The vivo S1 and Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW represent compelling options in the increasingly crowded mid-range 5G smartphone market. While both aim to deliver 5G connectivity at a relatively accessible price point, they take distinctly different approaches to achieving this, particularly in their core processing power and overall feature set. This comparison dissects these differences to help you determine which device best suits your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing consistent performance and future-proofing, the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW emerges as the stronger choice. Its Snapdragon 765G chipset, built on a more efficient 7nm process, offers a noticeable advantage in both CPU and GPU performance, despite the vivo S1's slightly faster clock speeds on certain cores. However, the vivo S1 presents a compelling value proposition for those on a tighter budget.
| 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 - Asia | 2, 4, 5, 13, 66 |
| 5G bands | - | 260, 261 mmWave |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (2CA) Cat6 300/150 Mbps | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| | 1, 3, 5, 8, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 - China | - |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2019, July 17. Released 2019, July | 2020, August 14 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2020, August 14 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic back, aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 159.5 x 75.2 x 8.1 mm (6.28 x 2.96 x 0.32 in) | 158.8 x 73.4 x 8.6 mm (6.25 x 2.89 x 0.34 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM (pre-installed) |
| Weight | 179 g (6.31 oz) | 188.8 g (6.67 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~404 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.38 inches, 99.9 cm2 (~83.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~87.5% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | Super AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| | Always-on display | - |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.7 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Prime & 1x2.2 GHz Kryo 475 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6768 Helio P65 (12 nm) | Qualcomm SM7250 Snapdragon 765G 5G (7 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G52 MC2 | Adreno 620 |
| OS | Android 9.0 (Pie), Funtouch 9 | Android 10, One UI 2 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | eMMC 5.1 | UFS 2.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 48 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
12 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide)
5 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Single | - | 5 MP, AF |
| Triple | 16 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.8", 1.12µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/120fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm | 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 |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio, RDS, recording |
| USB | microUSB 2.0, 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 (under display, optical), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| | - | ANT+ |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 15W wired |
| Stand-by | - | Up to 672 h |
| Talk time | - | Up to 5 h |
| Type | 4500 mAh, non-removable | Li-Po 4500 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Diamond Black, Skyline Blue, Cosmic Green | Prism Bricks Blue |
| Models | 1907, V1907, 1907_19, V1913A | SM-A516V |
| Price | About 230 EUR | About 470 EUR |
| SAR | - | 0.70 W/kg (head) 1.25 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.59 W/kg (head) 1.32 W/kg (body) |
| Pricing |
|---|
| 128GB 4GB RAM | ₹ 17,200 | - |
| 128GB 6GB RAM | ₹ 17,200 | - |
| 64GB 6GB RAM | ₹ 17,990 | - |
vivo S1
- Faster 18W charging
- Potentially lower price point
- Adequate performance for basic tasks
- Less powerful chipset (Helio P65)
- Less efficient 12nm process
- Potentially limited software support
Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW
- More powerful and efficient Snapdragon 765G
- 7nm process for better battery life
- Potentially better camera image processing
- Slower 15W charging
- Likely higher price point
- Samsung’s software bloat can be a concern
Display Comparison
Neither device boasts a particularly standout display. While specific display specs (resolution, panel type) are missing for the vivo S1, the A51 5G UW’s display is likely a standard FHD+ AMOLED panel, typical for the segment. The key difference lies in the underlying processing power impacting UI smoothness. The Snapdragon 765G’s superior GPU can contribute to a more fluid scrolling experience. Bezels are likely comparable, given the similar target price points, and color accuracy will depend heavily on software calibration, a known strength for Samsung.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specifications for the vivo S1, a direct comparison is limited. However, both phones likely feature a multi-camera setup with a primary sensor, ultrawide, and depth sensor. The Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW benefits from Qualcomm’s image signal processor (ISP) within the Snapdragon 765G, which offers advanced features like improved noise reduction and dynamic range. The A51 5G UW’s image processing is generally known for vibrant, saturated colors, while the vivo S1’s processing style is likely more natural. The presence of Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) on the A51 5G UW, if equipped, would be a significant advantage for low-light photography.
Performance
The performance gap is the most significant differentiator. The Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, fabricated on a 7nm process, offers a substantial architectural advantage over the vivo S1’s MediaTek Helio P65 (12nm). The 765G’s Kryo CPU cores – Prime, Gold, and Silver – provide a more balanced and efficient performance profile. While the Helio P65’s Cortex-A75 cores reach 2.0 GHz, the Snapdragon 765G’s Kryo 475 Prime core at 2.4 GHz, coupled with the more advanced process node, translates to faster application loading times and smoother multitasking. The 765G also features a more capable Adreno 620 GPU, providing a better gaming experience.
Battery Life
The Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW’s 15W charging is slower than the vivo S1’s 18W wired charging. However, the Snapdragon 765G’s 7nm process is significantly more power-efficient than the Helio P65’s 12nm process. This efficiency translates to longer battery life under similar usage scenarios, potentially offsetting the slower charging speed. Real-world 0-100% charge times will vary, but the vivo S1 will likely charge faster, while the A51 5G UW will likely last longer on a single charge.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo S1 if you need a functional 5G smartphone with adequate performance for everyday tasks and prioritize maximizing value for your money. It's ideal for users who primarily browse the web, use social media, and occasionally play less demanding games. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G UW if you prefer a smoother, more responsive experience, especially when multitasking or playing graphically intensive games, and value the benefits of a more efficient chipset and potentially better software support.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Helio P65 in the vivo S1 struggle with demanding games like PUBG Mobile?
The Helio P65 can run PUBG Mobile, but you'll likely need to lower the graphics settings to achieve a consistently smooth frame rate. The Snapdragon 765G in the A51 5G UW offers a significantly better gaming experience, allowing for higher settings and more stable performance.
❓ How does the Snapdragon 765G's 5G performance compare to the Helio P65's 5G capabilities?
Both chipsets support 5G, but the Snapdragon 765G generally offers more robust 5G connectivity and wider band support. This translates to potentially faster and more reliable 5G speeds, especially in areas with varying 5G network infrastructure.
❓ Is the 18W charging on the vivo S1 a significant advantage over the A51 5G UW's 15W charging?
While 18W is faster, the difference in charging speed isn't massive. The A51 5G UW’s superior power efficiency means it may not require as frequent charging, mitigating the impact of the slower charging speed. Expect roughly 30-60 minutes difference in full charge times.
