On this page:
Price Samsung Galaxy A52
Unpacking
First configuration
Finish
Specifications
CPU / GPU Performance
Benchmark Antutu/3DMark
Network performance
Wifi performance
GPS performance
Battery range
Photo camera test
Hardware
Photo quality
Video quality
Audio quality
Screen quality
Biometry
Operating system
Test / Review conclusion
Questions answers

Best new price:
231.965 EUR
See the offer | Amazon.com

136 other prices available in other stores.

Subscribe
Subscribe to my YouTube channel to receive updates.
[TEST] Samsung Galaxy A52 Full review / test

Samsung Galaxy A52: test / review

Category: Smartphones

I don't often test Samsung's because while they aren't bad phones, they're generally more expensive than other phones I've tested and the brand is so strong (like Apple) that writing a long review doesn't always help. to much. Fortunately, I make a few exceptions and this year I decided to test the Samsung Galaxy A52. This new mid-range Samsung phone comes in two versions, there is the normal version and the 5G version which is simply called Samsung Galaxy A52 5G and that's about all that will let you distinguish the two versions. These are two phones that are almost identical in every way, the 5G version is a little more efficient but the difference is around 10 to 15%. I tested the "normal" version because I do not have access to 5G coverage in Belgium anyway, but my test will also be valid for the 5G version. [b][b] The Axx range generally ranks among the top sellers at Samsung, I had not yet had the opportunity to test this kind of model, so I was curious to see if this Samsung Galaxy A52 was able to compete with the mid-range at Xiaomi. I bought this phone for 349 € and for that price I got a Poco F3 which outperforms the Samsung in many ways. If I try to find a phone from Xiaomi that comes close to the Samsung, I think the Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite would be a good candidate and that's good because I'm testing it at the same time as this Samsung. [b][b] Samsung has always succeeded in producing phones with smaller dimensions than the Chinese competition, this Galaxy A52 is however quite large and quite heavy compared to what I have been used to test at Samsung. The other curiosity of this phone is the choice of photo sensors. Samsung manufactures its own photo sensors, but they have chosen to integrate a Sony sensor in this model. I haven't tested many Samsungs so far but this is the first time I've seen a competing Samsung sensor in a Samsung. This is the Sony IMX 682 which is also used in the Poco x3 or the Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro. Other than those things, the Samsung doesn't really stand out from the competition, so I'll see what can justify such a price gap with the Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite or other phones in this price / performance segment. [b][b][b][b][b]linkManufacturer web site: https://www.samsung.com[b]linkSite where I have bought the Samsung Galaxy A52: Not yet available / tested[b][b]

Structure of my tests

I test the phones according to a pre-established structure (see below) to provide you with as much information as possible. Unfortunately, this takes a long time. Some tests like network performance tests take several days and for photo tests I sometimes have to wait until the weather is suitable to take pictures in good conditions. I am therefore obliged to publish the tests step by step, so I invite you to come back if the test is not complete at the time of your visit.[b]
How are my tests different from others on the web?

- I usually buy the devices with my own money, so price is just as important as you are!
- I keep the devices for at least a few weeks (sometimes more) to see what they are worth in real conditions.
- I answer (when possible) your questions to help you decide before you buy
- no one pays me to do these reviews, so I'm completely neutral and independent...
- My pages are not filled with ads



iiiF150 R2022 : test / review
Realme 6 test, review and price
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7 test, review and price
Umidigi F1 test, review and price
Poco M3 Pro : test / review
Redmi Note 10s : test / review
Poco F2 review - test - specs
Lemfo Lem15: test / review / price
Realme GT 5G : test / review
Samsung Galaxy A52: test / review

Price Samsung Galaxy A52

The list below shows the prices for the Samsung Galaxy A52 from more than 50 sites around the world. If you are not satisfied with any price, you can subscribe to a price alert to be the first to be notified when the price drops.[b]
Samsung Galaxy A71 SM-A715F/DS, 4G LTE, International Version (No US Warranty), 128GB + 6GB Ram, Pri...
2021-09-18 13:12
272 USD
Samsung Galaxy A71 5G LTE Verizon | 6.7" AMOLED Screen |128GB of Storage | Long Lasting Battery | Si...
2021-09-18 13:12
330 USD
Cellulare Smartphone Samsung Galaxy A52 SM-A525F 6,5" 6+128GB Dual Sim Black...
2021-09-18 14:25
298 EUR
Cellulare Smartphone Samsung Galaxy A52 SM-A525F 6,5" 6+128GB Dual Sim Blue...
2021-09-18 14:25
300 EUR
Cellulare Smartphone Samsung Galaxy A52 SM-A525F 6,5" 6+128GB Dual Sim White...
2021-09-18 14:25
300 EUR
Cellulare Smartphone Samsung Galaxy A52 SM-A525F 6,5" 6+128GB Dual Sim Violet...
2021-09-18 14:25
300 EUR
[b]
helpThe above links are affiliate links from companies such as Amazon, Gearbest, Aliexpress,... If you appreciate my work, I would be grateful if you could purchase these products through these links. It costs you absolutely nothing but I get a small commission that allows me to buy the material I test. Thank you very much!

Timeline

04/24/2021 It is very rare but I did not buy from Samsung Galaxy A52 on the internet, I bought it in a petrol pump near my home! I had gift certificates to liquidate, I took the opportunity to buy this phone. [b][b] 04/26/2021 Start of the test[b]

Why this phone?

I wasn't planning on testing the Galaxy A52, I didn't even pay attention to the latest Samsung releases as they are often too expensive compared to the competition. What made me change my mind is that I had gift certificates that were going to expire and looking a little for what could be the most "useful" to me I chose to buy this phone in a gas pump near my house. So this is not a very common route to start a test but that does not mean that I will neglect this phone, I will test it with the same level of detail as the others and I would deliver an objective conclusion despite my apprehension for the price.[b]

Unpacking

The Samsung Galaxy A52 is sold in a fairly standard white box that contains the phone, a manual, a charger and a USB cable. Samsung is not a low cost brand but it does not offer anything more in its box where Xiaomi offers a protective shell for most of its phones. [b]
Length : 159.9
Width : 75.1
Thickness : 8.4
Weight : 189
Jack output : Yes
USB Type : Type C
Infrared port : No

First configuration

The procedure for setting up a new Samsung is quite different from what I find on other brands. The procedure for transferring data from your old phone does not follow the same method as most Android phones, you need to use the Smart Switch app developed by Samsung. This application allows you to recover all of the data from your old phone (photos and videos included), so this transfer goes much further than the basic backup offered by Android. What bothers me with this app is that I got used to storing my data in the Google cloud and with Smart Switch I cannot retrieve my data from the cloud. Using Smart Switch also implies that you still have to have your old phone because you have to allow the transfer from the old phone. [b][b] The other point that irritated me a bit with the initial setup is Samsung's insistence on making you install unwanted apps. You not only have to confirm twice that you do not want the proposed Samsung applications but then Samsung will again offer you applications and you have to uncheck them manually so as not to have to install them. These applications are free but they do not interest me and a refusal is not enough to get rid of them. [b]

Finish

I bought the matte black version of the Samsung Galaxy A52 and am quite happy with my choice. Where many manufacturers try to stand out with all kinds of effects on the back of the phone, Samsung has chosen a certain sobriety and I find that it is quite successful. Beyond the matte appearance of the phone, it seems to have been designed in one piece. The photo unit on the back seems to have been tarred in the phone shell, the optical unit is well integrated and no dust can get lodged there. [b][b]
The matte surface is also significantly less messy than a glass surface, I still see fingerprints but they are noticeably less visible than on a glass back. The outline of the phone has a metallic appearance but here too a matte effect has been applied, this allows to remain in the continuity of the matte aspect of the back of the phone. [b][b]
The front camera is integrated in the form of a punch in the middle of the screen, it is a fairly standard configuration but in this price range the punch is generally thinner. [b][b]
For the rest, the phone is fairly standard, it has a USB type C port at the bottom with a speaker and an audio jack output. The SIM drawer that can accommodate two SIM cards or a SIM card + memory card is located above. The second speaker for stereo sound is built into the speaker for listening. The fingerprint sensor is integrated into the screen. [b][b] This new Samsung Galaxy A52 is both classic and elegant, the matte effect allows it to look more serious than the Chinese competition but all this is obviously only one a matter of taste. [b]

Specifications

[b]The information below comes from the Device Info HW application. The application provides detailed technical information about the tested phone.I bought the Samsung Galaxy A52 in its matte black version and with 6Gb RAM / 128 Gb for storage. The A52 is equipped with a 6.5 inch 90hz Amoled screen which occupies 84% of the front of the phone, the fingerprint sensor is integrated into the screen. Apart from the CPU, GPU and wifi chipset, the components used are specific to Samsung. The other features of the phone can be found in the screenshots below. [b]

CPU / GPU Performance

CPU : Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
GPU : Qualcomm AdreNo 618
Memory (RAM) : 6 - 8Gb
Storage : 128 - 256 Gb
[b][b]The Samsung Galaxy A52 is equipped with a mid-range Snapdragon 720G processor that I have already had the opportunity to test in the Redmi Note 9S released ... it is a year old! If I compare the performance of this processor compared to its price, Samsung is clearly lagging behind because for the price of a Samsung Galaxy A52, we find a Poco F3 which offers 3 times the performance. This is not to say that the Snapdragon 720G is a bad processor as it will allow you to use the A52 quite normally under most conditions. It is the price / performance positioning that is not good. [b][b] For the graphics part, the Samsung Galaxy A52 relies on an Adreno 618 GPU for the 4G version and an Adreno 619 for the 5G version. Here too there is a significant discrepancy in the price / performance ratio. This GPU was also used in the Redmi Note 9s launched last year but it is also found in the Poco X3 which costs almost half the price of the A52. [b][b][b]

Benchmark Antutu/3DMark

I obtained a score of 283,381 points with Antutu, this places the Samsung Galaxy A52 on the same level as a Poco X3 or a Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite in terms of performance. This allows the Samsung Galaxy A52 to run most games without problems, but for the most demanding games like Fortnite, you will need to decrease the level of detail to have a perfectly smooth experience. [b]
Antutu score : 283381
Antutu CPU : 100930
Antutu GPU : 71533
Antutu UX : 59215
Antutu Mem : 51703
[b]Top 10 - performance ranking based on Antutu
1. Realme Gt - 811858
2. Oppo Find X2 Pro - 605184
3. Oneplus 8t - 595000
4. Poco F3 - 589677
5. Xiaomi Mi 10t Pro - 581650
6. Oneplus 8 Pro - 579417
7. Xiaomi Mi 10 - 579114
8. Poco F2 Pro - 569559
9. Samsung Galaxy S20 Fe - 565000
10. Samsung Galaxy S20 - 503905

Number of smartphones in the ranking:128
Position of this smartphone in the ranking:43/128

Note: this ranking only contains the phones I tested as well as a few others that I added for reference.
[b]Gaming[b]To test the performance in game, I download the mobile PUBG game and evaluate the in-game experience, graphics level and depth of vision. This game is quite demanding and should help you evaluating the performance of a phone. With a score of 283,000 points on Antutu, Samsung does not rank very well in terms of price / performance ratio because a Poco X3 Pro does 2x better for 200 €. This level of performance is enough to run most games, however. PUBG Mobile runs in HD with no issues and the gaming experience is pretty good. For more greedy games like Fortnite, however, it will be necessary to make some sacrifices in terms of graphics.[b]

Network performance

The Samsung Galaxy A52 offers wide 3G / 4G frequency coverage which will allow you to use it anywhere in Europe. For 5G the A52 supports 7 different frequencies which should also offer wide compatibility in Europe but since 5G is not available in many countries, you will need to check the frequency used in your country before purchasing this phone.[b]
3G frequencies : B1 (2100), B2 (1900), B4 (1700/2100 AWS A-F), B5 (850), B8 (900)
4G frequencies : B1 (2100), B2 (1900), B3 (1800), B4 (1700/2100 AWS 1), B5 (850), B7 (2600), B8 (900), B20 (800), B28b (700), B28a (700), B38 (TDD 2600), B40 (TDD 2300), B41 (TDD 2500)
Number measurements : 1427
Average signal (reference) : -89.27
Average signal (telephone) : -93.39
Average deviation reference/telephone : -4.12
Min/Max signal (reference) : -87 / -98
Min/Max signal (phone) : -92 / -96
Choose your country to check if your phone is compatible:


The frequencies displayed below will allow you to see if this phone is compatible with your operator or if you will be able to use it in the country where you are going on vacation.


Signal 4G (before december 2020)[b]The ability to pick up the network correctly is an essential element for a phone but it is only very rarely measured. To measure a phone's ability to pick up the network, I perform a large number of measurements on the same cells to be able to compare phones under similar conditions. The signal is measured in dBm, a value of -90dBm indicates a worse signal than -70dBm. These measurements are therefore taken under real conditions and not in a laboratory, they are not scientific but give a good indication of performance. [b][b]Network signal sensitivity rating
Phone tested:Average signal (dBm)Number of measurements:
Xiaomi Mi 9t Pro-881600
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5-91.305600
Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite-93788
Samsung Galaxy A70-94.5111975
Nokia 5.3-94.98531
Realme 6-95.142301
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro-95.9221599
Xiaomi Mi A3-95.951000
Huawei Y6 2019-95.951199
Doogee S58 Pro-96.22856
Redmi 9a-96.481000
Meizu Note 9-96.68937
Motorola G8 Power-96.881032
Xiaomi Redmi Note 7-97.011430
Redmi 9c-97.041000
Umidigi S3 Pro-97.131200
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8-97.34879
Samsung Galaxy A21s-97.781000
Umidigi F1-97.82298
Ulefone Armor 7e-98.71000
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite-991000
Honor 9x-99.14899
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9s-99.41860
Poco F2 Pro-99.81247
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9-100.791785
Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g-100.881198
Poco X3-101.19821
Umidigi F2-101.47712
[b][b]Signal 4G (from December 2020)[b]I decided to change the methodology for measuring the network because I noticed that the configuration of the mobile network changes over time. This makes it more difficult to compare phones because the conditions are no longer exactly the same.[b][b]To overcome this problem, I set up a device that captures 24 hours a day about ten parameters from the mobile network (ex: cell id, rssi, rsrq, snr, frequency,...). I then place the phone next to the device for 24 to 48 hours taking the same measurements so that I can compare them. [b][b] Overview of the phones tested with this methodology[b][b]
Phone tested:MeasurementsAvg signal (reference)Avg signal (phone)Min/Max (reference)Min/Max (phone)
Samsung Galaxy S10+457-93.06-97.39-89 / -98-97 / -99
Xiaomi Mi 9t Pro669-93.69-95.84-90 / -95-92 / -98
Poco F2 Pro1438-91.02-94.99-89 / -94-94 / -96
Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g1645-90.77-95.02- 88 / -98-95 / -100
Poco X3821-94.89-103.19-91 / -97.7-101 / -104
Umidigi Bison2343-92.71-96.46-90 / -99-94 / -102
Oukitel C211101-92.04-94.99-90 / -97-92 / -95
Poco M31116-92.09-91.74-88 / -98-90 / -99
Xiaomi Mi 10t Pro1071-90.61-94.03-88 / -94-94 / -96
Umidigi A9 Pro981-90.40-94.01-88 / -95-93 / -95
Redmi Note 9t1201-92.149-91.71-90 / -97-91 / -97
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10999-92.35-93.99-88 / -97-92 / -98
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro877-89.72-90.56- 88 / -92-89 / -95
Poco X3 Pro1876-91.45-92.91-90 / -94-90 / -96
Poco F31382-90.79-94.2-89 / -94-93 / -98
Oneplus Nord N100896-91.23-96.005-88 / - 99-96 / -99
Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite2875-91.36-91.49-87 / -96-90 / -96
Samsung Galaxy A521427-89.27-93.39-87 / -98-92 / -96
Doogee S96 Pro1259-94.2-91.21-90 / -102-88 / -95
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10s957-92.07-97.62-90 / -102-96 / -102
Poco M3 Pro1247-91.76-102.97-99 / -104-88 / -98
Realme Gt843-96.49-94.02-93 / -101- 92 / -96
F150 R20221002-92.4-105.1-90 / -97-98 / -110
[b][b]I carried out more than 1400 measurements in 4G to measure the sensitivity to the network of the Samsung Galaxy A52. I got an average signal of -93.39 dBm where I got an average signal of -89.27 dBm with my meter at the same time. So I have a difference of a little over 4 dBm between the two devices, it is a significant difference if I look at the average deviations obtained on other phones but the loss of sensitivity brings the Galaxy A52 back to just the average . It is neither excellent nor bad.
On the graph we see that the Galaxy A52 is not able to compete with the measuring device but it offers a stable performance which should satisfy most of the users living under a decent network coverage. If network sensitivity is important to you, I've tested other phones that score much better.[b][b][b]Download/Upload speed[b]To test the download speed, I have identified some 4G cells offering good performance where I test all my devices several times to see what download and upload speed they can achieve.[b]Top 10 - speed ranking in download
1. Samsung Galaxy S20 D:351Mbps U: 20Mbps
2. Poco X3 D:232Mbps U: 55Mbps
3. Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g D:223Mbps U: 52Mbps
4. Poco F2 Pro D:207Mbps U: 53Mbps
5. Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite D:153Mbps U: 68Mbps
6. Xiaomi Mi A3 D:150Mbps U: 60Mbps
7. Xiaomi Redmi Note 9s D:150Mbps U: 60Mbps
8. Xiaomi Mi 8 Lite D:149Mbps U: 60Mbps
9. Samsung Galaxy A21s D:147Mbps U: 51Mbps
10. Huawei Y6 2019 D:145Mbps U: 61Mbps

Number of smartphones in the ranking:30
Position of this smartphone in the ranking:0/30

Note: the theoretical maximum speed of a telephone is often limited by the configuration of the mobile network and the congestion of the network at the time of the measurement. So maybe you could get a higher speed on another network
[b][b]

Wifi performance

To test a phone's ability to receive the network properly, I take measurements near my router and then remotely (and always at the same place). This gives me an average in dBm where a value of -90 dBm indicates poorer performance than a value at -30 dBm.[b]
Wifi frequencies : 802.11a , 802.11b , 802.11g , 802.11n , 802.11n 5GHz , 802.11ac
Download speed : 195
Signal / close : -17
Signal / distant : -68
Wifi signal[b]I got a -17 dBm signal near the router, it's a good score indicating good wifi sensitivity. From a distance I got a score of -68 dBm and here too it is a good score.[b][b]Top 10 - wifi sensitivity ranking
1. Poco F2 Pro -11dBm
2. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro -12dBm
3. Realme Gt -12dBm
4. Samsung Galaxy A21s -13dBm
5. Oneplus Nord N100 -15dBm
6. Poco X3 Pro -15dBm
7. Poco F3 -15dBm
8. Redmi Note 9t -15dBm
9. Samsung Galaxy A52 -17dBm
10. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10s -17dBm

Number of smartphones in the ranking:48
Position of this smartphone in the ranking:9/48

[b]Download/Upload speed[b]To test the speed in Wifi, I connect to my router in 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz (if available) and use the Ookla application to measure the speed.[b]Top 10 - wifi download speed ranking
1. Poco F3 398Mbps
2. Poco X3 Pro 389Mbps
3. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro 367Mbps
4. Samsung Galaxy S20 351Mbps
5. Poco F2 Pro 341Mbps
6. Redmi Note 9t 332Mbps
7. Realme Gt 330Mbps
8. Doogee S96 Pro 328Mbps
9. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10s 325Mbps
10. Poco M3 Pro 323Mbps

Number of smartphones in the ranking:47
Position of this smartphone in the ranking:24/47

Note: I have a 400Mbps line and a modem capable of delivering higher speed, but I can never be sure how much bandwidth is available when doing a test.
[b]

GPS performance

[b]To test the quality of the GPS signal I use the Offline Maps application and I make the same train trip in pedestrian mode. Why? In pedestrian mode, the GPS does not artificially correct the signal to stick to the road, it has no markings, so you can see the actual position. I then use an application to measure the accuracy of the signal. I got an accuracy level of 3m with the Samsung Galaxy A52, it's the same score as most phones using Snapdragon architecture. This level of precision can be improved with your GPS application which will take care of repositioning you on the road.[b][b]Top 10 - GPS accuracy ranking
1. Oukitel C21 1m
2. Redmi 9a 1m
3. Doogee S96 Pro 1m
4. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10s 1m
5. Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 1m
6. Redmi 9c 2m
7. Umidigi Bison 2m
8. Poco M3 Pro 2m
9. F150 R2022 2m
10. Redmi Note 9t 2m

Number of smartphones in the ranking:23
Position of this smartphone in the ranking:17/23

Note: An accuracy of 3 meters or less can easily be corrected by a good GPS application. Phone performance also plays a role in how fast your display updates, so good accuracy could be compromised by too slow a display.
[b]

Battery range

Capacity : 4500
Fast charge : Yes
W max : 25
Range (100% brightness) : 652.00
Range (50% brightness) : 1239.00
Charging time : 165.00
Discharge speed (100%) : 0.15
Discharge score (100%) : 6.90
Discharge speed (50%) : 0.08
Discharge score (50%) : 3.63
Charging speed : 0.61
Charging score : 27.27
From March 2020, I replaced my subjective battery test with a technical test to better measure the real behaviour of the battery. Now I test the autonomy and charging time under absolutely identical conditions. I perform several measurements, so this test alone takes several days during which I cannot use the phone for anything else.

Battery life - methodology
To test the battery life, I measure the battery consumption every minute in strictly identical conditions to be able to compare phones and also to allow you to evaluate your phone in the same conditions. I rule out any influence of applications that could interfere with the measurement. The autonomy is not linear, the battery sometimes discharges much faster at the end. This is a frustrating phenomenon but with my measurements, you will know if you need to find a charger quickly.

Battery life
The battery of the Samsung Galaxy A52 has a capacity of 4500 mAh and has discharged from 100% to 1% in 652.00 minutes with 100% brightness, it has discharged from 100% to 1% in 1239.00 minutes with 50% brightness. I obtain in this way an average discharge speed of 0.15% per minute with 100% luminosity and 0.08% per minute with 50% luminosity, the consumption is therefore 6.90 mA per minute with 100% luminosity and 3.63 with 50% luminosity. To be able to compare the efficiency of the phone and its influence on the battery, you have to compare the 6.90 (or 50%) score with that of other smartphones, the figure should be as low as possible.

Charging time - methodology
To test the charging time, I always use the same charger with the same cable. I measure the charging time minute by minute to see the evolution of the charge as well as the charging speed. The charging speed of a battery is not linear, it is often faster at the beginning and slower at the end. The charger is compatible with fast charging.

Charging time
The battery of the Samsung Galaxy A52 has a capacity of 4500 mAh and has been charged from 1% to 100% in 165.00 minutes. This gives me an average charging speed of 0.61% per minute and therefore an increase of 27.27 mA per minute. To compare the performance of the Samsung Galaxy A52 compared to other phones, you should use the 27.27 per minute score, this score should be as high as possible.

Important note: the charging speed is not always linear, the graph below gives you an indication of the battery behaviour.

The following table lists the phones tested with the technical battery test, they are ranked in order of efficiency. A higher battery capacity should logically result in a higher battery life but it is not always the case and it does not give any indication of the efficiency of a phone.

SmartphoneCapacity (mAh)Battery life (minutes)Efficiency ScoreBattery life (minutes) / 50%Efficiency Score / 50%Charging time.Score charging
Samsung Galaxy S204000565.007.081217.003.29136.0029.41
Oukitel C214000497.008.051324.003.02167.0023.95
Nokia 5.34000549.007.291096.003.65199.0020.10
Honor 9x4000770.005.191333.003.00151.0026.49
Umidigi A9 Pro4150552.007.521562.002.66112.0037.05
Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g4160749.005.551541.002.70163.0025.52
Realme 64300704.006.111104.003.89162.0026.54
Realme Gt4500574.007.841057.004.2687.0051.72
Samsung Galaxy A524500652.006.901239.003.63165.0027.27
Poco F34520657.006.881840.002.46122.0037.05
Poco F2 Pro47001150.004.091536.003.06180.0026.11
Oneplus Nord N1005000808.006.191278.003.91663.007.54
Xiaomi Redmi Note 105000691.007.241728.002.89193.0025.91
Redmi Note 9t5000766.006.532054.002.43148.0033.78
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10s5000636.007.861556.003.21161.0031.06
Poco M3 Pro5000657.007.611647.003.04131.0038.17
Redmi 9a5000694.007.201902.002.63195.0025.64
Motorola G8 Power5000912.005.482792.001.79311.0016.08
Samsung Galaxy A21s5000729.006.861283.003.90166.0030.12
Redmi 9c5000656.007.621915.002.61170.0029.41
Umidigi Bison5000550.009.091471.003.40238.0021.01
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro5020625.008.031557.003.22213.0023.57
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9s5020663.007.571876.002.68224.0022.41
Xiaomi Redmi Note 95020650.007.721808.002.78162.0030.99
Umidigi F25150927.005.561854.002.78299.0017.22
Poco X35160653.007.901654.003.12181.0028.51
Poco X3 Pro5160648.007.961688.003.06138.0037.39
Doogee S58 Pro5180845.006.131908.002.71177.0029.27
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite5260827.006.361609.003.27208.0025.29
Ulefone Armor 7e5500768.007.161140.004.82179.0030.73
Poco M36000842.007.131898.003.16217.0027.65
Doogee S96 Pro6350929.006.841405.004.52424.0014.98
F150 R20228300879.009.441498.005.54243.0034.16

helpHow to read these figures?
The battery capacity is an important element in determining the autonomy of a phone but it is not the only factor. A phone with a large battery may have a shorter battery life if it consumes more power. If I had to take an example from everyday life, I would use the universe of the car. If a car has a large fuel tank, it should be able to drive a longer distance unless its average fuel consumption is higher. The battery efficiency score works the same way, it should be as low as possible and represents the energy consumption of the phone. These differences in efficiency are often related to the brightness of the screen, large bright screens will tend to consume more energy and even if they have a large battery, their range will be shorter.

In summary To charge the battery from 0 to 100%, the Samsung Galaxy A52 took 165 minutes, which is a good score without being exceptional. The load is quite linear, so you can just do a division to see that every minute the load increases by 0.6%.
I got a battery life of 652 minutes with the screen at 50% and 1239 minutes with the screen at 100%. The 100% test seems to have started a bit later for some reason that I don't know but that won't change the battery life rating. The autonomy is good and in normal use you should be able to last 2 days with the Samsung battery. If you are a gamer, you are more than likely going to have to charge your phone before the end of the day. The autonomy is quite linear also, the screen at 50% consumes almost half of the energy at 100%.
[b]

Photo camera test

To test the quality of photos produced by a phone, I do a technical test (resolution, sharpness, chromatic aberration,...) in studio (identical conditions) to evaluate the technical part objectively. From the second half of 2020, I built my own laboratory to take completely objective technical measurements. I then take pictures in real conditions to see how the camera performs. I then evaluate these photos according to my criteria but I publish the photos so that you can evaluate the result according to your criteria.[b]

Hardware

Selfie / resolution : 32
Selfie / sensor : Sony IMX616
Resolution : 64
Sensor : Sony IMX682 Exmor RS
mm wide angle : 5.23 mm
mm ultra wide angle : 1.74 mm
As I wrote in the introduction of this article, the Samsung Galaxy A52 uses a Sony sensor as the main sensor. It is a rather curious choice, Samsung builds its own photo sensors and integrates that of a competitor in the A52. For the end consumer, this obviously does not matter much especially as the Sony IMX 682 sensor is an excellent sensor. I had good results with this sensor on the Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro 2 years ago. This sensor is therefore not new but I am curious to see what the optimization of Samsung will bring to the quality of the photo. Samsung has developed a powerful optimization layer for its photos and with an equivalent sensor, a Samsung could produce better photos through optimization. I still have pictures taken with this Sony sensor 2 years ago, so I could see if Samsung has managed to do better with the same material. [b][b] The front camera also uses a Sony sensor (IMX 616), I have no information on the ultra wide angle sensor used, it is probably a Samsung sensor that I have not yet had the opportunity to test.[b]Default app[b]Samsung's default photo application is very easy to use, it focuses on the essentials, you don't have to dig into the menus to get better photos. The different options are displayed on a black background, this may seem trivial but it offers legibility of the options in all conditions where Xiaomi persists in displaying these options in the photo area. The Samsung optimization layer is enabled by default, it can be disabled by a small logo at the bottom of the photography area. [b][b] The application offers the following options: [b] - funny photo (photo with snapchat type effect) [b] - single take [b] - photo [b] - video [b] in the "more" menu: [b] AR Doodle, Pro, Panorama, food, night, macro, portrait, pro video, super slow motion, slow motion, hyperlapse. [b][b][b]

Photo quality

Photo test / studio[b]
In automatic mode, the Sony IMX 682 sensor chose to take studio shots at ISO 25 and 1/250 where the ultra wide-angle sensor opted for 1/400 and ISO 50. The difference in exposure is obvious between these two sensors. With 1/200 the main sensor could do better because I get a better result in manual mode at 1/125. It is often the same problem with automatic mode, photo sensors on smartphones tend to underexpose photos when they are under artificial light. By comparing the photos of the same type that I took two years ago with the Mi 9T Pro which uses the same sensor, I do not see any big differences in terms of colorimetry, the Samsung retouching effect is therefore not here not really visible, it will probably be with the photos taken outside. [b][b] The photo in the introduction of this studio test is a photo taken in pro mode with a shutter speed of 1/200 and ISO 50, this shows that the sensor is capable of taking pictures. very good photo with good exposure but in automatic mode it made the wrong choice. [b][b][b][b]Photo test / sunny[b] Main sensor: Sony IMX 682
I was wondering if Samsung was going to add its optimization key to improve the photos and with this first photo, I immediately got my reply. Samsung's photo optimization plays a big role in color saturation and in this first photo the colors are vivid and almost supernatural. The vegetation is lush, the wood has a warm tint and overall the sharpness is good without being pushed. So yes it's a bit of a cheat because in reality the colors were less vibrant but does it matter? I think that for the vast majority of users of this phone, it will make you feel like a good photographer and that's probably the effect Samsung is looking for. I can surely get a better result with an SLR camera and a little Photoshop retouching but how long will it take me? The Samsung Galaxy A52 takes care of everything, you just have to press the button and a second later it's all set. [b][b] I have more or less the same observation for the other photos, the photos are vivid, rich in detail and with a good balance between light and dark areas. The processing sometimes makes some mistakes when, for example, a few isolated branches get lost in the blue of the sky, the clipping of the branches takes on a pink color but in most cases, the photos are of good quality. Samsung has therefore done well to choose its competitor for the optical part because it thus offers a sensor with good optical qualities which are then further reinforced by the image processing provided by Samsung. [b][b]Photo test / cloudy[b]Not yet available / tested[b][b][b]Test photo / night[b]Not yet available / tested[b][b][b]

Video quality

Stabilisation[b] The Samsung Galaxy A52 is able to stabilize 4k videos but it cannot completely absorb the most severe shocks caused by walking. Stabilization is most effective at 1080p. The pixel recalculation is very fast, I don't see any pixelation because of the movement. In this price range, other phones do better, the Samsung offers a stabilization performance comparable to a phone sold around 200 €.[b]Video normale conditions The Galaxy A52 is capable of producing videos at 4k and 30 fps. The videos produced by this phone are particularly sharp and the colors are well saturated (even a little too much for water). The movements are fluid but I notice the jumps of exposures as well as a compression visible at the level of the sky where one sees levels of colors with pixelization. The development is very fast, the Samsung adapts quickly to different levels of foliage. [b][b] On this second video, the color saturation is clearly visible, the colors are vivid and vibrant without exaggeration. The sharpness is good although a little forced at the level of the treetops. The movements are fluid and without jerks. [b][b] The Sony sensor used in this Samsung has already proven itself on other phones, it produces good videos with a good level of sharpness and well saturated colors.[b]Video low light[b]Not yet available / tested[b][b]

Audio quality

To test the quality of the phone's audio output, I connect the device's audio output to a measuring tool, then play sounds on all frequencies and measure the differences between the original sound and the sound produced by the phone. In this way I measure the phone's ability to correctly reproduce all sounds.[b]
Frequency Respons : 0.03/-0.12
Noise Level : -94.6
Dynamic Range : 94.6
THD : 0.00128
Intermodulation : 0.010
Stereo crosstalk : -87.2
Frequency Response[b]This test is intended to test the device's ability to correctly reproduce all frequencies. The white line in the middle of the graph is the ideal situation and the other colors come from tests on different phones. A deviation from the reference line indicates a deviation from the ideal situation. To see good sound at all frequencies, it is therefore necessary to get as close as possible to the reference line.
I compared the reproduction of frequencies of the A52 with the S10 + and the graph confirms my first impression. The A52 faithfully reproduces most frequencies and it is very close to the S10 +, it also presents differences at the same frequencies, the bands are almost parallel on all frequencies.[b]Dynamic Range[b]This test is designed to test a phone's ability to play sounds at different volume levels. Here too, the phones must be as close as possible to the reference.
If I look at this graph from a purely technical point of view, I see that the Galaxy A52 is able to produce a sound that is slightly more powerful than the S10 + and here it is difficult to leave the headphones at maximum volume, the sound is too powerful. This power does not lead to distortions, the sound is perfectly mastered on all frequencies.[b]Noise Level[b]This test aims to identify if the device under test is able to reproduce sounds without too much noise. A high score indicates a low parasite rate, a lower score indicates a higher presence of parasites.
I haven't noticed any interference problems with the A52, on the contrary it produces a very good sound.[b]Concert recording[b]The purpose of this test is to measure the recording quality of the phone when there is a lot of ambient noise. Since I don't have the opportunity to go to a concert every time I test a phone, I simulate the noise of a concert in a closed environment.Not yet available / tested[b][b]

Screen quality

To test the screen, I use a colorimetric probe that measures the color accuracy of a screen, as well as other parameters to see if a screen is able to correctly reproduce an image. I also test the brightness level to determine if the screen will be able to display an image in full sunlight.[b]
Screen size : 6.5
Resolution : 1080 x 2400
Ratio : 20:9
Type : Amoled
% occupancy : 84
dE white : 0.3
dE red : 2.9
dE green : 5.6
dE blue : 1.8
dE jaune : 1.1
dE cyan : 1.1
dE magenta : 1.3
White temperature : 6466
Brightness : 799
Colorimetry[b]
Samsung is capable of producing good displays, but where this quality was reserved for Samsung phones a year or two ago, good Samsung displays are now found on phones from other brands like Xiaomi. The difference between Samsung and competing brands tends to fade and I would even say that sometimes competing brands offer better displays. [b][b] The Samsung Galaxy A52 has a good display which is capable of producing very pure white, white is actually white, which is not very common yet. Besides that, I noticed a significant colorimetric deviation on the green and a less important one on the red. In the end I get a dE color difference of 2, that's a good score but I got better scores with competitive phones that use Samsung screens.[b][b]Top 10 - ranking of the best screens by colorimetry
1. Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g dE = 0.73
2. Xiaomi Mi 10t Pro dE = 0.83
3. Realme Gt dE = 1.17
4. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite dE = 1.19
5. Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 dE = 1.2
6. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 dE = 1.23
7. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro dE = 1.31
8. Samsung Galaxy S20 dE = 1.4
9. Poco M3 dE = 1.4
10. Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite dE = 1.46

Number of smartphones in the ranking:48
Position of this smartphone in the ranking:18/48

Note: the colorimetric difference is measured in dE. After three, the human eye will perceive a colorimetric difference, so the dE should be the lowest. The tests were all carried out with a colorimetric probe.
[b]Brightness / Contrast[b]The screen of the Samsung Galaxy A52 adapts the brightness to its environment, so it will be much brighter in the sun. I measured a brightness of 799 cd / m², it is quite exceptional, I have not tested many phones capable of offering such a level of brightness. You will therefore not have to worry about the readability of the screen under the sun. [b][b] The Galaxy A52 is equipped with an amoled screen, so the contrast is almost infinite. This phone has excellent white and black rendering.[b]Light Absorption/Reflection[b]The smartphone screen reflect light and sometimes turn them into a real mirror. This mirror effect makes it harder to read. [b][b]The absorption index below indicates the percentage of light absorbed by the screen. The readability of a screen is better when the absorption index is high.[b][b]
Phone tested:% light absorption
Samsung Galaxy S10+58
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro52
Honor 9x65
Redmi Note 9s55
Motorola G8 Power60
Realme 654
Umidigi F248
Poco F2 Pro52
Redmi Note 956
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite53
Samsung Galaxy S2047
Samsung Galaxy A21s53
The phones tested have an average absroption rate of54 %

Biometry

I see more and more phones using a side fingerprint sensor located on the power button. I also find that this is one of the best solutions but Samsung has decided to swim against the current by offering a fingerprint sensor on the screen, I do not understand why Samsung persists in using this type of sensor because it works less well than the side sensor. Unlocking the phone is the first contact with a phone and if this unlocking is inefficient, it quickly becomes annoying. I have the same issue with the Galaxy S20 where the recognition is not very good either and at best it will always be slower than a good side sensor.[b]

Operating system

[b]Samsung's operating system is arguably the most advanced in the Android range, it offers a lot of customization possibilities and I think some are only available on Samsung (eg: shortcut bar). If you are used to Samsung, you will find your bearings but if you are used to an Android version without an overlay, you may be overwhelmed by all the available options (a bit like when you use a Xiaomi for the first time). time). Fortunately all this is only a matter of habit and despite the intrusive side of the applications embedded by Samsung, I find that this operating system as a whole is very successful. In the few months that I have kept the Galaxy A52, I have had many updates, so Samsung is very active in ensuring the best level of security and the best experience for its users.[b]

Encoutered bugs

Not yet available / tested[b][b]

Accessories Samsung Galaxy A52

To better enjoy your experience with your smartphone, I offer links to all kinds of accessories that you might find useful

Protective cover / case samsung galaxy a52
Screen protection film samsung galaxy a52
Memory card samsung galaxy a52
USB Cable / Charger samsung galaxy a52
Headphones samsung galaxy a52
Bike rack samsung galaxy a52

Compare Samsung Galaxy A52 with the others

I assigned a score of 1 to 10 for each test that determines the strengths and weaknesses of a product. I am using 0 for criteria that have not (yet) been tested. A score of 1 to 3 indicates poor performance (and yes, it does), a score of 4 to 6 indicates average performance, a score of 7 to 8 indicates good performance, and a score of 9 and 10 indicates exceptional performance. .
The score is calculated based on my measurements and when there are no measurements, it is a subjective opinion based on my experience.

The scores are not static, they change over time because the performance of new products changes and this must be taken into account.

Samsung Galaxy A52
Finish quality7.56.00
Battery performance7.008.00
CPU performance7.006.5
GPU performance7.006.5
Screen quality7.57.00
Photo quality7.55.00
Video quality7.55.00
Wi-Fi performance7.57.00
Mobile download speed7.005.00
Mobile network sensitivity7.006.00
Frequency coverage8.007.00
Audio quality8.56.00
GPS performance7.006.00
Operating system88.00
Overall score10489
Global ranking
1. Realme Gt 112.5 / 140
2. Poco F2 Pro 111.5 / 140
3. Poco F3 111.5 / 140
4. Samsung Galaxy S20 111 / 140
5. Poco X3 Pro 107.5 / 140
6. Samsung Galaxy S10+ 107 / 140
7. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro 106.5 / 140
8. Xiaomi Mi 9t Pro 106 / 140
9. Samsung Galaxy A52 104 / 140
10. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 101.5 / 140
11. Poco X3 101 / 140
12. Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g 101 / 140
13. Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite 101 / 140
14. Redmi Note 9t 100.5 / 140
15. Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro 100 / 140
16. Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite 98 / 140
17. Doogee S96 Pro 98 / 140
18. Poco M3 Pro 98 / 140
19. Xiaomi Redmi Note 9s 98 / 140
20. Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 97 / 140
21. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 96.5 / 130
22. Poco M3 94.5 / 140
23. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10s 94.5 / 130
24. Xiaomi Redmi Note 7 94 / 140
25. Realme 6 93 / 140
26. Umidigi Bison 92 / 140
27. Umidigi A9 Pro 92 / 140
28. Oukitel C21 89.5 / 140
29. Xiaomi Mi A3 89 / 140
30. Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 89 / 140
31. Nokia 5.3 89 / 140
32. Motorola G8 Power 89 / 140
33. Oneplus Nord N100 88.5 / 140
34. Honor 9x 88 / 140
35. Xiaomi Mi 8 Lite 86 / 140
36. Meizu Note 9 86 / 140
37. Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 85 / 140
38. Umidigi S3 Pro 83 / 140
39. Samsung Galaxy A21s 82 / 140
40. Umidigi F2 82 / 140
41. Redmi 9a 81 / 140
42. Redmi 9c 80 / 140
43. Ulefone Armor 7e 80 / 140
44. Doogee S58 Pro 78.5 / 140
45. Honor 8x 78 / 140
46. Umidigi F1 77 / 140
47. Huawei Y6 2019 74 / 140
48. Xiaomi Mi 10t Pro 57 / 70
49. F150 R2022 53.5 / 80
50. Elephone U5 0 / 0

Test / Review conclusion

[b]I don't test Samsung a lot because everyone is testing Samsung and generally the conclusion is often the same, Samsung phones cost more than the Chinese competition without really offering any tangible benefit. Is this the case with this Samsung Galaxy A52? I would say that for the price / performance ratio, Samsung is very far behind the competition and that on many points Samsung is positioned in the middle for a higher price. There are however some elements where the Galaxy A52 stands out from the Chinese competition. The first element is the photo. Samsung has chosen a sensor from its competitor Sony for the Galaxy A52, it is a curious choice because Samsung manufactures its own photo sensors, but it is not a bad choice. The Sony IMX 682 sensor is a good photo sensor and Samsung has some expertise in optimizing photos. The result is therefore quite good. This sensor is also available in cheaper phones, but that doesn't take away from the fact that it's a good photo sensor. [b][b] Sound quality has often been a strength at Samsung and it still is with the Galaxy A52. The sound quality for music with headphones is really good and although Xiaomi has improved a lot, Samsung keeps a little touch of finesse in addition to its Chinese competitor. [b][b] The finish of this Galaxy A52 in matte black version is really good and without this stealth bomber color, the Samsung Galaxy A52 would probably have looked a little deja vu but don't get me wrong. By the way, Samsung almost always manages to make phones with impeccable finishes, this is still the case with this phone [b][b] On the other criteria, the Samsung Galaxy A52 ranks at the same level as phones at 200 €. The performance is good without being extraordinary, the screen is good without being extraordinary, the network sensitivity is average, the gps sensitivity is average, ... in short, for all these other criteria, the Samsung Galaxy A52 is just average. If you are a fan of the brand and don't feel like trying the adventure with a Chinese phone, you will definitely like this phone but if you want to try another brand you will definitely find what you are looking for at Xiaomi / Poco / Redmi.[b]Strengths[b]- photo / video quality [b] - audio quality with headphones for music [b] - finish [b] - good screen [b] - correct battery life [b][b][b]Weaknesses[b]As I wrote above, if you want to try your luck with another brand, you could be tempted by the Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite or the Poco F3 which can easily compete with this Samsung for a lower price.[b][b]Alternatives to this product[b][b]- fingerprint sensor [b] - price / performance ratio [b][b]
Subscribe
Subscribe to my YouTube channel to receive updates.

Comments

Join the discussion / Ask your questions

Your comment will be published after validation. I respond to over 1500 comments a year in my spare time, so I can't always respond very quickly. Your email address will not be publicly visible and it will not be used for commercial purposes.









Be notified by email when a response is published