The mid-range smartphone market is fiercely competitive, and the vivo Y75 and Samsung Galaxy A53 5G represent compelling options for users seeking a balance of features and affordability. While both aim to deliver a solid all-around experience, they take different approaches to achieving it. This comparison dives deep into their specifications to reveal which device best suits your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing a brighter, more visually appealing display and established brand reliability, the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G is the better choice. However, the vivo Y75’s significantly faster 44W charging and potentially more efficient chipset offer a compelling alternative for those who value quick top-ups and sustained performance.
| 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, 38, 40, 41 | 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 | 2022, May 21 | 2022, March 17 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022, May 21 | Available. Released 2022, March 24 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, glass back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 160.9 x 74.3 x 7.4 mm (6.33 x 2.93 x 0.29 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 |
| Weight | 172 g (6.07 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 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.44 inches, 100.1 cm2 (~83.8% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~85.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6781 Helio G96 (12 nm) | Exynos 1280 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC2 | Mali-G68 |
| OS | Android 12, Funtouch 12 | Android 12, up to 4 major Android upgrades, One UI 8 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | Dual-LED dual-tone 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 | 44 MP, f/2.0, (wide), AF | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Triple | 50 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚, 16mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
2 MP (macro) | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 44 MP, f/2.0, (wide), AF | 32 MP, f/2.2, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | No |
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| | 24-bit/192kHz audio | - |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.2, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| USB | USB Type-C, 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 (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer (market/region dependent) |
| | - | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 44W wired, 65% in 30 min | 25W wired |
| Type | 4050 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Moonlight Shadow, Dancing Waves | Black, White, Blue, Peach |
| Models | - | 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 240 EUR | $ 151.42 / £ 185.00 / € 169.14 |
| SAR | 1.03 W/kg (head) 0.66 W/kg (body) | 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 Y75
- Faster 44W charging significantly reduces downtime.
- Potentially more efficient chipset (Helio G96) could lead to better sustained performance.
- Competitive price point offers excellent value.
- Less established brand reputation compared to Samsung.
- Display brightness likely lower than the Galaxy A53 5G.
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
- Brighter 830 nit display for superior outdoor visibility.
- More powerful Exynos 1280 chipset for smoother performance.
- Samsung’s established brand and software support.
- Slower 25W charging.
- Potentially more thermal throttling under heavy load.
Display Comparison
The Samsung Galaxy A53 5G boasts a notably brighter display, reaching a measured peak of 830 nits. This translates to superior visibility outdoors under direct sunlight compared to the vivo Y75, whose brightness is not specified but is likely lower. While the A53’s contrast ratio is listed as ‘Infinite’ (nominal), this is typical marketing language; the real-world benefit is a punchier image. The Y75’s display specs are less detailed, making a direct comparison of color accuracy and panel technology difficult, but it likely targets a similar target audience with a focus on value.
Camera Comparison
Both devices offer photo and video capabilities, but detailed camera specifications are limited. The absence of sensor size information makes a direct comparison challenging. However, the A53’s brand reputation suggests a more refined image processing pipeline. The Y75 likely relies on software enhancements to compensate for potentially less capable hardware. It's reasonable to assume the A53 will deliver more consistent results in challenging lighting conditions. The inclusion of a 2MP macro camera on the Y75 is a common, but often underwhelming, feature in this price segment.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets: the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G utilizes the Exynos 1280 (5nm), while the vivo Y75 is powered by the MediaTek Helio G96 (12nm). The 5nm fabrication process of the Exynos 1280 offers superior power efficiency and thermal performance compared to the 12nm Helio G96. The A53’s CPU features 2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 cores, providing a performance edge over the Y75’s 2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 cores. Both utilize 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 efficiency cores. While both phones are capable of handling everyday tasks, the A53 is better equipped for demanding games and multitasking. The Y75 may show more throttling under sustained load.
Battery Life
Both the vivo Y75 and Samsung Galaxy A53 5G achieve an endurance rating of 113 hours, suggesting similar overall battery life. However, the charging speeds differ significantly. The Y75 supports 44W wired charging, capable of reaching 65% charge in just 30 minutes. The A53 5G is limited to 25W charging, resulting in a considerably slower charging time. This difference is crucial for users who prioritize convenience and quick top-ups. While the A53’s battery capacity isn’t specified, the similar endurance rating suggests it’s optimized for efficiency.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Y75 if you need a phone that can rapidly recharge – its 44W charging is a significant advantage over the A53’s 25W. This makes it ideal for users who frequently find themselves needing a quick power boost. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G if you prefer a brighter, more vibrant display for media consumption and a more polished software experience backed by Samsung’s extensive update commitment.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Exynos 1280 in the Galaxy A53 5G tend to overheat during prolonged gaming sessions?
The Exynos 1280 is known to exhibit some thermal throttling under sustained heavy load, such as extended gaming. While it won't shut down, you may experience a slight drop in frame rates after 30-45 minutes of intensive gameplay. The 5nm process helps mitigate this, but it's still a factor to consider.
❓ Is the 2MP macro camera on the vivo Y75 actually useful for taking detailed close-up photos?
Generally, 2MP macro cameras on budget phones offer limited detail and image quality. They often struggle with sharpness and dynamic range. While they can be fun to experiment with, don't expect professional-level macro photography. The primary camera on the Y75 will likely deliver far superior results even when cropping in.
❓ Can the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G reliably maintain 60fps in demanding games like PUBG Mobile?
The Galaxy A53 5G can generally maintain 60fps in PUBG Mobile with medium to high graphics settings. However, achieving consistently smooth performance at the highest settings may require reducing the frame rate or graphics quality to avoid frame drops. The Exynos 1280 is capable, but not a dedicated gaming chipset.
❓ How long does it *actually* take to fully charge the vivo Y75 from 0% to 100% with the 44W charger?
While vivo claims 65% in 30 minutes, a full 0-100% charge on the Y75 with the 44W charger is estimated to take around 60-70 minutes. This is still significantly faster than the Galaxy A53 5G's 25W charging, which can take over 90 minutes for a full charge.
