ZTE Blade 20 5G vs Samsung Galaxy A32 5G: A Deep Dive into Affordable 5G
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing display quality and a slightly more refined software experience, the Samsung Galaxy A32 5G emerges as the better choice. While both phones share the same Mediatek Dimensity 720 chipset, the A32 5G’s brighter display and established brand reputation provide a marginal advantage.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | ZTE Blade 20 5G | Samsung Galaxy A32 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 28, 41, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 78, 79 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat16 1024/75 Mbps, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| CDMA 800 & TD-SCDMA | 25, 41, 66, 71 SA/NSA/Sub6 - SM-A326U | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2020, November 05. Released 2021, February 20 | 2021, January 13 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2021, January 22 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 165.9 x 75.8 x 8.9 mm (6.53 x 2.98 x 0.35 in) | 164.2 x 76.1 x 9.1 mm (6.46 x 3.00 x 0.36 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 188 g (6.63 oz) | 205 g (7.23 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~269 ppi density) | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~270 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.52 inches, 102.6 cm2 (~81.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~81.6% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | TFT LCD, 60Hz (International), 90Hz (SM-A326U, SM-326DL only) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 720 (7 nm) | Mediatek Dimensity 720 (7 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC3 | Mali-G57 MC3 |
| OS | Android 10, MiFavor 10.5 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 13, One UI 5 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | LED flash, panorama, HDR | LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 48 MP, f/1.8, 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 | 16 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm, PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide) Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/120fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | - |
| Single | 8 MP | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio |
| 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 (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, compass |
| - | Virtual proximity sensing | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | Wired | 15W wired |
| Type | Li-Ion 4000 mAh | Li-Ion 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Gray, Blue | Awesome Black, Awesome White, Awesome Blue, Awesome Violet |
| Models | - | SM-A326B, SM-A326B/DS, SM-A326BR/DS, SM-A326BR, SM-A326U, SM-A326W, SM-A326U1, SM-A326K, SCG08, SM-S326DL |
| Price | About 220 EUR | € 111.89 / $ 78.64 / £ 77.53 |
| SAR EU | - | 0.33 W/kg (head) 1.08 W/kg (body) |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 123h |
| Camera | - | Photo / Video |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: 1470:1 (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - | -28.5 LUFS (Average) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 226561 (v8) GeekBench: 1673 (v5.1) |
ZTE Blade 20 5G
- Potentially lower price point
- 5G connectivity
- Mediatek Dimensity 720 chipset
- Unspecified charging wattage (likely slower)
- Less established brand reputation
- Potentially less refined software experience
Samsung Galaxy A32 5G
- Brighter display (497 nits)
- 15W wired charging
- More recognizable brand
- Slightly higher price
- Shares the same chipset as the ZTE
- Camera specs are not significantly better
Display Comparison
Both the ZTE Blade 20 5G and Samsung Galaxy A32 5G feature displays with similar contrast ratios – 1490:1 and 1470:1 respectively. However, the Samsung Galaxy A32 5G boasts a significantly brighter panel, reaching a measured 497 nits compared to an unspecified value for the ZTE. This higher peak brightness translates to better visibility outdoors under direct sunlight. While both likely utilize LCD technology given the price point, the A32 5G’s superior brightness makes it the more comfortable option for everyday use, especially for media consumption.
Camera Comparison
Both phones offer 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack detailed camera specifications in the provided data. Given the price bracket, we can expect similar sensor quality and image processing. The absence of information regarding sensor size or aperture makes a direct comparison difficult. It’s reasonable to assume both will struggle in low-light conditions. The inclusion of a 2MP macro camera on either device is likely a marketing tactic, offering limited practical benefit due to the small sensor size and lack of optical image stabilization (OIS).
Performance
At the heart of both devices lies the Mediatek Dimensity 720 (7nm) chipset, paired with an octa-core CPU configuration of 2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A76 and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This means performance will be largely identical for typical tasks like browsing, social media, and light gaming. Neither device specifies RAM speed, but given the target market, LPDDR4X is the likely standard. Thermal management will likely be adequate for the chipset’s capabilities, but sustained heavy workloads could lead to throttling. The real-world performance difference will be negligible for most users.
Battery Life
Both the ZTE Blade 20 5G and Samsung Galaxy A32 5G achieve an endurance rating of 123 hours, indicating comparable battery life under similar usage patterns. The Samsung Galaxy A32 5G supports 15W wired charging, while the ZTE Blade 20 5G only specifies 'Wired' charging without a wattage. This suggests a slower charging speed for the ZTE, meaning a longer time to reach a full charge. While both offer adequate battery life for a full day of moderate use, the A32 5G’s faster charging provides a convenience advantage.
Buying Guide
Buy the ZTE Blade 20 5G if you need a functional 5G device at the absolute lowest possible price point and are comfortable with a potentially less polished software experience. Buy the Samsung Galaxy A32 5G if you prefer a brighter, more vibrant display, a more recognizable brand, and a slightly longer-term software support commitment, even if it means paying a small premium.