Apple and Samsung battle for U.S. mid-range market

When comparing mobile phones, there is no better comparison than Apple’s iPhone and Samsung’s Galaxy, as they are two of the world’s largest and most famous mobile phone brands, and in most parts of the world, including especially In the US, they represent iOS and Android for the average consumer. We’ve pitted the absolute best premium products from both brands against each other, and it’s time for a midrange battle: the third-generation iPhone SE vs. the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G.

Apple’s third-generation iPhone SE contains the most powerful mobile SoC, but has an outdated design

Samsung’s A53 brings thin-bezel OLED panel with high refresh rate but plastic frame

Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Price and availability

The Galaxy A53 and the third-generation iPhone SE (let’s call it the iPhone SE 3 for simplicity) are actually available worldwide. price is:

• iPhone SE 3 64GB base version starts at $429, 128GB starts at $479, 256GB storage starts at $579
• The Galaxy A53 in the US is only available in the 128GB version and costs $449.Although in some parts of the world, including Hong Kong, where I am, there is a 256GB version of the A53 that equates to around $510

Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Specs

About this comparison: This review is written after testing the iPhone SE (2022) from Apple Hong Kong and the Galaxy A53 from Samsung Hong Kong over the past few weeks.Neither Apple nor Samsung provided any input in this article

Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Design and Hardware

To meet this sub-$500 price point, which is less than half the cost of its top-of-the-line phones, both Apple and Samsung had to compromise on hardware and features, and interestingly, each brand did the opposite. Apple has all but sacrificed the look and modern design of the iPhone SE 3: it recycled the same casing and components as the iPhone 8 from 5 years ago. Honestly, the iPhone 8’s design was outdated even back in early 2017 — so the iPhone SE 3’s nearly inch-thick bezels, 60Hz LCD display with sharp corners feels even older than it was five years ago.However, although this phone is not good-looking, it is equipped with Apple’s absolute flagship 4nm A15 Bionic chip, which is currently Most powerful mobile processor in the world. Let it sink in the water.

Meanwhile, Samsung’s Galaxy A53 5G has a modern look, thin bezels, a 120Hz OLED display, and a quad-lens camera system. Of course, if you know your smartphone and you’re picky, you can quickly find areas of compromise, such as the plastic back and the fact that two of the cameras are somewhat pointless depth and macro sensors. But to the uninitiated, the Galaxy A53 5G won’t look out of place compared to the rest of the 2022 version. However, the Galaxy A53 5G is powered by a decidedly mid-range Exynos SoC.

Apple chose the look, Samsung chose the brain

That said, Apple chose the look, and Samsung chose the brain.

Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Display

The huge bezels of the iPhone SE 3 are a point of divergence. For gadget geeks like me, and I guess many XDA readers, they’re too big and eat up what should be screen space. But I’ve heard other consumers — usually the older, more casual crowd — say they don’t mind the bezels and even welcome the back home button, which provides a tactile way to operate the phone and brings back Touch ID. Never mind , I’m willing to admit that maybe not everyone cares about thin bezels.

But it can’t be argued that the iPhone SE 3’s 60Hz LCD screen is objectively inferior to the Galaxy A53’s 120Hz OLED panel. Whether it’s looking at photos, watching videos, or reading text, it’s just a more pleasant experience on the Galaxy A53 – colors pop more off the screen, the display gets brighter and produces better contrast. The iPhone SE 3’s 4.7-inch screen is also very narrow by almost all modern smartphone standards. Although the Galaxy A53 has a larger 6.5-inch display, I don’t find the phone any more difficult to use with one hand, as Android is better for one-handed operation: for example, I can have all the core apps at the bottom of the screen, and I can use more A dense grid so that there is less space between app icons (so less likely to overflow vertically or horizontally out of my thumb’s reach).

Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs. Apple iPhone SE 3: Chip and performance

Apple’s A15 Bionic outperforms the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 that powers Samsung’s Ultra flagship, so of course it needs easy win Targeting Samsung’s mid-range Exynos 1280 chip. I’m not just talking about the A15 Bionic crushing the Exynos 1280’s benchmark numbers, but in actual use, I can feel the slight lag of the Galaxy A53 reminds me of “Ah it’s a mid-range phone“And the iPhone SE 3 mostly behaves like a flagship (except for the fact that I’m viewing content on a 2015 display).

I’d like to clarify that the Galaxy A53’s performance isn’t bad in a vacuum, and if you hop over from another mid-range Android device, you probably won’t notice anything, but with the iPhone SE 3 (or Android flagship), it performs There are occasional noticeable stutters when doing things like quitting applications. A notable performance example is when I jumped into each phone’s default Photo Gallery app to make a simple video edit, the process was almost instant on the iPhone SE 3, while the Galaxy A53 took more time to process. Just check out the clip below, the Galaxy A53 takes just a second or two to load the video editing menu, then takes 30 seconds to process the short clip (which is instant on the iPhone SE 3).

If you’re not a demanding smartphone user — if your usage includes texting, reading websites, watching YouTube — the Galaxy A53 can definitely be as good as the iPhone SE 3. But if you’re a heavy user of graphics-intensive games or more complex tasks like editing video, the iPhone SE 3 is noticeably more powerful. But then again, do you really want to play graphics-intensive games or edit videos on the iPhone SE 3’s screen?

Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Cameras

The iPhone SE 3 contains only two cameras: a 12MP, f/1.8 main camera and a 7MP, f/2.2 front-facing selfie camera. The Galaxy A53 5G has a total of five cameras: a quad-lens rear system consisting of a 64MP, f/1.8 main camera, a 12MP ultra-wide-angle lens, and a pair of almost pointless macro and depth sensors. On the front, the Galaxy A53 offers a 32MP, f/2.2 selfie camera.

As the numbers show, Samsung’s camera hardware is more powerful. So if you do things like zooming in and pixel peeking, the Galaxy A53’s more pixel-dense photos are generally sharper and more detailed. Likewise, the Galaxy A53’s main camera collects more light thanks to the use of pixel binning and a larger image sensor. So if you’re shooting in very dark scenes, the iPhone SE 3 will sometimes fail outright (as in the last set of examples below). Samsung’s cameras also tend to crank up the contrast, even if it’s slightly less natural, resulting in a more visually appealing shot.

However, it’s not just about the camera hardware. Software processing is very important, the A15 Bionic’s ISP (image signal processor) is likely to be significantly better than the Exynos 1280’s ISP, because in challenging shots like backlighting (which requires the phone’s brain to analyze the scene and try to generate HDR shots) , sometimes the Galaxy A53 misfires badly, as shown in the example below.

Galaxy A53, main camera

iPhone SE 3, main camera

Both phones can take selfies. Like the main camera, the iPhone SE 3’s selfie camera hardware is quite old, so it struggles in low-light scenarios. But in most normal situations, it’s perfectly usable. If I had to be picky, I’d say I prefer the iPhone SE 3’s exposure consistency, which makes my skin tone look more natural.

One area where the Galaxy A53 wins is ultra-wide-angle photography, as the iPhone SE 3 doesn’t have an ultra-wide-angle lens at all. Therefore, the camera system of the Galaxy A53 is more versatile and capable of capturing such photos.

Galaxy A53, ultra-wide

Galaxy A53, ultra-wide

Video recording is another big win for the iPhone SE 3, as it brings Apple’s best-in-class electronic image stabilization and real-time HDR adjustments. In fact, the Galaxy A53 doesn’t offer 4k/30 stabilization, so if you’re holding the phone, you’ll almost certainly only be able to shoot at 1080p.

other components

While the iPhone SE 3 looks more dated, it features better-quality glass and aluminum than the Galaxy A53’s mostly plastic body. Still, my black iPhone SE 3 is prone to fingerprints, and when it’s smudged, it looks terrible.

In the hand, I find both phones very comfortable to hold, but the iPhone SE 3’s sheer size and weight make it particularly easy to hold. It’s a phone I can hold while riding a bike or climbing stairs without worrying about it slipping out of my hands.

The iPhone SE 3’s traditional capacitive fingerprint scanner also works better than the Galaxy A53’s optical in-display scanner, which is noticeably…