charging speed remains a question mark.
Buying Guide
Buy the Tecno Camon 16 if you prioritize maximizing value and are comfortable with a less-established brand. It offers a comparable processor for potentially less money. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A32 if you value a brighter, more visible display, a more refined software experience, and the peace of mind that comes with Samsung’s brand recognition and support network.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Mediatek Helio G80 in the Galaxy A32 offer a noticeable gaming advantage over the Helio G70 in the Camon 16?
The difference in gaming performance between the Helio G80 and G70 is relatively minor. While the G80’s slightly faster Cortex-A55 cores may provide a small boost in some titles, both chipsets are capable of handling most mobile games at medium settings. Expect similar frame rates and overall gaming experiences on both devices.
❓ How does the Samsung Galaxy A32’s display perform in direct sunlight compared to what we might expect from the Tecno Camon 16?
The Galaxy A32’s 814 nits peak brightness makes it significantly more usable in direct sunlight. The Camon 16, lacking specified brightness data, likely has a lower peak brightness, resulting in a washed-out and difficult-to-see display outdoors. This is a key advantage for the A32.
❓ Is the 15W charging on the Samsung Galaxy A32 considered slow by today’s standards?
Yes, 15W charging is relatively slow compared to the faster charging technologies available on more expensive smartphones. However, it’s adequate for a budget device and will still fully charge the phone overnight. The Camon 16’s charging speed is unknown, making the A32’s 15W charging a known quantity.
