FR- Home page
-
Smartphone - Comparison
Oppo A53s vs Samsung Galaxy S20+ 5G SD865
Comparison of the technical features between smartphones, with the Oppo A53s on one side and the Samsung Galaxy S20+ 5G SD865 on the other. The first has a processor with 8 cores, 8 threads, a maximale frequency of 1.8GHz. The second chips has a total of 8 cores, 8 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 2.8GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the amount of RAM memory, the date of first broadcast, the values obtained in Geekbench 4.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.
Specification comparison:
| Smartphone | Oppo A53s | Samsung Galaxy S20+ 5G SD865 | ||||||
| Model version(s) | CPH2135 |
SM-G9860, SM-G986U, SM-G986U1 |
||||||
| Release date | Q4 2020 | Q1 2020 | ||||||
| Network | GSM, HSPA, LTE | 5G, CDMA, GSM, EVDO, HSPA, LTE | ||||||
| Dimensions | 6,45 x 2,96 x 0,33 in | 6,37 x 2,90 x 0,31 in | ||||||
| Weight | 6.56 oz | 6.63 oz | ||||||
| Body | Front glass, plastic body |
Front and back glass, aluminum frame |
||||||
| Screen size, colours | 6.5 inches, 16M colours | 6.7 inches, 16M colours | ||||||
| Screen type | IPS LCD | Dynamic AMOLED, 120Hz | ||||||
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels | 1440 x 3200 pixels | ||||||
| Screen ratio | 20:9 | 20:9 | ||||||
| Density | 270 ppi | 525 ppi | ||||||
| Operating system | Android 5.1; ColorOS 2.1 | Android 10; One UI 2 | ||||||
| Processor | Qualcomm SM4250-AA Snapdragon 460 | Qualcomm SM8250 Snapdragon 865 5G | ||||||
| Lithography | 11 nm | 7 nm N7P | ||||||
| Cores | 8 | 8 | ||||||
| Threads | 8 | 8 | ||||||
| Energy cores | 4x Qualcomm Kryo 240 Silver @ 1.45 GHz |
4x Qualcomm Kryo 585 Silver @ 1.8 GHz |
||||||
| High performance cores | 4x Qualcomm Kryo 240 Gold @ 1.8 GHz |
1x Qualcomm Kryo 585 Prime @ 2.84 GHz 3x Qualcomm Kryo 585 Gold @ 2.42 GHz |
||||||
| GPU integrated graphics | Qualcomm Adreno 610 | Qualcomm Adreno 650 | ||||||
| GPU execution units | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| GPU shading units | 96 | 512 | ||||||
| GPU base clock | - | 587 MHz | ||||||
| GPU boost clock | 600 MHz | 587 MHz | ||||||
| GPU FP32 floating point | 115.2 GFLOPS | 1,250 GFLOPS | ||||||
| Memory | 4 GB RAM | 12 GB RAM | ||||||
| Storage | 128 GB | 128 / 512 GB | ||||||
| Memory card | Up to 256 GB | Up to 1,000 GB | ||||||
| Photo | 13 MP, f/2,2, 25mm, 2 MP, f/2,4, 2 MP, f/2,4 |
12 MP, f/1,8, 26mm, 64 MP, f/2,0, 12 MP, f/2,2, 13mm |
||||||
| Video | 1080p@30fps |
8K@24fps, 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/240fps, 720p@960fps |
||||||
| Front photo | 8 MP, f/2,0 |
10 MP, f/2,2, 26mm |
||||||
| Front video | 1080p@30fps |
4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30fps |
||||||
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax | ||||||
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP | 5.0, A2DP, LE | ||||||
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 3.2 | ||||||
| Battery capacity | 5,000 mAh | 4,500 mAh | ||||||
| Battery type | Non removable Li-Po | Non removable Li-Po | ||||||
| Battery life (versatile use) | ~ 21 hours | ~ 11 hours | ||||||
| Head SAR | - | - | ||||||
| Body SAR | - | - | ||||||
| AnTuTu | 148,196 | 611,553 | ||||||
| Android PassMark Rating | 4,747 | 10,720 | ||||||
| (Android 64-bit) Geekbench 4 single core | 1,286 | 3,995 | ||||||
| (Android 64-bit) Geekbench 4 multi-core | 5,139 | 12,646 | ||||||
| (Android) Geekbench 5 single core | 252 | 813 | ||||||
| (Android) Geekbench 5 multi-core | 1,204 | 3,043 | ||||||
| Amazon |  |
|
||||||
| eBay |  |
|
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
We can easily compare the technical characteristics between these two smartphones. Both phones have an equivalent number of cores, the maximum frequency of Samsung Galaxy S20+ 5G SD865 is larger. They were produced the same year.
Autonomy: the autonomy given is the one for a versatile use with video playback, web browsing, various applications, games, photos, etc ...
Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.
Performance comparison with the benchmarks:
Performance comparison between the two smartphones, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark softwares such as Geekbench 4.
| AnTuTu - Total score | |
|---|---|
Samsung Galaxy S20+ 5G SD865 |
611,553 |
| Oppo A53s |
148,196 |
The difference is 313%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
AnTuTu is one of the most popular apps in the world to evaluate and compare the power of a mobile device with the competition. It tests above all the power of calculation, the display of Web pages, the modeling of decorations in 3D, the management of the memory, the transfer of data.
| Android PassMark Rating | |
|---|---|
| Samsung Galaxy S20+ 5G SD865 |
10,720 |
| Oppo A53s |
4,747 |
The difference in performance is 126%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity.
On Android 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-core & single core score - Android 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Samsung Galaxy S20+ 5G SD865 |
3,995 12,646 |
| Oppo A53s |
1,286 5,139 |
In single core, the difference is 211%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 146%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
Geekbench 4 is a complete benchmark platform with several types of tests, including data compression, images, AES encryption, SQL encoding, HTML, PDF file rendering, matrix computation, Fast Fourier Transform, 3D object simulation, photo editing, memory testing. This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices. For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.
On Android:
| Geekbench 5 - Multi-core & single core score - Android | |
|---|---|
| Samsung Galaxy S20+ 5G SD865 |
813 3,043 |
| Oppo A53s |
252 1,204 |
In single core, the difference is 223%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 153%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
Geekbench 5 is a software for measuring the performance of a computer system, for fixed devices, mobile devices, servers. This platform makes it possible to better compare the power of the CPU, the computing power and to compare it with similar or totally different systems. Geekbench 5 includes new workloads that represent work tasks and applications that we can find in reality.
See also:
Oppo A53Oppo A53 (2020)Oppo A53s 5GDisclaimer:
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
This page includes affiliate links for which the administrator of GadgetVersus may earn a commission at no extra cost to you should you make a purchase. These links are indicated using the hashtag #ad.
Information:
We do not assume any responsibility for the data displayed on our website. Please use at your own risk. Some or all of this data may be out of date or incomplete, please refer to the technical page on the respective manufacturer's website to find the latest up-to-date information regarding the specifics of these products.