Samsung Galaxy A03 Smartphone review - Inexpensive Galaxy with fast WLAN
Possible competitors in comparison
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 74.6 % v7 (old) | 06 / 2022 | Samsung Galaxy A03 T7200, Mali-G57 MP1 | 196 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.50" | 1600x720 | |
| 73.6 % v7 (old) | 12 / 2021 | Samsung Galaxy A03s Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320 | 196 g | 32 GB eMMC Flash | 6.50" | 1600x720 | |
| 75.1 % v7 (old) | 05 / 2022 | Motorola Moto G22 Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320 | 185 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.50" | 1600x720 | |
| 77 % v7 (old) | 04 / 2022 | Nokia G11 T7200, Mali-G57 MP1 | 190 g | 32 GB eMMC Flash | 6.50" | 1600x720 |
Case and equipment - More memory and fast microSD reader
Samsung has several entry-level phones on offer, and the Galaxy A03 is currently one of the cheapest. Thus, it is not surprising that the Koreans can only offer a fairly simple plastic casing for a price of just under 160 Euros. Compared to the Galaxy A03s from last year, it offers a quite chic pattern of crossed lines. The casing's stability also feels high-quality, so the smartphone can hardly be twisted. Pressure on the front, however, gets through to the screen quite quickly.
Nothing has changed in terms of weight and dimensions compared to last year.
The Galaxy A03 offers more storage than its predecessor: it is available with 64 GB of mass storage and 4 GB of RAM, yet it has not become more expensive in Europe. Again, there is NFC, not necessarily a matter of course in this price range. However, there is a step backward in the USB port that seems a bit incomprehensible: instead of a USB-C port, a microUSB port is now installed again, whose plug cannot be inserted in every direction. It is about time for the manufacturers finally bury this outdated USB port in inexpensive phones as well.
The microSD reader is kept separate from the two SIM slots. It achieves very good rates in both the copy test and the CPDT benchmark, so microSD cards can be used quite well for memory expansion.
| SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03 (Angelbird V60) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03s (Angelbird V60) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (7.7 - 77, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Nokia G11 (Angelbird V60) | |
| Motorola Moto G22 (Angelbird V60) | |
Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)
Communication, software and operation - Finally WiFi 5
Had the Galaxy A03s only had WiFi 4 on board, the successor finally has WiFi 5, which is now common even in the inexpensive entry-level class. The Galaxy A03 performs well, but with two slight drops in transfer rates.
There are still not many LTE frequencies, so mobile Internet abroad becomes a gamble. The reception is overall decent during our test, but the Galaxy A03 does show signal weaknesses at individual moments.
Android 11 with Samsung OneUI 3.1 is preinstalled on the smartphone. During our test, we received an update with the very latest security patches from May. According to Samsung, Android 12 is still to come, but it should not be expected before the second half of the year. In addition, Android 13 will probably be released next year for this phone.
The 60 Hz touchscreen can be operated quickly. A fingerprint sensor is completely missing. Unlock is only possible via facial recognition, but it is only a somewhat insecure software solution that cannot be used for directly unlocking apps like online banking.
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03s | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03s | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| Motorola Moto G22 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03 | |
| Nokia G11 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Motorola Moto G22 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03 | |
| Nokia G11 | |
Cameras - No more macro camera
Is the camera system of the Galaxy A03 a step forward or a step backward compared to the one in the Galaxy A03s? This is an interesting question that is difficult to answer at first glance: on the one hand, the camera has a much higher resolution of 48 megapixels, but on the other hand, it usually only uses a quarter of the resolution, but with higher light sensitivity due to the larger pixels. In addition, the Galaxy A03 no longer has a dedicated macro camera.
Let's take a closer look at the image quality: in direct comparison, the pictures from both smartphones look very similar. The Galaxy A03 again offers decent dynamics, even in more difficult situations, but details are quickly blurred. The additional light sensitivity is hardly noticeable in the pictures. Compared with high-end phone cameras, the significantly lower image sharpness and pixelated areas are noticeable.
Videos can still be recorded with a maximum of 1080p and 30 fps. The speed of the autofocus and exposure compensation is pleasing, but the image sharpness quickly decreases in low light and the video starts to noise. Overall, both generations of the smartphone are on about the same level in terms of photography.
Pictures taken with the 5-megapixel front-facing camera are quite decent, but the dynamic range could be even higher and you should not enlarge the pictures too much because details will be lost. However, selfies are usable for social media.
Image Comparison
Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. 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.
Main cameraMain cameraLow Light
Display - Brighter, but with a blue cast
The screen of the Galaxy A03 has an expanded 720p resolution and is thus on a standard level for the price range of the phone.
The display is a bit brighter than in the predecessor, but with an average of 419 cd/m², the brightness still lags behind the screens in the Moto G22 and the Nokia G11 behind. We like the low black value, which actually makes dark areas appear quite deep and also achieves a good contrast.
The color reproduction is, as in all phones in the comparison field, quite inaccurate. There is also a heavy blue cast in the grayscale. On the other hand, we did not notice any PWM, so even those sensitive to flickering can use the phone's screen without any problems.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 443 cd/m²
Contrast: 1641:1 (Black: 0.27 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.99 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 6.4 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
96% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.174
| Samsung Galaxy A03 PLS, 1600x720, 6.5" | Samsung Galaxy A03s PLS, 1600x720, 6.5" | Motorola Moto G22 IPS LCD, 1600x720, 6.5" | Nokia G11 IPS, 1600x720, 6.5" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response Times | 4% | 8% | 6% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 58 ? | 54 ? 7% | 46 ? 21% | 48 ? 17% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 32 ? | 32 ? -0% | 34 ? -6% | 34 ? -6% |
| PWM Frequency | 807 ? | |||
| Screen | -12% | -15% | -16% | |
| Brightness middle | 443 | 383 -14% | 451 2% | 502 13% |
| Brightness | 419 | 354 -16% | 431 3% | 486 16% |
| Brightness Distribution | 90 | 88 -2% | 90 0% | 89 -1% |
| Black Level * | 0.27 | 0.34 -26% | 0.5 -85% | 0.53 -96% |
| Contrast | 1641 | 1126 -31% | 902 -45% | 947 -42% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.99 | 5.09 -2% | 5.82 -17% | 5.73 -15% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 9.01 | 9.25 -3% | 9.3 -3% | 8.72 3% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 6.4 | 6.5 -2% | 5 22% | 6.8 -6% |
| Gamma | 2.174 101% | 2.261 97% | 2.776 79% | 2.352 94% |
| CCT | 8495 77% | 8152 80% | 7683 85% | 8800 74% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -4% /
-9% | -4% /
-11% | -5% /
-12% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 32 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 19 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 13 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 84 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 58 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 27 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 31 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 94 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Performance, emissions and battery life - More power, more runtime
With the Unisoc T606 as SoC, Samsung makes a solid choice for the Galaxy A03, it means a clear performance plus compared to the Galaxy A03s. The smartphone is much more agile in everyday use and does not immediately drop to its knees during a somewhat more complex background app. Photos sometimes load quite quickly on websites, so browsing with the Galaxy A03 can also be quite nice.
Demanding gamers will have to look elsewhere, but those who only want to play simpler games like Angry Birds or Candy Crush will get enough performance.
The eMMC storage is also common in the price range, but it is still annoyingly slow and significantly prolongs loading times and data transfers compared to higher-end smartphones.
Prolonged high load leads to noticeable warming, but it still remains within acceptable limits.
The mono speaker on the bottom edge is very treble-heavy and cannot really provide good music quality over longer periods. A 3.5 mm audio jack and Bluetooth 5.0 are on board, and external audio devices can be connected easily via them. However, the latest aptX codecs are not available for Bluetooth.
The 5,000 mAh battery is sufficient for good runtimes, but they are much shorter than in the predecessor. Nevertheless, with 18:17 hours of WLAN surfing, you should also survive two workdays with a medium load on the phone. Charging is possible with a maximum of 7.8 watts, so you should not be in a hurry when the phone is empty: it can take up to 3 hours for a full charge.
| GFXBench | |
| on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03s | |
| Motorola Moto G22 | |
| Nokia G11 | |
| Average Unisoc T7200 (5.1 - 11, n=18) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (3.6 - 247, n=204, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03s | |
| Motorola Moto G22 | |
| Nokia G11 | |
| Average Unisoc T7200 (1.9 - 5.5, n=18) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2.3 - 263, n=204, last 2 years) | |
| on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03s | |
| Motorola Moto G22 | |
| Nokia G11 | |
| Average Unisoc T7200 (0.85 - 7.3, n=18) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (0.85 - 144, n=204, last 2 years) | |
| 2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03s | |
| Motorola Moto G22 | |
| Nokia G11 | |
| Average Unisoc T7200 (0.85 - 2.1, n=18) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (0.85 - 112, n=204, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A03 | Samsung Galaxy A03s | Motorola Moto G22 | Nokia G11 | Average 64 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -16% | -42% | -7% | -14% | 514% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 250 | 279.8 12% | 215.45 -14% | 252.7 1% | 274 ? 10% | 1859 ? 644% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 188.3 | 86.8 -54% | 112.78 -40% | 187.6 0% | 176.2 ? -6% | 1445 ? 667% |
| Random Read 4KB | 70.5 | 64 -9% | 39.32 -44% | 48.2 -32% | 59.4 ? -16% | 278 ? 294% |
| Random Write 4KB | 56.5 | 48.7 -14% | 16.34 -71% | 59 4% | 32 ? -43% | 310 ? 449% |
Temperature
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 41.3 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 41.9 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.4 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Speaker
Samsung Galaxy A03 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 38.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 8.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (31.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 78% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 89% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 9% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Nokia G11 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 52% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 70% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Battery life
| Samsung Galaxy A03 5000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A03s 5000 mAh | Motorola Moto G22 5000 mAh | Nokia G11 5050 mAh | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | |||||
| WiFi Websurfing | 1097 | 1193 9% | 1101 0% | 1053 -4% | 985 ? -10% |
Pros
Cons
Verdict - Old problems go, new ones come
Samsung takes a step in the right direction with the Galaxy A03 and gets closer to the competition again. Although the Galaxy A03 is by no means the price-performance winner, it is a solid entry-level phone that finally also offers faster Internet, more memory, and reasonable performance rates.
The battery runtimes are also still convincing, but the predecessor Galaxy A03s still has the nose in front. You also get a fast microSD reader, a decent main camera for the price range, and a reasonably bright display without PWM.
Long runtimes and good system performance make the Galaxy A03 a decent entry-level phone. However, you should consider the smartphone's problem areas before buying it.
We are annoyed about the reintroduced microUSB port, slow charging, the few available LTE frequencies, and the missing fingerprint sensor. All in all, the inexpensive Galaxy phone offers some good and bad traits so you should carefully check whether you can live with the drawbacks before buying.
A bit more convincing is the Nokia G11: it enables unlocking via fingerprint and even offers a 90 Hz screen, but we do not like the camera as much. The inexpensive Xiaomi Redmi Phones are also a good alternative; some of them offer much more features.
Price and availability
The Samsung Galaxy A03 is available on the Internet for about 137 Euros at the time of testing. Also, amazon.com and notebooksbilliger.de also have the device on offer.
Samsung Galaxy A03
- 06/03/2022 v7 (old)
Florian Schmitt
Price comparison
