The mid-range smartphone market is fiercely competitive, and the vivo Y200 (India) and Samsung Galaxy A55 represent compelling options for users seeking a balance of features and affordability. This comparison dives deep into their core specifications, focusing on performance, display quality, battery life, and charging capabilities to determine which device offers the best value.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing all-day battery life and a brighter display, the Samsung Galaxy A55 is the stronger choice. However, the vivo Y200’s Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 offers a more efficient architecture, potentially leading to better sustained performance in demanding tasks despite a lower peak CPU clock speed.
| 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, 8, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 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 | 2023, October 23 | 2024, March 11 |
| Status | Available. Released 2023, October 23 | Available. Released 2024, March 15 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic frame, glass back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass Victus+), glass back (Gorilla Glass), aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 162.4 x 74.9 x 7.7 mm (6.39 x 2.95 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 | 190 g (6.70 oz) | 213 g (7.51 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass Victus+ |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~390 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~88.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.6 inches, 106.9 cm2 (~85.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (peak) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+, 1000 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (4x2.75 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM4375 Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 (6 nm) | Exynos 1480 (4 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 619 | Xclipse 530 |
| OS | Android 13, Funtouch 13 | Android 14, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 6.1 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | No | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | 64 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF, OIS
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Features | Ring-LED flash, panorama, HDR | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Triple | - | 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 | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, (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 | No | 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, 50% in 28 min
Reverse wired | 25W wired |
| Type | Li-Ion 4800 mAh | Li-Ion 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Jungle Green, Desert Gold | Iceblue, Lilac, Navy, Lemon |
| Models | V2307 | SM-A556V, SM-A556B, SM-A556B/DS, SM-A556E, SM-A556E/DS, SM-A5560 |
| Price | About 250 EUR | $ 324.99 / £ 251.50 / € 319.99 / ₹ 23,998 |
| SAR | 0.99 W/kg (head) 0.86 W/kg (body) | - |
| SAR EU | - | 0.68 W/kg (head) 1.04 W/kg (body) |
vivo Y200 (India)
- Faster 44W charging
- Potentially better thermal efficiency with 6nm Snapdragon
- More affordable price point (likely)
- Lower peak display brightness (estimated)
- Less established brand reputation
Samsung Galaxy A55
- Exceptional battery life (13:27h active use)
- Brighter 1010 nit display
- Stronger brand recognition and software support
- Slower 25W charging
- Exynos 1480 may throttle under sustained load
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A55 boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1010 nits peak brightness, making it far more usable in direct sunlight compared to the vivo Y200, which lacks published brightness data. While the Y200’s panel technology isn’t specified, Samsung’s Super AMOLED panels are known for vibrant colors and excellent contrast. The A55’s higher brightness is a clear advantage for outdoor visibility and HDR content consumption. We expect the A55 to have a higher quality panel overall.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specifications for the vivo Y200, a direct comparison is limited. However, Samsung typically excels in image processing, and the A55 likely benefits from this. The A55’s camera system likely prioritizes computational photography and image stabilization. The Y200’s camera performance will depend heavily on sensor size and image processing algorithms, which are currently unknown. We can assume the A55 will have a more refined camera experience.
Performance
The core performance difference lies in the chipsets: the Samsung Galaxy A55 utilizes the Exynos 1480 (4nm), while the vivo Y200 features the Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 (6nm). The Exynos 1480 has a higher peak CPU clock speed (4x2.75 GHz Cortex-A78) compared to the Y200’s (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A78). However, the 4nm process node of the Exynos 1480 doesn’t necessarily translate to superior efficiency; the 6nm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 could offer better thermal management and sustained performance under load. The A55’s CPU configuration suggests a stronger focus on burst performance, while the Y200 aims for consistent efficiency.
Battery Life
The Samsung Galaxy A55 demonstrates a clear advantage in battery life, achieving an active use score of 13 hours and 27 minutes. The vivo Y200’s battery capacity is not specified, but its 44W wired charging (50% in 28 minutes) is faster than the A55’s 25W charging. This means the Y200 can recover battery life more quickly, but the A55 offers significantly longer runtimes on a single charge. The A55’s efficiency is a key differentiator.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Y200 (India) if you prioritize a more power-efficient chipset for consistent performance during extended use and value fast charging. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A55 if you need exceptional battery endurance, a brighter and more visible display in outdoor conditions, and a more established brand ecosystem.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Exynos 1480 in the Galaxy A55 tend to overheat during prolonged gaming sessions?
While the Exynos 1480 is a capable chip, it's known to exhibit some thermal throttling under sustained heavy loads like extended gaming. Samsung's software optimizations help mitigate this, but users may experience frame rate drops after prolonged gameplay. The vivo Y200’s Snapdragon 4 Gen 1, with its 6nm process, may offer more consistent performance over longer periods.
❓ How significant is the charging speed difference between the 44W vivo Y200 and the 25W Samsung Galaxy A55 in real-world use?
The vivo Y200’s 44W charging is noticeably faster, reaching 50% charge in approximately 28 minutes. The Galaxy A55’s 25W charging will take considerably longer. While the A55’s superior battery life reduces the need for frequent top-ups, the Y200 provides a quicker solution when you need a rapid charge.
❓ Is the Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 in the vivo Y200 powerful enough for demanding games like PUBG or Call of Duty?
The Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 can handle PUBG and Call of Duty, but you’ll likely need to lower graphics settings to achieve smooth frame rates. It’s not a gaming powerhouse, but it’s sufficient for casual gaming. The Exynos 1480 in the A55 will offer a slightly better gaming experience at higher settings, but both phones are mid-range devices and won't match flagship performance.
