Umidigi A9 Pro 2021 vs Samsung Galaxy A32: A Detailed Comparison for Budget Shoppers
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Samsung Galaxy A32 emerges as the better choice. While both phones share a similar endurance rating, the A32’s brighter 814 nit display and slightly more efficient Helio G80 chipset provide a smoother, more enjoyable user experience, justifying its typically higher price.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Umidigi A9 Pro 2021 | Samsung Galaxy A32 |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 | 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 | 2021. Released 2021 | 2021, February 25 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2021, February 25 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Aluminum frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 158.7 x 74.9 x 8.6 mm (6.25 x 2.95 x 0.34 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 | 205 g (7.23 oz) | 184 g (6.49 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~411 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.3 inches, 97.4 cm2 (~82.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.4 inches, 98.9 cm2 (~84.6% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | Super AMOLED, 90Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A53) | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Helio P60 (12 nm) | Mediatek MT6769V/CU Helio G80 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 | Mali-G52 MC2 |
| OS | Android 11 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 13, One UI 5 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.0", AF 16 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide) 5 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens | 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 | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Single | 24 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 20 MP, f/2.2, (wide) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.2, A2DP | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO | GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO |
| Radio | No | FM radio, RDS, recording |
| USB | USB Type-C, 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 (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass, thermometer (skin temperature) | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass |
| - | Virtual proximity sensing | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 10W wired | 15W wired |
| Type | 4150 mAh | Li-Ion 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Onyx Black, Forest Green | Awesome Black, Awesome White, Awesome Blue, Awesome Violet |
| Models | - | SM-A325F, SM-A325F/DS, SM-A325M, SM-A325N |
| Price | - | € 124.99 / £ 89.38 |
| 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) |
Umidigi A9 Pro 2021
- Most affordable option
- Decent battery endurance
- Functional for basic tasks
- Dimmer display
- Older, less powerful chipset
- Slower charging
Samsung Galaxy A32
- Brighter, more vibrant display
- More powerful Helio G80 chipset
- Faster 15W charging
- Typically more expensive
- Similar battery endurance to A9 Pro
- Software updates may be limited
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A32 boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 814 nits, compared to an unspecified brightness for the Umidigi A9 Pro. This difference is crucial for outdoor visibility. While both displays have an 'infinite' contrast ratio (typical for LCD/TFT panels), the higher brightness of the A32 translates to a more vivid and punchy image. The A9 Pro’s display specifications are less detailed, suggesting a potentially lower-quality panel. The A32’s larger user base also means more readily available information regarding color accuracy and viewing angles.
Camera Comparison
Both phones feature 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but detailed camera specifications are lacking for both. Without sensor size or aperture information, a direct comparison is difficult. However, given Samsung’s image processing expertise, the Galaxy A32 is likely to produce more consistently pleasing photos, particularly in challenging lighting conditions. The prevalence of 2MP macro lenses on both devices suggests limited utility; these sensors typically lack the detail and dynamic range needed for truly compelling macro photography. Focusing on the main sensor performance, Samsung’s software optimizations often provide a significant advantage.
Performance
Both devices utilize MediaTek Helio chipsets, but the Galaxy A32’s Helio G80 offers a performance edge over the A9 Pro’s Helio P60. The G80 features a more modern CPU configuration with 2x Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz, alongside 6x Cortex-A55 cores at 1.8 GHz, versus the A9 Pro’s 4x Cortex-A73 cores at 2.0 GHz and 4x Cortex-A53 cores at 2.0 GHz. The A75 cores in the G80 provide a noticeable boost in single-core performance, impacting app launch times and general responsiveness. While both are 12nm chips, the G80’s architecture is more efficient, potentially leading to better sustained performance under load. The A9 Pro’s older chipset may struggle with more demanding applications and multitasking.
Battery Life
Interestingly, both the Umidigi A9 Pro 2021 and the Samsung Galaxy A32 achieve an endurance rating of 119 hours. This suggests similar real-world battery life despite the A9 Pro’s unspecified battery capacity and the A32’s 15W charging versus the A9 Pro’s 10W charging. The faster charging on the A32 allows for quicker top-ups, reducing downtime. While the A32’s 15W charging isn’t particularly fast by modern standards, it’s still 50% faster than the A9 Pro’s 10W charging, offering a convenience advantage.
Buying Guide
Buy the Umidigi A9 Pro 2021 if you prioritize absolute affordability and are willing to compromise on display brightness and peak performance. It’s a solid option for basic tasks like calling, texting, and light social media use. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A32 if you value a more vibrant display, slightly better performance for gaming and multitasking, and the brand recognition and software support associated with Samsung.