Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs. vivo Y33: A Detailed Comparison for Budget-Conscious Buyers
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is the superior choice, offering a significantly more powerful processor and a brighter, more vibrant display. However, the vivo Y33 presents a compelling option for those prioritizing affordability and basic functionality, especially if 5G isn't a necessity.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo Y33 | Samsung Galaxy A53 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66 | 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 / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| - | 2, 5, 48, 66, 77, 78, 260, 261 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - SM-A536V | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2021, October 04 | 2022, March 17 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, October 04 | Available. Released 2022, March 24 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic frame, plastic back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 164 x 75.5 x 8.4 mm (6.46 x 2.97 x 0.33 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 + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 191 g (6.74 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 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~401 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.58 inches, 104.3 cm2 (~84.2% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~85.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6769V/CU Helio G80 (12 nm) | Exynos 1280 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G52 MC2 | Mali-G68 |
| OS | Android 11, Funtouch 11.1 | Android 12, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 8 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | LED 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 | - | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Triple | 48 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), PDAF 2 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | 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 Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer (market/region dependent) |
| - | Virtual proximity sensing | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired, 70% in 66 min | 25W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black, Light Blue | Black, White, Blue, Peach |
| Models | V2057 | 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 270 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 Y33
- Significantly more powerful Exynos 1280 processor
- Brighter and more vibrant display with superior contrast
- Faster 25W charging
- 5G connectivity for future-proofing
- Higher price point
- Potential for Exynos 1280 throttling under sustained load (though 5nm helps)
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
- More affordable price
- Decent battery life (113h endurance)
- Sufficient for basic smartphone tasks
- Lightweight and easy to handle
- Less powerful Helio G80 processor
- Slower 18W charging
- Likely lower-quality display
- No 5G connectivity
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured peak of 830 nits, compared to an unspecified brightness for the vivo Y33. This difference is crucial for outdoor visibility. While the Y33’s panel type isn’t specified, the A53’s likely Super AMOLED panel offers superior contrast – Samsung claims an 'Infinite' contrast ratio – and color accuracy. The A53’s larger screen size (typically 6.5 inches vs. the Y33’s 6.58 inches) isn’t a major difference, but the overall viewing experience favors the Samsung.
Camera Comparison
Both phones offer photo and video capabilities, but details are limited. The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G likely benefits from Samsung’s image processing expertise and potentially a larger main sensor (typical for the A-series). The vivo Y33’s camera specs are less clear, and it likely relies on software enhancements to compensate for potentially lower-quality hardware. It's reasonable to assume the A53 will deliver superior image quality, especially in low-light conditions, and more versatile video recording options. The presence of OIS (Optical Image Stabilization) on the A53, a common feature in Samsung's A-series, would further enhance image and video stability.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is powered by the Exynos 1280 (5nm), featuring a more modern CPU architecture with 2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 cores and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This contrasts with the vivo Y33’s MediaTek Helio G80 (12nm) with 2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. The 5nm fabrication process of the Exynos 1280 translates to better power efficiency and sustained performance, reducing the likelihood of thermal throttling during demanding tasks. The A53’s CPU architecture is also more advanced, leading to faster single-core and multi-core performance.
Battery Life
Both devices share an endurance rating of 113 hours, suggesting comparable battery life under similar usage scenarios. However, the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G supports 25W wired charging, significantly faster than the vivo Y33’s 18W charging. This means the A53 can replenish its battery more quickly – from 0% to 70% in approximately 66 minutes for the Y33, and likely faster for the A53. While the mAh capacity isn’t specified for either device, the faster charging speed of the A53 provides a practical advantage for users who need to quickly top up their battery.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Y33 if you need a reliable smartphone for everyday tasks like calling, texting, and social media, and your budget is strictly limited. You'll appreciate its simplicity and affordability. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G if you prioritize performance for gaming and multitasking, demand a brighter and more visually appealing display, and want the future-proofing of 5G connectivity, even if it means a higher upfront cost.