Umidigi F3 5G vs Samsung Galaxy A53 5G: A Detailed Comparison
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing a refined experience and strong brand support, the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is the better choice. However, the Umidigi F3 5G presents a compelling option for budget-conscious buyers willing to compromise on certain features for significant cost savings.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Umidigi F3 5G | Samsung Galaxy A53 5G |
| 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 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 14, 20, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 48, 66 - SM-A536U |
| 5G bands | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 25, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 2, 5, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536U |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| - | 2, 5, 48, 66, 77, 78, 260, 261 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536V | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2022 | 2022, March 17 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022 | Available. Released 2022, March 24 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 168.3 x 76.6 x 8.8 mm (6.63 x 3.02 x 0.35 in) | 159.6 x 74.8 x 8.1 mm (6.28 x 2.94 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 195 g (6.88 oz) | 189 g (6.67 oz) |
| - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1650 pixels (~269 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.7 inches, 106.2 cm2 (~82.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~85.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 700 (7 nm) | Exynos 1280 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC2 | Mali-G68 |
| OS | Android 12 | Android 12, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 8 |
| 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 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 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 |
| Single | - | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Triple | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2", AF 8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide) 5 MP (macro) | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.2, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1440p@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| 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 (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer (market/region dependent) |
| - | Virtual proximity sensing | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 25W wired |
| Type | 5150 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Starry Black, Matte Silver, Sunglow Gold | Black, White, Blue, Peach |
| Models | - | SM-A536B, SM-A536B/DS, SM-A536U, SM-A536U1, SM-A5360, SM-A536E, SM-A536E/DS, SM-A536V, SM-A536W, SM-A536N, SM-S536DL |
| Price | - | $ 151.42 / £ 185.00 / € 169.14 |
| SAR | - | 0.75 W/kg (head) 1.58 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.89 W/kg (head) 1.60 W/kg (body) |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 113h |
| Camera | - | Photo / Video |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - | -26.5 LUFS (Good) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 329802 (v8), 379313 (v9) GeekBench: 1891 (v5.1) GFXBench: 19fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Umidigi F3 5G
- Significantly lower price point
- 5G connectivity for future-proofing
- Functional and capable for basic tasks
- Less powerful processor
- Likely inferior display quality
- Limited software support and updates
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
- Brighter and more vibrant display
- More powerful and efficient processor
- Samsung’s software ecosystem and support
- Higher price tag
- Charging speed could be faster given the price
- May be overkill for basic smartphone users
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 830 nits, compared to an assumed lower peak brightness on the Umidigi F3 5G (typical of its price bracket). While the Umidigi’s panel specifications are unavailable, the A53’s 'Infinite' contrast ratio (nominal) suggests a Super AMOLED panel, offering superior blacks and vibrant colors. This benefits content consumption and outdoor visibility. The A53’s display is likely to offer a smoother experience, even if both share a standard 60Hz refresh rate, due to superior panel quality and processing.
Camera Comparison
Both devices feature photo and video capabilities, but details are limited for the Umidigi F3 5G. The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G likely benefits from Samsung’s sophisticated image processing algorithms and potentially a larger main sensor (specifications unavailable for either). While the Umidigi may offer acceptable image quality in good lighting, the A53 is expected to deliver more consistent results across various conditions, particularly in low light. The presence of Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) on the A53, if equipped, would further enhance image and video stability.
Performance
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G’s Exynos 1280 (5nm) chipset offers a clear advantage over the Umidigi F3 5G’s MediaTek Dimensity 700 (7nm). The Exynos utilizes Cortex-A78 cores, which are architecturally superior to the A76 cores in the Dimensity 700, resulting in faster single-core performance. While both CPUs feature 6x Cortex-A55 efficiency cores, the 5nm fabrication process of the Exynos 1280 provides better power efficiency and thermal management, potentially leading to less throttling during sustained workloads. The A53 will handle demanding apps and multitasking more smoothly.
Battery Life
Both the Umidigi F3 5G and Samsung Galaxy A53 5G achieve an endurance rating of 113 hours, suggesting comparable overall battery life. However, the Samsung A53 5G supports 25W wired charging, significantly faster than the Umidigi F3 5G’s 18W charging. This translates to quicker top-ups, reducing downtime. While battery capacity isn't specified, the faster charging speed gives the A53 an edge in convenience.
Buying Guide
Buy the Umidigi F3 5G if you need a functional 5G smartphone at the lowest possible price and are comfortable with a less-refined software experience. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G if you prefer a brighter, more color-accurate display, a more powerful processor for smoother multitasking, and the peace of mind that comes with Samsung’s software support and ecosystem.