Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs. vivo V23e: A Detailed Comparison of Mid-Range Contenders
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing long-term performance and a brighter display, the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is the better choice. Its Exynos 1280 chipset, despite slower charging, offers a noticeable performance advantage over the vivo V23e’s Helio G96, making it more capable for demanding tasks and future software updates.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo V23e | Samsung Galaxy A53 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 14, 20, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 48, 66 - SM-A536U |
| 5G bands | - | 2, 5, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536U |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| CDMA 800 | 2, 5, 48, 66, 77, 78, 260, 261 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536V | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2021, November 09 | 2022, March 17 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, November 09 | Available. Released 2022, March 24 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 160.9 x 74.3 x 7.4 mm (6.33 x 2.93 x 0.29 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 | 172 g (6.07 oz) | 189 g (6.67 oz) |
| - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.44 inches, 100.1 cm2 (~83.8% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~85.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6781 Helio G96 (12 nm) | Exynos 1280 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC2 | Mali-G68 |
| OS | Android 11, Funtouch 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, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Dual-LED dual-tone 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 | 50 MP, f/2.0, (wide), AF | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Triple | 64 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚, 16mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm 2 MP (macro) | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 50 MP, f/2.0, (wide), AF | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | No |
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| 24-bit/192kHz audio | - | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.2, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | No | 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 (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer (market/region dependent) |
| - | Virtual proximity sensing | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 44W wired, 69% in 30 min | 25W wired |
| Type | 4050 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black, Aurora | 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 | About 330 EUR | $ 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) |
vivo V23e
- Superior performance with the Exynos 1280 chipset
- Brighter and more vibrant display (830 nits)
- More efficient 5nm process for better battery life and thermal management
- Slower 25W charging compared to the V23e
- Potentially higher price point
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
- Extremely fast 44W charging (69% in 30 minutes)
- Sleek and lightweight design
- Competitive price
- Less powerful Helio G96 chipset
- Potentially lower display brightness and color accuracy
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured peak of 830 nits, compared to an unstated value for the V23e. This translates to superior visibility outdoors. While both likely utilize AMOLED panels, Samsung’s ‘Infinite’ contrast ratio suggests deeper blacks and more vibrant colors. The A53’s larger screen size (typically 6.5 inches vs. the V23e’s 6.44 inches) also contributes to a more immersive viewing experience. The absence of refresh rate data for the V23e suggests it may not match the A53’s smooth scrolling.
Camera Comparison
Both phones offer photo and video capabilities, but details are limited. The A53 5G likely benefits from Samsung’s established image processing algorithms and potentially a larger main sensor (typical for Samsung A-series). While the V23e may offer unique camera features, the A53’s overall image quality and video stabilization are likely superior. The presence of Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) on the A53 (a common feature in this price range) would further enhance low-light performance and video smoothness, a feature likely absent on the V23e.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G’s Exynos 1280, fabricated on a 5nm process, offers a clear advantage in efficiency and performance over the vivo V23e’s 12nm Mediatek Helio G96. The A53’s CPU configuration – 2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 cores and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores – is architecturally superior to the V23e’s 2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 setup. This means faster app loading, smoother multitasking, and better gaming performance on the A53. The 5nm process also means less heat generation under sustained load, reducing throttling.
Battery Life
Both devices share an endurance rating of 113 hours, suggesting comparable battery life despite differing charging speeds. However, the A53 5G’s more efficient Exynos 1280 chipset likely contributes to better real-world battery performance under heavy use. The V23e’s 44W charging is significantly faster than the A53 5G’s 25W, achieving 69% charge in 30 minutes. This is a major advantage for users who prioritize quick top-ups, but the A53’s efficiency may offset the slower charging in daily use.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo V23e if you prioritize extremely fast charging – its 44W capability significantly outperforms the A53 5G’s 25W. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G if you value sustained performance, a brighter and more visible display in sunlight (830 nits), and a chipset built on a more efficient 5nm process, ensuring better thermal management and longevity.