The sub-₹15,000 (approximately €180) smartphone market in India is fiercely competitive. The vivo Y20s and Samsung Galaxy A12 (India variant) both aim to deliver essential smartphone functionality at an accessible price point. However, they take different approaches, with the Y20s leveraging Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 460 and the A12 opting for Samsung’s in-house Exynos 850. This comparison dissects these key differences to determine which device offers the best value.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing sustained performance and potentially smoother multitasking, the Samsung Galaxy A12 (India) is the better choice. Its Exynos 850, built on an 8nm process, offers a slight efficiency advantage over the Snapdragon 460’s 11nm node, translating to better thermal management during extended use. However, the Y20s offers a larger base storage option.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 38, 40, 41 | - |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, October 19. Released 2020, October 19 | 2021, August 12 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2021, August 12 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 164.4 x 76.3 x 8.4 mm (6.47 x 3.00 x 0.33 in) | 164 x 75.8 x 8.9 mm (6.46 x 2.98 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 192.3 g (6.77 oz) | 205 g (7.23 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~270 ppi density) | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~270 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.51 inches, 102.3 cm2 (~81.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~82.1% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | PLS LCD |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x1.8 GHz Kryo 240 & 4x1.6 GHz Kryo 240) | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM4250 Snapdragon 460 (11 nm) | Exynos 850 (8 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | Mali-G52 |
| OS | Android 10, Funtouch 10.5 or Funtouch 11 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 13, One UI 5.1 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | - | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 48 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), AF
5 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide)
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Triple | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Single | 8 MP, f/1.8, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.2 |
| Video | 1080p@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 | No |
| 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 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer |
| | - | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 15W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Purist Blue, Obsidian Black, Nebula Blue | Black, Blue, White |
| Models | - | SM-A127F, SM-A127F/DS |
| Price | About 200 EUR | About 160 EUR |
| SAR | - | 0.79 W/kg (head) |
| Pricing |
|---|
| 128GB 4GB RAM | € 264.40 | - |
| 128GB 8GB RAM | Rp 2,760,000 | - |
vivo Y20s
- Faster 18W charging
- Option for 8GB of RAM for improved multitasking
- 128GB base storage option
- Less efficient Snapdragon 460 (11nm)
- Potentially more thermal throttling under sustained load
Samsung Galaxy A12 (India)
- More efficient Exynos 850 (8nm)
- Potentially better thermal management
- Samsung’s brand recognition and software support
- Slower 15W charging
- Base storage option may be smaller
Display Comparison
Neither device boasts a particularly standout display. Specifics like panel type (IPS LCD is assumed for both) and resolution are not provided, but both target the budget segment. The focus here is on processor efficiency, not display fidelity. Bezels are likely comparable, typical of this price range. Color accuracy is expected to be standard for budget phones, leaning towards warmer tones for wider appeal.
Camera Comparison
Camera performance is likely to be similar, with both phones targeting basic photography needs. Details on sensor sizes and apertures are missing, but the focus will be on the main sensor. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on both devices is largely a marketing tactic, offering limited practical benefit due to the low resolution. Image processing will likely differ, with Samsung leaning towards more saturated colors and vivo potentially aiming for a more natural look. Without detailed specs, it’s difficult to declare a clear winner.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Samsung Galaxy A12’s Exynos 850 (8nm) has a theoretical advantage over the vivo Y20s’ Snapdragon 460 (11nm). The smaller fabrication process generally translates to better power efficiency and potentially lower heat generation. While both CPUs are octa-core, the Exynos 850 utilizes Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz, while the Snapdragon 460 uses Kryo 240 cores with a split clock speed (1.8 GHz & 1.6 GHz). This suggests the Exynos 850 may offer slightly better single-core performance. The Y20s offers a RAM advantage with an 8GB option, which will benefit multitasking, but the Exynos 850's efficiency will likely offset this in many scenarios.
Battery Life
The Samsung Galaxy A12 supports 15W wired charging, while the vivo Y20s offers 18W. While 18W is faster on paper, the Exynos 850’s efficiency may allow the A12 to achieve comparable real-world charging times. Battery capacity is not specified, but both are likely in the 4000-5000 mAh range. The Exynos 850’s efficiency could translate to slightly longer battery life during moderate usage.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Y20s if you need a phone with 128GB of storage as a baseline and prefer Qualcomm’s Snapdragon ecosystem. This is ideal for users who heavily rely on offline media or apps. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A12 (India) if you prioritize a more efficient processor for everyday tasks and anticipate moderate multitasking. The Exynos 850 provides a smoother experience for social media, browsing, and light gaming.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Exynos 850 in the Galaxy A12 overheat during prolonged gaming sessions?
The Exynos 850, built on an 8nm process, is generally more efficient than the Snapdragon 460. While it won't deliver flagship-level gaming performance, it's less prone to overheating during extended gaming sessions compared to the Y20s, offering a more consistent frame rate over time.
❓ Is the 2MP macro camera on either phone actually useful for taking detailed close-up photos?
Unfortunately, the 2MP macro cameras on both the vivo Y20s and Samsung Galaxy A12 are largely marketing features. The low resolution results in images lacking detail and sharpness. They are best avoided in favor of the main camera.
❓ Can the Samsung Galaxy A12 (India) handle PUBG Mobile at 60fps with smooth graphics?
The Exynos 850 can likely run PUBG Mobile at smooth graphics and medium frame rates (around 30-40fps). Achieving a consistent 60fps with smooth graphics is unlikely, as the chipset is not powerful enough for that sustained performance. Lowering the graphics settings will improve frame rates.
❓ What type of charging protocol does the vivo Y20s support, and how long does it take to fully charge?
The vivo Y20s supports 18W wired charging using a standard USB-C port. While the exact 0-100% charging time isn't officially specified, it's estimated to take around 2-2.5 hours, depending on usage during charging. It does *not* support fast charging standards like Quick Charge or Power Delivery.
