vivo V40 Lite vs Samsung Galaxy A55: A Deep Dive into Mid-Range Contenders
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing sustained performance and a brighter, more vibrant display, the Samsung Galaxy A55 emerges as the stronger choice. Its Exynos 1480 offers a noticeable CPU performance edge, and the 1010 nit display provides superior outdoor visibility. However, the vivo V40 Lite’s faster 44W charging is a significant advantage for those who value quick top-ups.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo V40 Lite | Samsung Galaxy A55 |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 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, 26, 28, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 26, 28, 66, 75, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2024, July 14 | 2024, March 11 |
| Status | Available. Released 2024, July 14 | Available. Released 2024, March 15 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic frame, glass back or plastic back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass Victus+), glass back (Gorilla Glass), aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 164.4 x 74.8 x 7.7 mm (6.47 x 2.94 x 0.30 in) | 161.1 x 77.4 x 8.2 mm (6.34 x 3.05 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + eSIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM + eSIM (max 2 at a time) |
| Weight | 179 g or 188 g (6.31 oz) | 213 g (7.51 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass Victus+ |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~388 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~390 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.78 inches, 111.0 cm2 (~90.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.6 inches, 106.9 cm2 (~85.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, 1300 nits (peak) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+, 1000 nits (HBM) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.2 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (4x2.75 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6450 Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 (4 nm) | Exynos 1480 (4 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 710 | Xclipse 530 |
| OS | Android 14, Funtouch 14 | Android 14, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 6.1 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Ring-LED flash, panorama, HDR | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Triple | 50 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/1.95", 0.8µm, PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm 2 MP (macro) | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/1.56", 1.0µm, PDAF, OIS 12 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.06", 1.12µm 5 MP (macro) |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.74", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes (market/region dependent) | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS, BDS, QZSS |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 44W wired, PD Reverse wired | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Ion 5500 mAh | Li-Ion 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Classy Brown, Dreamy White | Iceblue, Lilac, Navy, Lemon |
| Models | - | SM-A556V, SM-A556B, SM-A556B/DS, SM-A556E, SM-A556E/DS, SM-A5560 |
| Price | $ 127.08 | $ 324.99 / £ 251.50 / € 319.99 / ₹ 23,998 |
| SAR EU | 0.99 W/kg (head) 1.18 W/kg (body) | 0.68 W/kg (head) 1.04 W/kg (body) |
vivo V40 Lite
- Faster 44W charging for quick top-ups
- Potentially lower price point
- Efficient Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 chipset for everyday tasks
- Likely less powerful CPU and GPU
- Potentially lower display brightness and quality
- Camera performance may lag behind the A55
Samsung Galaxy A55
- Brighter and more vibrant display (1010 nits)
- More powerful Exynos 1480 processor
- Longer battery life during active use (13:27h)
- Slower 25W charging
- Potentially higher price
- May experience more heat under sustained load
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A55 boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1010 nits, compared to an assumed lower peak brightness for the vivo V40 Lite (typical of its price bracket). This translates to superior visibility under direct sunlight. While the V40 Lite’s panel technology isn’t specified, the A55 likely utilizes a Super AMOLED panel known for its vibrant colors and deep blacks. The absence of LTPO technology on either device suggests neither offers adaptive refresh rate capabilities for optimal power efficiency, but the A55’s higher peak brightness is a clear advantage.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specifications for the vivo V40 Lite, a direct comparison is challenging. However, Samsung typically focuses on image processing and computational photography, potentially giving the A55 an edge in dynamic range and low-light performance. The A55 likely features Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) on its main sensor, a feature often absent in this price segment, resulting in sharper images and smoother videos. The inclusion of a 2MP macro camera on the V40 Lite is likely a marketing feature with limited practical benefit, as image quality is often subpar. The A55’s larger main sensor (assumed, based on Samsung’s typical implementation) will capture more light and detail.
Performance
The Samsung Galaxy A55’s Exynos 1480, with its 4x2.75 GHz Cortex-A78 cores, demonstrably outperforms the vivo V40 Lite’s Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 (4x2.2 GHz Cortex-A78). While both chipsets are built on a 4nm process, the higher clock speeds of the Exynos 1480 translate to faster application loading times and smoother multitasking. Both devices utilize Cortex-A55 cores for efficiency, but the A55’s CPU advantage will be most noticeable in graphically intensive games and demanding applications. The V40 Lite’s Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 prioritizes efficiency, making it suitable for everyday tasks, but will likely exhibit more throttling under sustained load.
Battery Life
The Samsung Galaxy A55’s active use score of 13:27h demonstrates impressive battery endurance. While the V40 Lite’s battery capacity is unknown, the A55’s efficiency and optimized software contribute to its longevity. The V40 Lite compensates with 44W wired charging, significantly faster than the A55’s 25W charging. This means the V40 Lite can replenish its battery much quicker, potentially mitigating any capacity disadvantage. A full charge on the V40 Lite is expected to take under an hour, while the A55 will likely require over 1.5 hours.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo V40 Lite if you prioritize fast charging and a lower upfront cost, and your usage primarily revolves around everyday tasks like social media, messaging, and light web browsing. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A55 if you value a brighter, more color-accurate display, smoother performance in demanding applications, and longer battery life during active use, even if it means sacrificing charging speed.