Samsung Galaxy A52 vs Google Pixel 4a - Which is Better? By PhoneArena

So, the Pixel 4a happened, and so did its sales. People were initially excited about the lower cost of what could be a clean, android user experience, and the phone was frankly also exciting for the photos it could offer at a lower cost, but a new player has already stuck within its bounce, and that is the new Samsung Galaxy a52. Now both of these two devices offer a seemingly good user experience at a similar price, and I'd be a fool not to compare them so hello. There guys my name is Vic here from phone arena in terms of design, I'm personally more of a fan of the pixel, since it's smaller with a 6.2 inch footprint, while the galaxy a52 is around 6.5 inches but in terms of overall feel in hand both are similar, and that is to say that they're, both of average weight and made of plastic. The galaxy is met. Much like the pixel.

This year around, both the pixel and galaxy a52 are with OLED panels with gorgeous colors, but the former is limited to 60 hertz as a refresh rate, whereas the a52 is capable of the 90 hertz. We've come to expect from new devices. This makes the new Samsung device feel awesomely smooth in day-to-day tasks, while the pixel seems to be kind of subpar. Otherwise, in terms of sharpness, both devices are perfect. The pixel is with a 1080 by 2340 pixel resolution, and the a52 is, with almost the same resolution of 1080 by 2400 pixels performance wise.

We do have a difference in favor of the galaxy a52. It comes equipped with a snapdragon 720 g versus the 730g in the Pixel 4a, but there's a pretty negligible difference between both. You won't notice, too much stuttering or anything on these two devices unless you're coming from a flagship device, since you could notice the occasional stutter throughout the whole day, but overall, a pretty nice experience for the average user. So I read a quick benchmark on both devices and the results were the following: the a52 scored around 541 points on a single core in geek bench 5, while the Pixel 4a scored around 532 points. The multi-core score was also comparable with you know: 1 1634 points for the galaxy and around 1 488 points for the pixel, not much of a difference between the two, but still something to consider so.

Moving on to the cameras, then the Samsung Galaxy a52 comes with a quad camera setup, which is more like a triple system since the fourth camera is actually a depth sensor and doesn't really do anything else besides that, otherwise, the main camera is a 64 megapixel shooter with optical stabilization, capable videos up to 4k at 30fps. The second one is a 12 megapixel ultrawide and the third one is a 5 megapixel macro camera, which is sadly more like a gimmick, but still an improvement over last year's predecessor, the a51. In any case, I'm still happy to see OS included on the main sensor since Samsung doesn't usually include this feature in its lower mid-range lineup. On the other hand, then we have the Pixel 4a coming with a single camera on the back at 12 megapixels, and it's also capable of 4k at 30fps with optical stabilization. So google, for instance, is pretty famous for having amazing camera processing, which manages to make mediocre hardware perform amazing much like drugs at the Olympics and on the other side, we have Samsung's methodology of improving hardware as much as possible.

This is essentially why I'm taking it with me now in this in-depth comparison regarding dynamic range, though the a52 seemed to fare just a tad bit better by not making the shadows too dark on the ground, so just to note that the pixel 4 does not have Zoom lens same as the a52, but the zoom photos I am presenting to. You actually come from a cropped in image. In any case, you kind of lose a bit of quality there and there is an edge for the a52 here with the fact that it has a higher megapixel camera at 64, meaning it can actually crop in more than the Pixel 4a, thus zooming in more, without losing as much quality but processing also kind of balances that out so again your mileage might vary. So then I decided to do a macro photo, or at least the best I could achieve with a single camera on the Pixel 4a. But this is also where I was surprised.

The pixel actually took as good of a photo as the galaxy a52, which was using a dedicated macro camera, and if this doesn't show you that macro cameras are a gimmick, I don't know what will details are pretty much on par, as are the depth and colors. I also noticed that there was a neat focus tracking option enabled by default on the pixel, which was pretty handy with small moving objects, so I'm really inclined to say that the pixel did better. So then I moved over to take a bit of ultra-wide shots, and this is where the Pixel 4a actually doesn't really have any kind of uh competitive chance since uh for ultrawide photos really need a wider lens, which, sadly, the 48 doesn't have regarding j52's ultrawide it's more than serviceable. It actually does pretty good shots, as I mentioned earlier in my review of the a52. It's a pretty good overall, not the most amazing, but for a mid-range section for Samsung, it's actually better than what I would expect and uh.

In all honesty, it's much better than not having an ultra ride at all, since at some point you actually will want to use an ultrawide. It's actually pretty neat in some occasions. So how about the front-facing camera then? Well, it's actually pretty good on both. If there is enough light that is taking a regular selfie is pretty much easy-peasy, but as soon as I went to a darker place, it's a bit hard on both devices they're, really not the best when it comes to night mode, but computational photography actually does wonder nowadays and they both pretty much managed to comparably moving on then to video recording. This one is where I expected Samsung to have upped it's game by a bigger margin with the optical stabilization in the a52, but the last when I tested it, it was burst in the pixel, and this is without any electronic stabilization, since both devices were recording at 4k 30fps.

The front-facing camera, though, performed better in terms of stabilization. Otherwise, the colors and sharpness were good. Dynamic ranges are so decent, so pretty comparable performance, but just a bit lacking in stabilization Samsung got one thing right: they included optical stabilization, but I kind of wish they also did it a bit better. As a conclusion to the camera testing, then I found out that more cameras do not always equal better quality. Now, moving on to the battery life portion of our comparison, starting with the Pixel 4a, it comes with a decently sized 3140 William hour battery, which is a tad bit small when compared to modern batteries.

So, for instance, the a52 comes with a 4500mah battery, so that's a pretty massive difference so yeah. This is kind of a bit of a bummer regarding this device, but in all honesty it still lasted me. A good day same goes for the a52. Both actually lasted perfect, but if you compare them well, you start to see how the 4a is actually worse. Putting it this way browsing the web at 60 hertz gives us around 16 hours and 30 minutes for the a52, whereas the 4a lasted around 9 hours and 30 minutes.

Not only that, but in gaming I also saw a massive difference. The a52 lasted me around 9 hours and 40 minutes, whereas the 4a lasted me around 4 hours and 50 minutes. The a52 also has faster charging speeds up to 25 watts if you buy the charger needed separately, of course, while the Pixel 4a caps out at 18 watts. Sadly, neither device supports wireless charging, but I reckon the cable charging is healthier and much faster for the battery either way and finally feature-wise, I'm telling you right off the bat that the galaxy is the winner here. Both the a52 and pixel come with a 3.5 millimeter headphone jack, but the pixel still comes short with its lack of a water resistance rating and missing SD card slot, which the a52 is happy to provide. Not only that, but we also get stereo speakers in the galaxy, which is a rarity in the lower segment.

So I don't know about you guys, but this IP rating at this price alone is enough to make me decide and trust me. I would rather use the smaller phone, but I'm already too impressed by what Samsung managed to muster with a limited budget. So overall, I think this was a good fight. I think the a52 won this one, but as always to each own, and you might think otherwise. Let me know down in the comments below if I missed anything or if you think the Pixel 4a managed to do better and which phone you like better once again, I'm Vic from phone arena.

If you want to see more future content like this subscribe, and I'll, see you guys next time you.

Source : PhoneArena