Notebookcheck

Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016) Smartphone Review

Andreas Osthoff (translated by Liala Stieglitz), 03/01/2016

Upgraded mid-range. Just one year after the first Galaxy A5 generation, Samsung introduces the successor. Updates are found in screen, wireless module as well as the SoC. However, the performance still proves to be a minor shortcoming.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a loyal reader of notebookcheck? Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Especially wanted:
News Editor, Review Editor
(Smartphones)Details here

For the original German review, see here.

Samsung's newest Galaxy A5 (2016) is a consistent further development of the predecessor. Again, the smartphone's focus is on design with its casing composed of aluminum and glass. The battery still cannot be removed, but the storage capacity can be expanded via micro-SD card. The buyer again gets solid mid-range components alongside an Exynos octa-core SoC, Super-AMOLED screen in Full HD resolution and a fingerprint scanner in total. The technical relationship to the Galaxy S5 Neo (approx. 100 Euros, ~$108, cheaper) that we had in review is interesting.

Starting at an official retail price of 429 Euros (~$466), the latest Galaxy A5 finds many opponents. We use the Nexus 5XHTC One A9Huawei P8 and OnePlus 2 as comparison devices for this test. However, Samsung also provides two strong rivals: In addition to the aforementioned Galaxy S5 Neo, the price of the former top-model Galaxy S6 has dropped considerably and is now not much more expensive than the Galaxy A5.

Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 (Galaxy Series)
Processor
Graphics adapter
Memory
2048 MB 
Display
5.2 inch 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel, capacitive, Super AMOLED, glossy: yes
Storage
16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB 
, 10.8 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm audio, Card Reader: micro-SD (max. 128 GB), 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: brightness sensor, proximity sensor, accelerometer, gyroscope, eCompass, pedometer, position sensor, magnetometer, USB-OTG, WiFi Direct, ANT+, FM radio, SAR head: 0.29 W/kg, SAR body: 0.47 W/kg
Networking
802.11a/b/g/n (a/b/g/n), Bluetooth 4.1, 2G (GSM 850/900/1800/1900 MHz), 3G (UMTS 850/900/1900/2100 MHz), 4G (LTE Cat. 6 800/850/900/1800/2100/2300/2600 MHz), LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.3 x 144.8 x 71 ( = 0.29 x 5.7 x 2.8 in)
Battery
2900 mAh Lithium-Ion, Talk time 3G (according to manufacturer): 16 h
Operating System
Android 5.1 Lollipop
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix f/1.9, 28 mm, OIS, auto focus, LED flash
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix f/1.9, 24 mm
Additional features
Speakers: mono, Keyboard: virtual, Keyboard Light: yes, power supply, USB cable, headset, warranty information, manual, Google apps, S-Health, S-Planner, S-Voice, Smart Manager, Galaxy apps, Microsoft Office, My Galaxy, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
155 g ( = 5.47 oz / 0.34 pounds), Power Supply: 63 g ( = 2.22 oz / 0.14 pounds)
Price
430 Euro

 

Case

Like the predecessor, the casing of Samsung's Galaxy A5 is made of aluminum and glass. This time, glass is also used on the back. However, that makes it feel very sleek and sometimes even a bit slippery. The camera only juts out of the back marginally and is therefore not annoying in everyday use. The aluminum bezel is slightly beveled at the edges. The design is overall very appealing, but the sleek, glass back makes handling a bit awkward. The keys are incorporated very accurately, but the Home button produces a relatively loud clicking noise. The Galaxy A5 (2016) is available in black, gold and pink-gold in addition to our white review sample.

The stiffness of the unibody casing is very good. We only heard very quiet cracking noises during very energetic warping attempts. Pressure on the screen is not at all a problem. In total, the entire build can be called impeccable.

Compared with the predecessor, this year's A5 is a bit taller (6.7 vs. 7.3 mm). It is still pleasant to hold with a weight of 155 grams. The devices in the comparison are all on a very similar level. Only OnePlus' 2 is noticeably bulkier with its bigger 5.5-inch display. The battery cannot be removed due to the casing's construction.

Connectivity

The Exynos 7580 octa-core SoC operates with eight cores, and 2 GB of working memory supports it. The internal storage capacity is 16 GB. The user can initially use 10.8 GB, but 1 GB is additionally deducted from that after updating the preloaded apps. The storage can be expanded by up to 128 GB via a micro-SD card. Compatible apps can be moved to the memory card after their installation. A micro-USB 2.0 port for charging and data sharing with a PC is situated on the lower edge; it also supports USB-OTG for external peripherals, but not MHL. Supported transfer standards are Wi-Fi Direct and ANT besides NFC and Bluetooth 4.1. An FM radio that can be used in conjunction with headphones is also integrated.

The fingerprint scanner is incorporated into the Home button. The finger has to be placed on the sensor 10 - 15 times for setting it up. It functions very reliably and conveniently since swiping is not necessary. However, the sensors in the rivals are now faster. The fingerprint can also be used for logging in on websites and making payments via the Samsung account (e.g. in Samsung's own apps store) after unlocking the screen. The fingerprint cannot yet be used for shopping in Google's Play Store.

Left: volume control
Left: volume control
Lower edge: 3.5 mm audio, micro-USB 2.0, speaker, microphone
Lower edge: 3.5 mm audio, micro-USB 2.0, speaker, microphone
Upper edge: no interfaces
Upper edge: no interfaces
Right: Nano-SIM & micro-SD combo slot, power button
Right: Nano-SIM & micro-SD combo slot, power button

Software

The Galaxy A5 is shipped with Android 5.1.1 that Samsung covers with its proprietary user interface TouchWiz. It is not yet known whether or when an update to the latest Android 6.0 Marshmallow will be released. Currently, only update information for the premium devices of the S and Note lineups are available, but not for the A models. The software does not present us with any big surprises. It is easy to use and offers some useful extra features, such as the news feed "Briefing" when swiping the home screen left. We also find the well-known extras like the proprietary app store "Galaxy Apps", "Smart Manager" and some Microsoft apps. The fitness tool "S-Health" that records daily activities via the integrated pedometer is also on-board.

Home Screen 1/2
Home Screen 1/2
Home Screen 2/2
Home Screen 2/2
Preloaded apps 1/2
Preloaded apps 1/2
Preloaded apps 2/2
Preloaded apps 2/2
Motions and gestures
Motions and gestures
Easy mode
Easy mode

Communication & GPS 

Like the Galaxy S5 Neo, the Galaxy A5 supports the high-speed LTE Cat. 6 standard for transmission rates of up to 300 Mbit/s downstream (50 Mbit/s upstream) - at least when the provider supports these speeds. A version with dual-SIM support is available in some parts of the world. Only one SIM card can be inserted in the European A-510F model. All frequencies are listed in the specifications at the beginning of this article. The review sample is not quite as modern in local network connectivity. It does not support the high-speed 802.1ac standard. At least, both the 2.4 and 5 GHz networks can be used. We did not have any reception issues in either the urban German Telecom network or in the private Wi-Fi network at home during the test.

GPS test indoors
GPS test indoors
GPS test outdoors
GPS test outdoors

The European smartphone model can be localized via GPS and the Russian GLONASS systems. Tracking was already possible near a window indoors with a relatively good accuracy of 8 meters. The accuracy does not improve outdoors. Interestingly, the GPS signal decreases gradually until it is completely lost when a finger is placed on the smartphone's upper right.

We additionally check the tracking accuracy on a bike trip and compare the outcomes with the Garmin Edge 500 navigation system. Although the navigation system does not always track the route perfectly, the review sample takes bigger shortcuts since the position is not determined as frequently. The total deviation is only approximately 150 meters on our test route, thus there should not be any restrictions when navigating in a car.

Galaxy A5: total
Galaxy A5: total
Galaxy A5: intersection
Galaxy A5: intersection
Galaxy A5: riverside
Galaxy A5: riverside
Garmin Edge 500: total
Garmin Edge 500: total
Garmin Edge 500: intersection
Garmin Edge 500: intersection
Garmin Edge 500: riverside
Garmin Edge 500: riverside

Telephone & Call Quality

The phone app is known from other Samsung devices and should not be an unsolvable riddle for anyone. Phone numbers can be entered either via the large keypad or simply by opening the contact. It is also possible to set up call forwarding or block specified numbers in the settings. 

We criticized the middling call quality in the test of the predecessor; in particular the microphone did not make a good impression. We were therefore curious whether the latest Galaxy A5 does a better job. The speaker still renders voices with some distortion, but our contact always understood us well. We did not observe static or other interruptions during calls.

Cameras & Multimedia

Photo with front camera
Photo with front camera
Photo with primary camera
Photo with primary camera

At first glance, the camera equipment seems unchanged compared with the predecessor. Samsung still installs a 13 MP sensor on the rear and a 5 MP lens on the front. However, a bigger aperture is now used in both modules (rear: f/1.9 vs. f/2.0; front: f/1.9 vs. 2.2), which is to create brighter photos. That is particularly noticed with the front camera. A lot can still be recognized even in low residual light despite the lack of a flash, even if that inevitably leads to image noise. The details also suffer under the low resolution, as can be seen in our comparison screenshot taken with the rear camera. Videos can be recorded in Full HD (1920x1080 pixels). In total, the performance is sufficient for selfies.

The camera app is very clearly arranged and easy to use. It offers common features, such as a professional mode and panorama mode, but it does not offer time lapse. Double clicking the home button directly opens the camera from standby, and the volume control keys serve as the release. The auto-focus has room for improvement: Unlike other smartphones, it needs quite some time and thus makes a somewhat sluggish impression. 

Compared with other smartphones, it is immediately noticed that the rear-facing 13 MP camera shoots relatively dark photos. Some small details are absorbed already in scene 1, although the outcome is acceptable seen on its own. It is more drastic in scene 2 where many details of the surroundings cannot be recognized at all. The object is still illuminated properly in the low-light scene (scene 3), and many details are visible. However, the image noise is more prominent than in the rivals. The video-recording settings are limited to resolution, where the user can select Full HD, HD or VGA. The frame rate frequency is limited to 30 FPS and slow motion is not supported. The sensor copes well with quick panning, and the shots can also be paused.

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the zoom step. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3

Color Accuracy & Sharpness

In addition to our standard test, we also examined the color accuracy and sharpness under controlled test conditions. The photos are shot in automatic mode, and it is not edited afterwards. The white balance is not manipulated, either.

We use X-Rite's ColorChecker Passport for the test. The original color is displayed in the lower part of each color. Some colors of the Galaxy A5 are somewhat paler, but the deviations are overall within limits.

We assess the image sharpness based on a photo of our test chart. The 100% image section is from the center and is relatively sharp thanks to the decent resolution. Lightly frayed outlines are only seen at the edges. We could see this minor fuzziness in the entire chart.

Screenshot of ColorChecker colors. Original colors are displayed in the lower half of every patch.
Screenshot of ColorChecker colors. Original colors are displayed in the lower half of every patch.
Section of test chart (center)
Section of test chart (center)

Accessories

The box of Samsung's Galaxy A5 contains a modular power supply (10 watts), a USB cable, a headset and the usual brochures. Samsung optionally offers diverse accessories on its homepage, such as generic items like headphones or external batteries, as well as special covers for the A5.

Warranty

A warranty period of 24 months is included.

Input Devices & Handling

Samsung's keyboard is enabled by default. An additional number bar is above the normal letters. It is a bit narrower than the latter. The keyboard also supports all common features, such as word suggestions, spelling correction and swiping that first has to be enabled in the settings. The touchscreen offers very good gliding qualities, and inputs are implemented reliably even at the edges. Like in the Galaxy S5 Neo, handling was sometimes accompanied with occasional lags or glitches. The touchscreen is also very sensitive, which occasionally resulted in incorrect inputs.

Display

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid

Samsung has improved the Galaxy A5's screen compared to last year's model. A Super-AMOLED panel is again installed, but its resolution has been increased to 1920x1080 pixels. That leads to a pixel density of 424 PPI alongside the somewhat larger diagonal of 5.2-inches, which ensures extremely sharp images.

The screen also scores very decently in the brightness measurements. While the screen's average brightness on a pure white image is almost 380 cd/m², it climbs to a maximum of 472 cd/m² when bright and dark content is distributed evenly (APL50). Even a tremendously high 681 cd/m² is possible when the light sensor is enabled. Since the inherent design leads to a black level of 0 cd/m², the contrast ratio is also extremely high. In total, the Galaxy A5 outshines the AMOLED rivals with these rates, and can even compete with the best LC displays in terms of brightness. The minimum brightness is only 1.79 cd/m², which allows using the smartphone very comfortably even in dark environments.

396
cd/m²
372
cd/m²
361
cd/m²
394
cd/m²
378
cd/m²
368
cd/m²
397
cd/m²
378
cd/m²
373
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 397 cd/m² Average: 379.7 cd/m² Minimum: 1.79 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 378 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.95 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 1.86 | - Ø
Gamma: 2.13
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Screen
4%
1%
-74%
-20%
-49%
-28%
Brightness
380
498
31%
349
-8%
439
16%
345
-9%
446
17%
341
-10%
Brightness Distribution
91
97
7%
93
2%
91
0%
89
-2%
90
-1%
91
0%
Black Level *
0.38
0.28
0.3
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.95
2.09
-7%
1.55
21%
4.7
-141%
2.51
-29%
3.84
-97%
2.84
-46%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.86
2.12
-14%
2.05
-10%
5.03
-170%
2.59
-39%
3.97
-113%
2.91
-56%
Gamma
2.13 113%
2.27 106%
2.15 112%
2.27 106%
2.43 99%
2.46 98%
2.01 119%
CCT
6376 102%
6621 98%
6267 104%
7439 87%
6424 101%
7283 89%
6432 101%
Contrast
1324
1618
1503
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
72.04
58.07
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
90.14

* ... smaller is better

CalMAN ColorChecker (profile: Basic, sRGB)
CalMAN ColorChecker (profile: Basic, sRGB)
CalMAN Grayscale (profile: Basic, sRGB)
CalMAN Grayscale (profile: Basic, sRGB)
CalMAN Saturation (profile: Basic, sRGB)
CalMAN Saturation (profile: Basic, sRGB)
CalMAN Colorspace (profile: Basic, sRGB)
CalMAN Colorspace (profile: Basic, sRGB)
CalMAN ColorChecker (profile: Photo, sRGB)
CalMAN ColorChecker (profile: Photo, sRGB)
CalMAN Grayscale (profile: Photo, sRGB)
CalMAN Grayscale (profile: Photo, sRGB)
CalMAN Saturation (profile: photo, sRGB)
CalMAN Saturation (profile: photo, sRGB)
CalMAN Colorspace (profile: Photo, sRGB)
CalMAN Colorspace (profile: Photo, sRGB)
CalMAN ColorChecker (profile: Cinema, sRGB)
CalMAN ColorChecker (profile: Cinema, sRGB)
CalMAN Grayscale (profile: Cinema, sRGB)
CalMAN Grayscale (profile: Cinema, sRGB)
CalMAN Saturation (profile: Cinema, sRGB)
CalMAN Saturation (profile: Cinema, sRGB)
CalMAN Colorspace (profile: Cinema, sRGB)
CalMAN Colorspace (profile: Cinema, sRGB)

As common for Super-AMOLEDs, the user can select among different color profiles. The smartphone automatically adapts to content by default, but the profiles Basic, Cinema (higher saturation) and Photo (realistic reproduction) are also available. In delivery state, the average DeltaE 2000 shifts are a very good 1.95 in colors and 1.86 in the grayscale levels compared with the sRGB color space. The target rate is less than 3 in both cases, and thus the human eye will not detect any color shifts. That makes the Galaxy A5 one of the best devices also in the comparison field.

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 4 ms rise
↘ 3 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (27.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 4 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 250 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (42.6 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 240.4 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 240.4 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 240.4 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 59 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 480 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 10420) Hz was measured.

Thanks to the tremendous brightness (with enabled brightness sensor) and extremely high contrast ratio, the content displayed on the Galaxy A5 remains easily legible even in bright surroundings. We could not make a photo in direct sunlight due to weather conditions, but that should not be a problem. That is, of course, providing reflections on the glare-type screen are avoided, as is the case in virtually every mobile device. The right description for the viewing-angle stability is also excellent: minor color shifts (greenish tint) are only seen in extreme positions. That will not restrict everyday use, though.

Outdoors
Outdoors
Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Discussion

Performance

The SoC in Samsung's Galaxy A5 is the Exynos 7580 Octa. As the name suggests, it has eight Cortex A53 cores that achieve a maximum of 1.6 GHz. The processor is a member of the lower mid-range in terms of performance and thus it has a hard time in this comparison. That is all the more true for the Mali-T720 MP2 graphics card with a performance even lower than Qualcomm's Adreno 405.

We find the expected results in the benchmarks. Our review sample is usually in one of the last places and competes with the technically very identical Galaxy S5 Neo for the last place. Both Samsung devices are clearly behind the rivals particularly in the graphically demanding Sling Shot benchmark (ES 3.0). In total, the Galaxy A5, Galaxy S5 Neo, Huawei P8 as well as HTC One A9 are on par. We would have wished for a bit more power in view of the purchase price.

Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
3607 Points ∼22%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
2955 Points ∼18% -18%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
5073 Points ∼31% +41%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
4154 Points ∼25% +15%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
3330 Points ∼20% -8%
32 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
692 Points ∼15%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
698 Points ∼15% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
1146 Points ∼25% +66%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1066 Points ∼23% +54%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
721 Points ∼15% +4%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
3530 Points ∼18%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
3032 Points ∼16%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
3458 Points ∼18%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
4804 Points ∼25%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1246 Points ∼26%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
747 Points ∼16%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
864 Points ∼18%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1140 Points ∼24%
AnTuTu Benchmark v5 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
38291 Points ∼48%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
52923 Points ∼66% +38%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
40780 Points ∼51% +7%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
45927 Points ∼57% +20%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
60804 Points ∼75% +59%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
58535 Points ∼73% +53%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
37854 Points ∼47% -1%
AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
41676 Points ∼23%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
65936 Points ∼36% +58%
3DMark
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.1 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1350 Points ∼56%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.1 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1777 Points ∼55%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.1 Unlimited (sort by value)
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1660 Points ∼59%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1267 Points ∼9%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2686 Points ∼24%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2151 Points ∼18%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.1 Physics (sort by value)
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1002 Points ∼39%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1060 Points ∼42%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
1320 Points ∼52%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1517 Points ∼59%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1503 Points ∼59%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.1 Graphics (sort by value)
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1127 Points ∼21%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
326 Points ∼6%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
1152 Points ∼21%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
846 Points ∼16%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
169 Points ∼3%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.1 (sort by value)
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1096 Points ∼28%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
385 Points ∼10%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
1186 Points ∼31%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
938 Points ∼24%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
211 Points ∼5%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1479 Points ∼57%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
831 Points ∼32% -44%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1051 Points ∼41% -29%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
1553 Points ∼60% +5%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1414 Points ∼55% -4%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1453 Points ∼56% -2%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
275 Points ∼4%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1942 Points ∼25% +606%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
618 Points ∼8% +125%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
1492 Points ∼19% +443%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1854 Points ∼24% +574%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
272 Points ∼4% -1%
Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
336 Points ∼7%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1497 Points ∼31% +346%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
680 Points ∼14% +102%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
1505 Points ∼31% +348%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1734 Points ∼36% +416%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
332 Points ∼7% -1%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9495 Points ∼15%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
12451 Points ∼20% +31%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9423 Points ∼15% -1%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
10494 Points ∼17% +11%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
18649 Points ∼29% +96%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
10985 Points ∼17% +16%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
10424 Points ∼16% +10%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
7542 Points ∼2%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
22180 Points ∼5% +194%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9015 Points ∼2% +20%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8743 Points ∼2% +16%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
23193 Points ∼5% +208%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
31858 Points ∼7% +322%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
7536 Points ∼2% 0%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
7903 Points ∼4%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
18898 Points ∼10% +139%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9163 Points ∼5% +16%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9080 Points ∼5% +15%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
22002 Points ∼12% +178%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
22400 Points ∼12% +183%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8030 Points ∼4% +2%
1920x1080 Ice Storm Extreme Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9808 Points ∼16%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8761 Points ∼14% -11%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9404 Points ∼15% -4%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
10270 Points ∼17% +5%
1920x1080 Ice Storm Extreme Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
4451 Points ∼1%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
4969 Points ∼1% +12%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
6064 Points ∼2% +36%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
4449 Points ∼1% 0%
1920x1080 Ice Storm Extreme Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
5066 Points ∼3%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
5498 Points ∼3% +9%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
6584 Points ∼4% +30%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
5090 Points ∼3% 0%
1280x720 Ice Storm Standard Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9265 Points ∼6%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8656 Points ∼6% -7%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9337 Points ∼6% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
10466 Points ∼7% +13%
1280x720 Ice Storm Standard Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8329 Points ∼1%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9962 Points ∼1% +20%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
10515 Points ∼1% +26%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8304 Points ∼1% 0%
1280x720 Ice Storm Standard Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8520 Points ∼4%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9639 Points ∼5% +13%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
10228 Points ∼5% +20%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8704 Points ∼4% +2%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
14 fps ∼1%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
37 fps ∼3% +164%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
16 fps ∼1% +14%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
10 fps ∼1% -29%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
46 fps ∼4% +229%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
48 fps ∼4% +243%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
14 fps ∼1% 0%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
14 fps ∼4%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
38 fps ∼10% +171%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
16 fps ∼4% +14%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
11 fps ∼3% -21%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
30 fps ∼8% +114%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
47 fps ∼13% +236%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
14 fps ∼4% 0%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
3.8 fps ∼1%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
16 fps ∼3% +321%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
6.4 fps ∼1% +68%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
5.5 fps ∼1% +45%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
22 fps ∼5% +479%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
23 fps ∼5% +505%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
4.8 fps ∼1% +26%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
3.8 fps ∼3%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
17 fps ∼15% +347%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
6.7 fps ∼6% +76%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
5.8 fps ∼5% +53%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
16 fps ∼14% +321%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
23 fps ∼21% +505%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
4.8 fps ∼4% +26%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
741 Points ∼48%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
769 Points ∼50% +4%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
786 Points ∼51% +6%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
694 Points ∼45% -6%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
923 Points ∼60% +25%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
733 Points ∼48% -1%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
488 Points ∼6%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2038 Points ∼24% +318%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
726 Points ∼8% +49%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
882 Points ∼10% +81%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2631 Points ∼31% +439%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
488 Points ∼6% 0%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
554 Points ∼21%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1115 Points ∼42% +101%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1018 Points ∼38% +84%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1216 Points ∼46% +119%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1297 Points ∼49% +134%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
569 Points ∼21% +3%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
2153 Points ∼33%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1730 Points ∼26% -20%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1595 Points ∼24% -26%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1860 Points ∼28% -14%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2536 Points ∼39% +18%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
2095 Points ∼32% -3%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
810 Points ∼25%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1318 Points ∼40% +63%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
981 Points ∼30% +21%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1085 Points ∼33% +34%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1681 Points ∼51% +108%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
808 Points ∼25% 0%

The browser benchmarks are performed with Samsung's preloaded browser that is based on Chrome 38. The four models mentioned above are again on a similarly low level and clearly lag behind the Galaxy S6Nexus 5X and OnePlus 2. Minor glitches might also be observed in everyday Internet browsing on more complex pages.

Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 38)
3611 Points ∼8%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 46)
8202 Points ∼18% +127%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 46.0)
3911 Points ∼9% +8%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Android 5.0)
4084 Points ∼9% +13%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash (Android 5.0.2)
8518 Points ∼19% +136%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 44)
6955 Points ∼15% +93%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 38)
3627 Points ∼8% 0%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 38)
11887 ms * ∼20%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 46)
4733.8 ms * ∼8% +60%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 46.0)
11053.7 ms * ∼19% +7%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Android 5.0 Lollipop Stock-Browser)
11807.9 ms * ∼20% +1%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 44)
6585.3 ms * ∼11% +45%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 38)
11603.4 ms * ∼20% +2%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 38)
22 Points ∼0%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 46)
45 Points ∼0% +105%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 46.0)
24.79 Points ∼0% +13%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash (Chrome 44)
49.193 Points ∼0% +124%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 44)
44.286 Points ∼0% +101%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 38)
23.097 Points ∼0% +5%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 38)
64 Points ∼11%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 46)
107 Points ∼19% +67%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 46.0)
69 Points ∼12% +8%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Android 5.0)
70 Points ∼13% +9%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 44)
80 Points ∼14% +25%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 38)
68 Points ∼12% +6%

* ... smaller is better

Transfer rates: micro-SD card
Transfer rates: micro-SD card

The 16 GB eMMC storage is likely the same model as in the Galaxy S5 Neo since the benchmark scores are virtually identical. Almost 210 MB/s in sequential read and 60 MB/s in sequential write place the Galaxy A5 in the midfield. That should not restrict everyday use.

We also test the card reader's performance with our Toshiba Exceria SD-CX32UHSI (32 GB) reference card. The rates are a very good 80 MB/s (read) and 40 MB/s (write). Thus, nothing stands in the way of using a micro-SD card for expanding the storage.

AndroBench 3
Random Write 4KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
11.2 MB/s ∼15%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
12.21 MB/s ∼16% +9%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
3.61 MB/s ∼5% -68%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
10.04 MB/s ∼13% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
19.9 MB/s ∼27% +78%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
13.94 MB/s ∼19% +24%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
11.07 MB/s ∼15% -1%
Random Read 4KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
22.9 MB/s ∼17%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
24.8 MB/s ∼18% +8%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
10 MB/s ∼7% -56%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
22.46 MB/s ∼16% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
80 MB/s ∼58% +249%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
21.87 MB/s ∼16% -4%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
22.57 MB/s ∼16% -1%
Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
60.4 MB/s ∼32%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
98.64 MB/s ∼52% +63%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
39.61 MB/s ∼21% -34%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
39.58 MB/s ∼21% -34%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
138.9 MB/s ∼74% +130%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
125.51 MB/s ∼67% +108%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
57.92 MB/s ∼31% -4%
Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
209.4 MB/s ∼43%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
245.19 MB/s ∼50% +17%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
187.57 MB/s ∼38% -10%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
139.95 MB/s ∼29% -33%
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
319 MB/s ∼65% +52%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
234.21 MB/s ∼48% +12%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
215.86 MB/s ∼44% +3%
BaseMark OS II - Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
554 Points ∼21%
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1115 Points ∼42% +101%
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1018 Points ∼38% +84%
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1216 Points ∼46% +119%
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1297 Points ∼49% +134%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
569 Points ∼21% +3%

Games

The review sample's higher screen resolution leads to even worse outcomes than that of the Galaxy S5 Neo in this section. For example, the Mali-T720 MP2 could not render the demanding racing game Asphalt 8: Airborne really smoothly using low graphics settings. That was first possible in very low details. Minor stutters were also observed in the more basic Angry Birds 2, for example in explosions. The sensors function well. However, the hand quickly covers the speaker in landscape mode.

Asphalt 8: Airborne
Asphalt 8: Airborne
Angry Birds 2
Angry Birds 2
Asphalt 8: Airborne
 SettingsValue
 very low29 fps
Dead Trigger 2
 SettingsValue
 high34 fps

Emissions

Temperature

The Galaxy A5's temperature development is absolutely uncritical. Some comparison devices are even a bit cooler, but the review sample never gets unpleasant with a maximum of almost 36 °C on the upper side even under load. The smartphone's underside, where the hand usually is, remains even cooler.

There are no temperature issues with the SoC inside and consequently no issues with the performance. The GFXBench battery test repeats the T-Rex test 30 times and records the performance. Although the performance flow looks a bit adventurous, the fluctuations are within just 1%.

GFXBench battery test
GFXBench battery test
Max. Load
 35.9 °C34.5 °C31.6 °C 
 35.5 °C33.1 °C31.3 °C 
 34.2 °C32.3 °C31.3 °C 
Maximum: 35.9 °C
Average: 33.3 °C
31.6 °C32.9 °C33.8 °C
31.5 °C32.4 °C32.8 °C
30.8 °C31.2 °C31.7 °C
Maximum: 33.8 °C
Average: 32.1 °C
Power Supply (max.)  31.4 °C | Room Temperature 22.2 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Heat
6%
-3%
5%
4%
-23%
9%
Maximum Upper Side *
35.9
34.4
4%
41.3
-15%
35.7
1%
35.6
1%
45.8
-28%
33.5
7%
Maximum Bottom *
33.8
37.4
-11%
39.8
-18%
31.3
7%
35.9
-6%
43.5
-29%
34
-1%
Idle Upper Side *
32.8
28.2
14%
28.7
12%
33.2
-1%
29.4
10%
38.9
-19%
27.8
15%
Idle Bottom *
31.5
25.8
18%
28.4
10%
27.6
12%
28.6
9%
36.9
-17%
27.4
13%

* ... smaller is better

Speaker

Speaker assessment: Pink Noise
Speaker assessment: Pink Noise

In this chapter, another modification compared with the predecessor is found. The mono speaker is now situated on the lower edge and no longer on the back. Thus, the smartphone can be placed on a table without needing to fear a muffled sound. The sound is overall tinny and bass is absolutely non-existent. At least only minor distortions are heard in high volumes. The maximum volume of almost 88 dB(A) is also sufficiently high. Samsung's SoundAlive music app offers some presets and settings to adapt the audio output according to personal preferences. Connecting external speakers or headphones would be recommendable for a better sound. That functioned impeccably via both the 3.5 mm jack and Bluetooth.

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Different instruments were used for the comparison measurements in some cases, and thus not all devices are directly comparable. We could, however, compare the Galaxy A5 directly with the technically very similar Galaxy S5 Neo that needs more power despite its screen's slightly smaller size and considerably lower resolution, particularly in idle. The review sample is also very frugal with at most 5 watts during load, which is due to the comparatively low performance.

Samsung ships the Galaxy A5 with a modular 10-watt power supply that supports Quick Charge. The battery is recharged by 50% in a bit over half an hour. The battery needs approximately 1 hour and 40 minutes for a full recharge.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.22 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.96 / 1.64 / 1.71 Watt
Load midlight 2.98 / 5.08 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Gossen Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Power Consumption
-12%
1%
-26%
10%
-16%
-40%
Idle Minimum *
0.96
0.55
43%
0.9
6%
0.7
27%
0.4
58%
0.6
37%
1.68
-75%
Idle Average *
1.64
1.44
12%
1.2
27%
2
-22%
0.6
63%
1.7
-4%
2.2
-34%
Idle Maximum *
1.71
1.9
-11%
1.4
18%
2.1
-23%
1.2
30%
1.8
-5%
2.33
-36%
Load Average *
2.98
3.36
-13%
3.8
-28%
4.9
-64%
5
-68%
5.7
-91%
4.09
-37%
Load Maximum *
5.08
9.76
-92%
5.9
-16%
7.4
-46%
6.8
-34%
6
-18%
5.92
-17%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

Samsung installs a 2900 mAh battery that achieves very good battery runtimes in conjunction with the low consumption rates. Over 38 hours is possible in an ideal case (Wi-Fi read script, minimum brightness). However, the load rate is all the more impressive (maximum brightness, Stability test). The user can count with approximately 8 hours before the battery is depleted even in a worst-case scenario. The outcomes in the tests using a brightness set to approximately 150 cd/m² are also very good. 10.5 hours in the Wi-Fi test and over 11 hours when rendering a Full HD video (Big Buck Bunny, H.264) place the Galaxy A5 before the comparison devices. Only the Galaxy S5 Neo is a bit more enduring in video playback. The review sample easily lasted a whole day in real-world use.

The familiar energy-saving modes are again integrated. In addition to the standard mode that limits the CPU's performance and brightness, the Ultra Energy Saving mode is also present. However, it strongly limits the smartphone's functions and only offers a gray-scale view. Regardless of the selected mode, the screen's brightness decreases to minimum at a battery charge of below 5% and cannot be increased.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
38h 43min
WiFi Surfing v1.3 (Chrome 38)
10h 26min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
11h 12min
Load (maximum brightness)
8h 03min
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Google Nexus 5X
Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash
HTC One A9
Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Huawei P8
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Samsung Galaxy S6
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
OnePlus 2
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo
Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Battery Runtime
-31%
-47%
-41%
-37%
-38%
-11%
Reader / Idle
2323
1775
-24%
1154
-50%
826
-64%
1300
-44%
1393
-40%
1615
-30%
Load
483
245
-49%
176
-64%
215
-55%
278
-42%
229
-53%
402
-17%
WiFi
575
WiFi v1.3
626
412
-34%
368
-41%
434
-31%
475
-24%
356
-43%
546
-13%
H.264
672
555
-17%
465
-31%
581
-14%
580
-14%
773
15%

Pro

+ superb screen
+ very good build
+ very long battery life
+ low emissions
+ expandable storage via micro-SD
+ fingerprint scanner

Cons

- middling performance
- non-removable battery
- slippery back side
- PWM flickering

Verdict

In review: Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016). Review sample courtesy of Samsung Germany.
In review: Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016). Review sample courtesy of Samsung Germany.

Samsung's Galaxy A5 (2016) proves to be a successful advancement of the predecessor in most sectors. The mid-range smartphone is again very elegant and, apart from PWM flickering, it has one of the best panels in this segment. The cameras have also been improved slightly. Further plus points are the low emissions and long battery life.

Real shortcomings are not found. We would have wished for ac Wi-Fi, and the casing is quite slippery due to its glass back, which lessens the good overall impression to a small extent. However, the biggest issue is - like in the predecessor - the performance. At an RRP of 429 Euros (~$466), we would have hoped for a bit more power. The Galaxy A5 not only falls behind its opponents in the benchmarks, but small lags and glitches are also noticed time and again in everyday use. Whether or not the mid-range models from the A lineup will be updated to Android 6.0 is not yet known, either.

Samsung again provides a very high-quality as well as very pricey mid-range smartphone with its new Galaxy A5. The screen belongs to the best of its kind, but it lags behind its rivals in performance.

Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 - 02/26/2016 v5
Andreas Osthoff

Chassis
93%
Keyboard
71 / 75 → 95%
Pointing Device
87%
Connectivity
46 / 61 → 75%
Weight
92%
Battery
93%
Display
91%
Games Performance
15 / 57 → 26%
Application Performance
35 / 65 → 54%
Temperature
92%
Noise
100%
Audio
60 / 91 → 66%
Camera
68%
Average
72%
84%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment this article:
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016) Smartphone Review
Andreas Osthoff, 2016-03- 1 (Update: 2016-03- 1)