The vivo Y51 (2020) and Samsung Galaxy A31 represent compelling options in the crowded budget smartphone market. Both aim to deliver essential features at an accessible price point, but they diverge in their core hardware choices. This comparison dissects the differences between the Qualcomm Snapdragon 665-powered vivo Y51 and the MediaTek Helio P65-equipped Samsung Galaxy A31, focusing on real-world performance implications and user experience.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing consistent performance and slightly faster charging, the vivo Y51 (2020) emerges as the better choice. While both phones offer similar battery endurance, the Snapdragon 665 generally provides a smoother experience in demanding applications, despite the Helio P65's 12nm process.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 - SM-A315F |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 40 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 38, 40, 41 - SM-A315F |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, December 03. Released 2020, December 07 | 2020, March 24. Released 2020, April 27 |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Dimensions | 163.9 x 75.3 x 8.4 mm (6.45 x 2.96 x 0.33 in) | 159.3 x 73.1 x 8.6 mm (6.27 x 2.88 x 0.34 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 188 g (6.63 oz) | 185 g (6.53 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 1080 x 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~401 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~411 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.58 inches, 104.3 cm2 (~84.5% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.4 inches, 98.9 cm2 (~84.9% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.7 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SDM665 Snapdragon 665 (11 nm) | Mediatek MT6768 Helio P65 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | Mali-G52 MC2 |
| OS | Android 11, Funtouch 11 | Android 10, upgradable to Android 12, One UI 4.1 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 48 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 123˚, (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
5 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Triple | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚, (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
2 MP (macro) | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | - |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/3.06" 1.0µm | 20 MP, f/2.2, (wide) |
| 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 | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio, RDS, recording |
| 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 |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired, 70% in 67 min | 15W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Titanium Sapphire, Crystal Symphony | Prism Crush Black, Prism Crush Blue, Prism Crush Red, Prism Crush White |
| Models | V2030 | SM-A315F, SM-A315F/DS, SM-A315G/DS, SM-A315G, SM-A315N |
| Price | About 210 EUR | £ 139.00 / € 138.27 |
| SAR EU | - | 0.49 W/kg (head) 1.68 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 124h |
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-30.9 LUFS (Below average) |
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 151815 (v8)
GeekBench: 5096 (v4.4), 1216 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 7fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
vivo Y51 (2020, December)
- Faster 18W charging
- Generally better CPU/GPU performance with Snapdragon 665
- Potentially smoother multitasking
- Display brightness likely lower than Galaxy A31
- Camera details are unknown
Samsung Galaxy A31
- Brighter 635 nit display for outdoor use
- Samsung’s software optimizations
- Comparable battery endurance
- Slower 15W charging
- Helio P65 may struggle with demanding tasks
- Potentially less efficient chipset
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A31 boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 635 nits, compared to the unspecified brightness of the vivo Y51. This makes the A31 more usable in direct sunlight. While both displays are likely LCD panels, Samsung’s ‘Infinite’ contrast ratio suggests a more aggressive dynamic contrast implementation. However, without knowing the vivo Y51’s panel characteristics, it’s difficult to assess color accuracy or viewing angles. The A31’s brightness advantage is a key differentiator for outdoor users.
Camera Comparison
Both phones feature 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but detailed camera specifications are lacking. Without sensor size or aperture information, a direct comparison is challenging. However, given the market positioning, it’s likely both rely on similar-tier sensors. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on both devices suggests limited utility, as these sensors typically lack the resolution and quality for truly detailed macro shots. Image processing will likely be the differentiating factor, with Samsung’s software often prioritizing vibrant colors and contrast.
Performance
The chipset choice is the core battleground. The vivo Y51 utilizes the Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, fabricated on an 11nm process, featuring a Kryo CPU architecture. The Samsung Galaxy A31 counters with the MediaTek Helio P65, built on a more refined 12nm process. While the Helio P65 has a slightly different CPU core configuration (2x Cortex-A75 and 6x Cortex-A55 vs. the SD665’s 4x Kryo 260 Gold and 4x Kryo 260 Silver), the Snapdragon 665 generally exhibits better sustained performance and GPU capabilities. This translates to smoother multitasking and a more responsive gaming experience on the vivo Y51. The 12nm process of the Helio P65 *should* offer better efficiency, but Qualcomm’s optimizations often compensate for the larger node size.
Battery Life
Both the vivo Y51 and Samsung Galaxy A31 achieve an endurance rating of 124 hours, indicating comparable battery life under similar usage conditions. However, the vivo Y51 offers faster charging at 18W, achieving 70% charge in 67 minutes, while the Galaxy A31 is limited to 15W. This means the Y51 can top up more quickly, reducing downtime. The similar endurance ratings suggest that despite the different chipsets, power consumption is relatively balanced.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Y51 (2020, December) if you need a phone that handles everyday tasks and light gaming with relative ease, and appreciate a slightly quicker charging cycle. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A31 if you prioritize a brighter display for outdoor visibility and are less concerned with peak performance, or if you are heavily invested in the Samsung ecosystem.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the MediaTek Helio P65 in the Galaxy A31 tend to overheat during prolonged gaming sessions?
While the Helio P65's 12nm process is more efficient than some older chips, it's still prone to thermal throttling under sustained load. Expect performance to dip after 30-45 minutes of demanding games. The Snapdragon 665 in the vivo Y51 is generally better at maintaining consistent performance over longer periods.
❓ Is the 18W charging on the vivo Y51 significantly faster in real-world use compared to the Galaxy A31's 15W charging?
Yes, the 18W charging on the vivo Y51 is noticeably faster. The advertised 70% charge in 67 minutes is a substantial improvement over the Galaxy A31's slower charging speed. This can be a significant convenience for users who frequently need to top up their battery quickly.
❓ How does the image processing differ between the vivo Y51 and the Samsung Galaxy A31?
Samsung's image processing typically emphasizes vibrant colors and increased contrast, often resulting in photos that appear more visually appealing at first glance. Vivo's processing tends to be more natural, aiming for greater accuracy. The preferred style is subjective, but Samsung's approach is generally more popular with casual users.
