Notebookcheck Logo

Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE smartphone review - Is this an update?

Basic Galaxy. The Galaxy A14 represents the entry into Samsung's A series. We test the basic model with 4G and 64 GB of storage. Will the Galaxy feeling arise even with the smallest "A" smartphone, or is the equipment already outdated?

The Galaxy A series stands for the midrange in Samsung smartphones, and the A14 is the entry-level model in this series. The manufacturer offers the device in a 5G and 4G version, but both devices not only differ in terms of their mobile communication standards but also in the processor, for example. Our test unit is the LTE version, which is the most affordable option to get a model of the A series. 

The Galaxy A14 is also available in two storage versions with either 64 or 128 GB of storage capacity. In addition, the manufacturer offers the device in three colors: black, silver, and green. The MSRP for the 64 GB version is 179 Euros (~$199). While we praised the highly resolving display in the Galaxy A13 predecessor, we had problems with the low performance of the processor. Let's find out where Samsung made some changes in the successor.

Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Galaxy A10 Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio G80 8 x 2 GHz, Cortex-A75 / A55
Graphics adapter
Memory
4 GB 
Display
6.60 inch 20:9, 2408 x 1080 pixel 400 PPI, capacitive, PLS, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB 
, 46.7 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: 3.5 mm audio port, Card Reader: microSD up to 1 TB (FAT, FAT32, exFAT), 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, compass, OTG
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.3, GSM: 850, 900, 1.800, 1.900 MHz; UMTS: B1, B5, B8; LTE: B1, B3, B5, B7, B8, B20, B28, B38, B40, B41, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 9.1 x 167.7 x 78 ( = 0.36 x 6.6 x 3.07 in)
Battery
5000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 13
Camera
Primary Camera: 50 MPix (f/1.8) + 5 MP (ultrawide f/2.2) + 2 MP (macro f/2.4)
Secondary Camera: 13 MPix (f/2.0)
Additional features
Speakers: mono, Keyboard: onscreen, SIM tool, USB cable (Type-C to Type-C), One UI 5.1, 24 Months Warranty, Single band GNSS: GPS (L1), Glonass (L1), Galileo (E1), BeiDou (B1); SAR head: 0.90 W/Kg, SAR body: 1.05 W/Kg, Camera2 API: Level 3; DRM Widevine L1, fanless
Weight
201 g ( = 7.09 oz / 0.44 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
219 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible Competitors in Comparison

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
75.9 %
07/2023
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2
201 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.60"2408x1080
76.5 %
05/2022
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1
195 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.60"2408x1080
81 %
07/2022
Motorola Moto G52
SD 680, Adreno 610
169 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.60"2400x1080
78.9 %
11/2022
Xiaomi Poco M5
Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2
201 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.58"2408x1080
80.1 %
05/2023
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
SD 685, Adreno 610
188 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.67"2400x1080

Case - Samsung uses textured plastic

As usual in this price range, the case of the Samsung Galaxy A14 is made of plastic. The material is textured in the back, giving it more grip. The three camera bulges stick out from the back, making the phone wobble during inputs when it is placed on a table. 

The smartphone's resistance to warping is good, and it doesn't produce any creaking noises when trying. The keys offer a good pressure point, but the volume rocker has some slight play in our test unit. The power button is easy to reach with the thumb, but you have to stretch your hand a lot in order to operate the volume rocker. We did not notice any scratches in the smartphone during the test period. Buyers of the A14 have to make do without an IP certification, and there is no apparent seal at all around the SIM card slot.

Size Comparison

167.7 mm / 6.6 in 78 mm / 3.07 in 9.1 mm / 0.3583 in 201 g0.4431 lbs165.1 mm / 6.5 in 76.4 mm / 3.01 in 8.8 mm / 0.3465 in 195 g0.4299 lbs165.9 mm / 6.53 in 76.2 mm / 3 in 8 mm / 0.315 in 188 g0.4145 lbs164 mm / 6.46 in 76.1 mm / 3 in 8.9 mm / 0.3504 in 201 g0.4431 lbs160.1 mm / 6.3 in 74.5 mm / 2.93 in 8 mm / 0.315 in 169 g0.3726 lbs148 mm / 5.83 in 105 mm / 4.13 in 1 mm / 0.03937 in 1.5 g0.00331 lbs

Equipment - Galaxy A14 with triple SIM slot

After the Galaxy A13 and A12 used the same SoC, Samsung provided the A14 with an upgrade, using the Mediatek Helio G80 as the CPU. It is accompanied by a Mali-G52 MP2 as graphics unit. 

The 64-GB storage capacity of the test unit can be expanded by using a microSD card. In addition, the smartphone supports dual-SIM, accepting two physical SIM cards in a triple slot. Another positive point is Samsung also fitting a 3.5-mm audio port into the thick frame. The A14 also offers NFC, but the USB-C connection only supports the USB-2.0 standard.

Left: SIM slot
Left: SIM slot
Right: Power button with fingerprint sensor, volume rocker
Right: Power button with fingerprint sensor, volume rocker
Top: microphone
Top: microphone
Bottom: headphone port, microphone, USB, speaker
Bottom: headphone port, microphone, USB, speaker

microSD Card Reader

Samsung equipped the Galaxy A14 with a microSD card reader that is able to handle cards up to 1 TB and supports the exFAT standard. In the test with our Angelbird AV PRO V60 reference card, the A14 impresses with the fastest transfer rates in the class comparison. It is significantly faster than the A13 predecessor and more than twice as fast as the rest of our test field. The transfer rates are also stable.

SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
50 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash (Angelbird V60)
34.3 MB/s -31%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird V60)
24.6 MB/s -51%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird V60)
23.6 MB/s -53%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash (Angelbird V60)
20.56 MB/s -59%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø34.3 (26.7-47.7)
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø30.8 (17.6-38.8)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø39.3 (27.4-50)
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø74.3 (37-79.3)
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø50 (37.9-54.4)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø75.5 (28-82.5)

Software - Samsung promises two large Android updates

The Galaxy A14 is delivered with Android 13. Samsung adjusts the basic software with its own One UI in version 5.1. The manufacturer promises two large software updates for the A14 and four years of security updates. At the time of this test, the security patch is still from April 2023, so we assume a quarterly update period.

In the state of delivery, some third-party apps such as Facebook, Otto, or Market Guru are preinstalled, but they can all be uninstalled without any problems. On the other hand, some standard programs such as a calculator or stopwatch are missing, but you can of course install them using the Play Store.

In addition to the typical Google apps, Samsung also installs its own software, such as the Calendar or the Gallery, and the manufacturer also offers its own app store with the Galaxy Store. With the Game Launcher, the manufacturer also gives the option to collect all games in one place. The software can also block all the notifications during the game or record the gaming session.

Communication and GNSS - WiFi 5 and accurate locating

Samsung uses the WiFi 5 standard in the Galaxy A14. In the test with our Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 reference router, the WLAN connection proves to be stable. Even though the transfer rates aren't outstanding, they correspond to the price class and are at a good level compared to the other competitors in our test.

The Galaxy A14 supports all the usual frequency bands needed in Europe, but there is only a single version for the whole of Europe. The reception is inconspicuous in our test. 

Networking
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Average of class Smartphone
  (34.8 - 1875, n=198, last 2 years)
662 MBit/s +96%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
356 (333min - 363max) MBit/s +6%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
337 (68min - 354max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
328 (300min - 339max) MBit/s -3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
286 (267min - 310max) MBit/s -15%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
283 (244min - 311max) MBit/s -16%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Average of class Smartphone
  (40.5 - 1810, n=199, last 2 years)
696 MBit/s +91%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
370 (332min - 381max) MBit/s +1%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
365 (331min - 379max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
356 (293min - 370max) MBit/s -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
325 (290min - 347max) MBit/s -11%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
292 MBit/s -20%
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320340360Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE Mediatek Helio G80, ARM Mali-G52 MP2; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø328 (68-354)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Qualcomm Adreno 610; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø286 (267-310)
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE Mediatek Helio G80, ARM Mali-G52 MP2; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø365 (331-379)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Qualcomm Adreno 610; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø325 (290-347)
GNSS connection indoors
GNSS connection indoors
GNSS connection outdoors
GNSS connection outdoors

The A14 is able to shine with its satellite connection. Although the smartphone only uses a single-band connection for locating, it supports all the usual networks, including SBAS.

Locating succeeds quickly and accurately outdoors as well as indoors. On a bike tour where we also take the Garmin Venu 2 as a reference, the A14 impresses with its accurate recording of the route.

GNSS measurement: around the lake
GNSS measurement: around the lake
GNSS measurement: turning point
GNSS measurement: turning point
GNSS measurement: overview
GNSS measurement: overview

Telephone Functions and Voice Quality - Galaxy A14 works without a hitch

Samsung uses its own Phone app on the Galaxy A14. The software has a clear design and offers few surprises. WLAN calls are supported by the Galaxy A14. 

The Galaxy A14 doesn't show any weaknesses in the voice quality. The voice of the A14 user is transferred clearly, and the voice reproduction of the earpiece is also good. The Galaxy A14 also masters calls via speaker phone without a hitch. Overall, the suppression of background noises could be better, since they are often also transferred.

Cameras - The main camera of the Galaxy A14 is good

Selfie taken with the Samsung Galaxy A14
Selfie taken with the Samsung Galaxy A14

Samsung uses a triple-camera setup on the back of the Galaxy A14. The star of the combo is clearly the 50-MP main camera. In good light conditions, the pictures are acceptable but lack a bit in sharpness. The color reproduction is rather pale. Movements lead to blurriness and streaking. But considering the MSRP, the performance offered by the main camera is good. The results of the HDR mode turn out positive. On the other hand, you should forgo using the digital zoom, since its results turn out very blurry.

It is good that Samsung also offers a Pro mode in the Galaxy A14: Optionally, ISO, shutter speed, aperture, focus, and white balance can be manually adjusted. Usually, the camera of the A14 uses pixel binning, but you can also take pictures in the full 50-MP resolution. In addition, the smartphone offers a panorama mode and various filter presets for arts and food.

For the macro mode, the A14 uses a separate 2-MP macro lens. Unfortunately, the results are rarely acceptable. To recognize some details, you definitely need a lot of light on the object. The results of the 5-MP ultrawide-angle lens turn out slightly better, but particularly the edges of the pictures are still blurry.

The 13-MP front camera takes good pictures, and portraits with blurry background also succeed reliably. A nice feature is the slider control allowing the user to adjust the degree of blurriness. You can even modify this afterwards in the gallery. Samsung forgoes an autofocus in the front camera, and none of the lenses offers an optical image stabilizer.

Recording videos is not one of the strengths of the Galaxy A14. With all of the lenses, the maximum resolution is FHD at 30 FPS. The autofocus of the main camera in the back works quickly and reliably, but you still need a steady hand, since otherwise the recordings can easily become blurry. When operating the camera, going through the modes, or switching between the camera and gallery, there are some clear stutters, and the operation isn't smooth. This corresponds to the A14's speed of operation, which is slow in general. But the shutter release still always works quickly.

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.

HaseSeeUltraweitwinkel5x ZoomLow Light

We like the sharpness of the main camera under controlled light conditions. It only decreases toward the edges. On the other hand, the test image is hardly recognizable under very low light (1 Lux) and details are lost.

Samsung did a good job with the color adjustments. In bright light, the deviations turn out low, with the largest deviation in dark green color. But overall, the color reproduction turns out very homogenous.

ColorChecker
6.9 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
9.7 ∆E
10.3 ∆E
3 ∆E
5.5 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
3.5 ∆E
3.7 ∆E
7.7 ∆E
9.2 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
3.7 ∆E
2.8 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
5 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE: 5.86 ∆E min: 2.83 - max: 10.28 ∆E
ColorChecker
30 ∆E
54.6 ∆E
39.4 ∆E
35.3 ∆E
45.1 ∆E
62.4 ∆E
53.4 ∆E
34.8 ∆E
42.8 ∆E
29.4 ∆E
65.1 ∆E
64.1 ∆E
29.8 ∆E
47.7 ∆E
36.9 ∆E
76.1 ∆E
43.7 ∆E
41.9 ∆E
92 ∆E
71 ∆E
52.5 ∆E
37.5 ∆E
24.4 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE: 46.82 ∆E min: 13.91 - max: 92.01 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty - No charger with the Galaxy A14

The included accessories of the Galaxy A14 are very limited. Samsung only includes a USB cable (Type-C to Type-C), a quick-start manual, and a SIM tool with the smartphone. We look in vain for a charger or a protective case in the box of the Galaxy A14. The display also doesn't have a protective cover.

In Germany, Samsung offers a 24-month warranty for the A14. With Care+, Samsung also offers a warranty extension, also covering damage from drops or water. A year of Samsung Care+ costs 24 Euros (~$27) for the Galaxy A14, and with theft protection, it is 33 Euros (~$37) for one year.

Input Devices and Operation - A14 with stutters when typing

Samsung uses its own Samsung keyboard for typing. The software offers many adjustments to individualize the inputs. For inputs in landscape format, the keyboard is split, which facilitates typing on the large display.

The sliding characteristics of the touchscreen are good and there are no input errors in the test. However, the low system speed is even noticeable when typing, with inputs being displayed only with a delay and clearly stuttering keyboard animations.

You can unlock the Galaxy A14 either using a fingerprint reader in the power button or with 2D face recognition. Fingerprints are recognized reliably, but the device needs to think for a second before it is unlocked. The face recognition uses the front camera and is correspondingly insecure. In sufficient light, the face is recognized reliably, but the A14 isn't one of the fastest in the market in this regard.

Display - Large but dark LC panel in the Samsung

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid

Even though the display of the Galaxy A14 has large bezels particularly above and below, it still impresses with a good resolution of 401 ppi. The PLS LCD display measures 6.6 inches and offers a refresh rate of 60 Hz with a scan rate of 117 Hz.

Looking at it by itself, the display of the Galaxy A14 offers a good impression, but a comparison with the competitors in this price class shows that others offer more for the money. The Motorola Moto G52 and Redmi Note 12 use an OLED panel, for example.

With the exception of the Poco M5, all the comparison devices have a brighter display with a better adjusted color reproduction. Even the panel of the Galaxy A13 predecessor achieved better results throughout all of our tests.

But at least the brightness distribution of the panel is fairly even. Although we measure some flickering of the display, since its frequency is extremely high at 343,500 Hz, we hardly expect any limitations.

436
cd/m²
459
cd/m²
429
cd/m²
431
cd/m²
465
cd/m²
445
cd/m²
431
cd/m²
444
cd/m²
415
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 465 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 439.4 cd/m² Minimum: 4.47 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 89 %
Center on Battery: 465 cd/m²
Contrast: 989:1 (Black: 0.47 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 8.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 11.8 | 0.57-98 Ø5.2
97.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.2
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
PLS, 2408x1080, 6.60
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
PLS, 2408x1080, 6.60
Motorola Moto G52
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.60
Xiaomi Poco M5
IPS, 2408x1080, 6.58
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Screen
27%
59%
42%
58%
Brightness middle
465
553
19%
655
41%
400
-14%
650
40%
Brightness
439
506
15%
649
48%
396
-10%
658
50%
Brightness Distribution
89
87
-2%
95
7%
96
8%
97
9%
Black Level *
0.47
0.44
6%
0.27
43%
Contrast
989
1257
27%
1481
50%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
8.5
4.64
45%
1.1
87%
1.26
85%
1.55
82%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
15.8
7.86
50%
2.58
84%
2.45
84%
2.59
84%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
11.8
5.6
53%
1.7
86%
1.5
87%
1.8
85%
Gamma
2.2 100%
2.18 101%
2.212 99%
2.298 96%
2.194 100%
CCT
10757 60%
8002 81%
6557 99%
6658 98%
6316 103%

* ... smaller is better

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 343500 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 343500 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 343500 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17744 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

The color adjustments of the Galaxy A14 are a bit weak. At 0.47cd/m², the black value is the highest in our test field, and in the Grayscale and colors, the deviations increase further. According to the Calman 2D measurement, the sRGB color space coverage lies at 97.3%.

Saturation (Mode: Natural, Color Temperature: adjusted; Target Color Space: sRGB)
Saturation (Mode: Natural, Color Temperature: adjusted; Target Color Space: sRGB)
Color Space (Mode: Natural, Color Temperature: adjusted; Target Color Space: sRGB)
Color Space (Mode: Natural, Color Temperature: adjusted; Target Color Space: sRGB)
Grayscale (Mode: Natural, Color Temperature: adjusted; Target Color Space: sRGB)
Grayscale (Mode: Natural, Color Temperature: adjusted; Target Color Space: sRGB)
Colors (Mode: Natural, Color Temperature: adjusted; Target Color Space: sRGB)
Colors (Mode: Natural, Color Temperature: adjusted; Target Color Space: sRGB)

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
15.68 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 4.963 ms rise
↘ 10.72 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 32 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
35.55 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 16.32 ms rise
↘ 19.23 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 44 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (33.6 ms).

The viewing angle stability of the Galaxy A14 display is decent. Its contents can be seen from various angles, but the brightness decreases significantly when viewing from the sides. The low maximum brightness of the panel becomes noticeable outside. In full sunlight, you have to protect the display from the sun with your hand, in order to still be able to see the contents.

Performance - The Galaxy A14 is lame

The performance of the system is one of the largest limitations of the Galaxy A14. Even though the Mediatek Helio G80 is a significant improvement compared to the Exynos 850 processor in the predecessor, the system speed is still slow. Even when closing some apps, there can be a wait and the animation can stutter. Opening apps also takes some time, even if the apps aren't very demanding. 

This also becomes clear in the benchmark measurements, where the A14 does much better than the Galaxy A13 but still remains clearly behind the comparison devices with a Snapdragon 680, 685 or Mediatek Helio G99 in most tests. Only in the CrossMark and AIMark is the Galaxy A14 able to surpass one of the comparison devices. The Galaxy A14 also always interrupted the AnTuTu v9 benchmark.

While the smartphone is usable in everyday operation, this is accompanied by constant stutters and wait times.

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 2138, n=202, last 2 years)
919 Points +163%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
548 Points +57%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
442 Points +26%
Motorola Moto G52
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
378 Points +8%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (300 - 387, n=12)
357 Points +2%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
350 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
155 Points -56%
Multi-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (473 - 6681, n=202, last 2 years)
3043 Points +128%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
1924 Points +44%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1787 Points +34%
Motorola Moto G52
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1573 Points +18%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1334 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (790 - 1370, n=12)
1275 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
586 Points -56%
Geekbench 6.0
Single-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (188 - 2531, n=44, last 2 years)
1279 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
477 Points
Multi-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (512 - 6460, n=44, last 2 years)
3412 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1498 Points
Antutu v9 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone
  (102602 - 1650926, n=139, last 2 years)
765857 Points
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
337968 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
289659 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (204040 - 232228, n=5)
212027 Points
Motorola Moto G52
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
207780 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
134832 Points
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Average of class Smartphone
  (4609 - 21385, n=201, last 2 years)
11960 Points +109%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
9587 Points +68%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
9421 Points +65%
Motorola Moto G52
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
6728 Points +18%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (5589 - 8120, n=10)
6354 Points +11%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
5720 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
4966 Points -13%
CrossMark - Overall
Average of class Smartphone
  (200 - 1474, n=159, last 2 years)
851 Points +145%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
602 Points +73%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
454 Points +30%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
348 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (325 - 348, n=3)
340 Points -2%
Motorola Moto G52
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
327 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
254 Points -27%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Average of class Smartphone
  (411 - 11438, n=156, last 2 years)
5959 Points +168%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
3050 Points +37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2737 Points +23%
Motorola Moto G52
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2573 Points +16%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (2072 - 2400, n=8)
2243 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2226 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
1594 Points -28%
System
Average of class Smartphone
  (2376 - 16475, n=156, last 2 years)
9890 Points +94%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
6637 Points +30%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
6155 Points +21%
Motorola Moto G52
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
5739 Points +12%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
5104 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (4045 - 5452, n=8)
4853 Points -5%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
3112 Points -39%
Memory
Average of class Smartphone
  (670 - 12716, n=156, last 2 years)
6470 Points +144%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
3802 Points +43%
Motorola Moto G52
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
3483 Points +31%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
3254 Points +23%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2650 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (2343 - 3101, n=8)
2643 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
1744 Points -34%
Graphics
Average of class Smartphone
  (697 - 58651, n=156, last 2 years)
15017 Points +729%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2744 Points +52%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2334 Points +29%
Motorola Moto G52
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2182 Points +20%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1811 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (1735 - 1818, n=8)
1790 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
1237 Points -32%
Web
Average of class Smartphone
  (10 - 2145, n=156, last 2 years)
1529 Points +53%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
1250 Points +25%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1232 Points +23%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (1002 - 1243, n=8)
1122 Points +12%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1002 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
930 Points -7%
Motorola Moto G52
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
917 Points -8%
UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Average of class Smartphone
  (207 - 84787, n=144, last 2 years)
21424 Points +490%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
9493 Points +162%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
4445 Points +22%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (3400 - 3992, n=3)
3674 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
3630 Points
AImark - Score v3.x
Average of class Smartphone
  (298 - 245629, n=110, last 2 years)
17435 Points +2135%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
890 Points +14%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
780 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (311 - 780, n=2)
546 Points -30%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
365 Points -53%

The graphics performance of the Galaxy A14 with the Mali G52 MP2 turns out better. The benchmark results show that the Samsung smartphone performs at the same level as the competitors. While the Poco M5 plays in its own league in terms of the performance, the A14 is able to place second in some of the 3D Mark measurements. An overview of the tests shows that the Galaxy A14 surpasses the predecessor and performs at a similar level as the comparison devices.

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
323 Points +81%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
178 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
141 Points -21%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
122 Points -31%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
342 Points +91%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
179 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
139 Points -22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
135 Points -25%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
115 Points -36%
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1155 Points +61%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
716 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
634 Points -11%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
509 Points -29%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
463 Points -35%
3DMark / Wild Life Score
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1205 Points +71%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
706 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
646 Points -8%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
513 Points -27%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
457 Points -35%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2838 Points +18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2589 Points +7%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2511 Points +4%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2410 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2177 Points -10%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2378 Points +109%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1343 Points +18%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
1153 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1139 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
799 Points -30%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2467 Points +91%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1545 Points +20%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
1299 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1290 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
930 Points -28%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3727 Points +38%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2694 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2676 Points -1%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2674 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2054 Points -24%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2413 Points +105%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1436 Points +22%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
1242 Points +5%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1178 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
791 Points -33%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2618 Points +95%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1558 Points +16%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
1367 Points +2%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1346 Points
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
916 Points -32%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
54 fps +46%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
39 fps +5%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
37 fps
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
36 fps -3%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
22 fps -41%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
64 fps +56%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
45 fps +10%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
41 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
41 fps
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
25 fps -39%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
36 fps +64%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
22 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
21 fps -5%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
20 fps -9%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
14 fps -36%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
40 fps +74%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
24 fps +4%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
23 fps
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
22 fps -4%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
16 fps -30%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
22 fps +69%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
14 fps +8%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
13 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
13 fps
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
8.2 fps -37%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
25 fps +67%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
16 fps +7%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
15 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
15 fps
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
9.4 fps -37%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
12 fps +58%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
7.6 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
7.6 fps
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
7.4 fps -3%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
5.1 fps -33%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
15 fps +67%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
9 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
8.9 fps -1%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
8.8 fps -2%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
6.1 fps -32%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
8.8 fps +83%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5.4 fps +13%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
5.3 fps +10%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
4.8 fps
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
3.3 fps -31%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5.8 fps +81%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3.6 fps +13%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
3.2 fps
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2.2 fps -31%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
1.4 fps -56%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
14 fps +87%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
9.5 fps +27%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
9.2 fps +23%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
7.5 fps
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
5.3 fps -29%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
16 fps +88%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
10.1 fps +19%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
8.5 fps
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
6.1 fps -28%
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
5.1 fps -40%
GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2.5 fps +79%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1.5 fps +7%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1.4 fps

The browser benchmarks paint a similar picture. The Galaxy A14 doesn't show any weaknesses here, always remaining in the center of the test field. In everyday operation, the performance while web surfing is inconspicuous. Web pages are loaded quickly, and smooth scrolling is also possible.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 351, n=163, last 2 years)
110.2 Points +175%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
58.945 Points +47%
Xiaomi Poco M5 (Chrome 107)
46.877 Points +17%
Motorola Moto G52 (Chrome 103)
40.743 Points +2%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
40.02 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (29 - 40, n=8)
34 Points -15%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G (Chrome 101)
22.283 Points -44%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (14.9 - 445, n=147, last 2 years)
114.2 runs/min +257%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
50.9 runs/min +59%
Motorola Moto G52 (Chrome 103)
37.48 runs/min +17%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
32 runs/min
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (21.8 - 32, n=8)
28.3 runs/min -12%
Xiaomi Poco M5 (Chome 107)
24.09 runs/min -25%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G (Chome 101)
16.73 runs/min -48%
WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 202, n=154, last 2 years)
102.2 Points +132%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
58 Points +32%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (44 - 45, n=2)
44.5 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
44 Points
Xiaomi Poco M5 (Chrome 107)
39 Points -11%
WebXPRT 3 - Overall
Average of class Smartphone (39 - 304, n=109, last 2 years)
139.2 Points +132%
Xiaomi Poco M5 (Chrome 107)
88 Points +47%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
74 Points +23%
Motorola Moto G52 (Chrome 103)
60 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
60 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (43 - 60, n=7)
49.7 Points -17%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G (Chrome 101)
39 Points -35%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 89112, n=208, last 2 years)
33762 Points +187%
Xiaomi Poco M5 (Chrome 107)
17228 Points +46%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
15695 Points +33%
Motorola Moto G52 (Chrome 103)
12386 Points +5%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
11782 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (10432 - 12744, n=9)
11574 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G (Chrome 101)
5904 Points -50%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G (Chrome 101)
8326.9 ms * -149%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (3227 - 4076, n=8)
3513 ms * -5%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
3347 ms *
Motorola Moto G52 (Chrome 103)
3183.3 ms * +5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
2534.5 ms * +24%
Xiaomi Poco M5 (Chrome 107)
2213.3 ms * +34%
Average of class Smartphone (388 - 9999, n=163, last 2 years)
1519 ms * +55%

* ... smaller is better

On the other hand, Samsung cut some corners in the storage. Our test unit of the Galaxy A14 only offers 64 GB of storage, 17.3 GB of which are occupied in the state of delivery. But at least, the A14 includes the option of storage expansion via microSD card.

The storage used here is affordable eMMC storage, which is also clearly apparent when analyzing the read and write speeds. Compared to the predecessor, we notice that the storage in the A14 is even slightly slower. But the differences become drastic with the comparison devices. The results of the Moto G52, Poco M5, and Redmi Note 12 are about three times faster when reading large files.

Samsung Galaxy A14 LTESamsung Galaxy A13 4GMotorola Moto G52Xiaomi Poco M5Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4GAverage 64 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
32%
164%
317%
289%
-15%
413%
Sequential Read 256KB
298.69
308.5
3%
893.44
199%
976.4
227%
954.87
220%
Sequential Write 256KB
200.17
236.8
18%
503.56
152%
870.7
335%
709.51
254%
176.8 ?(40 - 274, n=201)
-12%
Random Read 4KB
55.9
104.4
87%
98.99
77%
247.6
343%
261.09
367%
Random Write 4KB
55.86
67.3
20%
182.92
227%
257.8
362%
231.57
315%

Games - Galaxy A14 with low frame rates

Despite the low system performance, playing games on the Galaxy A14 is still possible. Even more demanding games such as PUBG Mobile are playable, but the highest graphics level you can select is HD. Once the game is loaded and cards and other resources are downloaded, you can play the game smoothly. However, measurements with GameBench show that the frame rates turn out low. It hardly makes any difference whether you select the HD or Balanced setting. 

The frame rates are 17.6 and 18.5 FPS respectively on average. In simpler games such as Dead Trigger 2, the frame rate is higher, but stable frame rates aren't reached even in this game. In addition, the recordings show that there are some frame drops that are clearly noticeable as stutters from time to time.

Dead Trigger 2 game impression
Dead Trigger 2 game impression
PUBG Mobile game impression
PUBG Mobile game impression
051015202530354045505560Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE; Dead Trigger 2; 1.9.1: Ø50 (1-61)
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE; PUBG Mobile; Balanced; 2.7.0: Ø18.5 (4-25)
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE; PUBG Mobile; HD; 2.7.0: Ø17.6 (12-25)

Emissions - Low heat and good sound with the A14

Temperatures - The Samsung stays mostly cool

In everyday operation, the Galaxy A14 stays pleasantly cool, and we measure a temperature of 28.9 °C (84 °F), which is lower than the class average. If you put some load on the smartphone, for example when gaming or running other demanding programs, it becomes significantly warmer, particularly in the area of the camera.

We measure a maximum temperature of 40.3 °C (104.5 °F) in that area. With this, the smartphone still is comfortably usable without becoming unpleasantly warm. The stress test shows that the performance of the smartphone is hardly throttled under load. While the system runs stably, a look at the other competitors shows that things can also be done better in this performance class.

Max. Load
 36.8 °C
98 F
34.2 °C
94 F
35.5 °C
96 F
 
 37.6 °C
100 F
35.1 °C
95 F
33.5 °C
92 F
 
 37.2 °C
99 F
36.1 °C
97 F
33.3 °C
92 F
 
Maximum: 37.6 °C = 100 F
Average: 35.5 °C = 96 F
35.2 °C
95 F
36.7 °C
98 F
40.2 °C
104 F
34.7 °C
94 F
34.7 °C
94 F
40.3 °C
105 F
34.3 °C
94 F
36 °C
97 F
39.3 °C
103 F
Maximum: 40.3 °C = 105 F
Average: 36.8 °C = 98 F
Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35.5 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 32.7 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37.6 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.3 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.9 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
99.7 % +3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
99.6 % +3%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
99.3 % +3%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
98.7 % +2%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
96.4 %
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
96.4 % 0%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
98.8 % +3%
Xiaomi Poco M5
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
97.8 % +2%
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash
97.2 % +2%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
95.6 %
Motorola Moto G52
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
% -100%
01234567Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø0.84 (0.827-0.851)
Xiaomi Poco M5 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø2.05 (2.02-2.07)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø0.813 (0.807-0.816)
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø4.29 (4.15-4.31)
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø3.07 (3.06-3.08)
Motorola Moto G52 Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø2.68 (2.68-2.68)
Xiaomi Poco M5 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø7.44 (7.37-7.47)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø3.9 (3.89-3.91)

Speaker - A good mono speaker in the Samsung

Even though the Samsung Galaxy A14 only possesses a mono speaker, that delivers a solid performance. At 90.7 dB, it can get attractively loud without there being any vibrations in the case. The sound is balanced and particularly the mids are reproduced linearly. The highs are slightly too emphasized, while - as typical for this class - the low frequencies or even bass sounds are lacking almost completely. 

It is positive that Samsung continues to equip its smartphone with an audio port. The signal-to-noise ratio is a decent 78.78 dBFS. Connecting Bluetooth headphones also works without any problems in the test. The A14 supports standard codecs such as SBC, AAC, aptX, LDAC, and SSC, but AptX HD, Adaptive, TWAS+ and LC3 are missing.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2035.938.52526.230.93129.430.54028.731.85036.640.5632235.88019.733.410017.936.212518.538.416017.742.220015.143.825015.545.631516.550.24001354.850013.459.563014.262.88001366.3100012.870.6125013.874.7160013.777.1200013.679.2250013.279.631501482400013.582.9500013.679.7630013.978.3800013.679.41000013.679.71250013.869.31600013.158.2SPL25.890.7N0.778.5median 13.7median 70.6Delta0.813.436.434.428.230.326.624.926.627.132.43122.521.71717.325.526.721.228.419.136.11541.514.746.513.752.111.359.914.760.816.269.516.574.114.374.112.167.411.654.411.159.913.666.721.469.524.872.82868.623.466.123.165.120.870.723.470.82258.733.581.31.549.7median 16.5median 65.14.49.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy A14 LTEXiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.8% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 7.3% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 47% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 66% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 27% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 44% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 50% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 63% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Battery Life - Large battery but meagre battery life in the A14

Power Consumption

Unfortunately, the Mediatek Helio G80 doesn't compensate for its low performance with a very low power consumption. Even though the SoC isn't really power hungry either, the Snapdragon processors in the comparison devices are more efficient. This is less due to any configuration by Samsung but more to the general consumption of the chip, as a look at the average values of all devices using this SoC shows. 

While the power consumption under load is at the same level as that of the comparison devices, particularly the consumption during regular operation is fairly high at an average of 2.31 watts.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.13 / 0.36 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.89 / 2.31 / 2.34 Watt
Load midlight 4.11 / 6.46 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A13 4G
5000 mAh
Motorola Moto G52
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Poco M5
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
5000 mAh
Average Mediatek Helio G80
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
14%
30%
9%
16%
-3%
-1%
Idle Minimum *
0.89
0.9
-1%
0.8
10%
0.9
-1%
0.8
10%
1.025 ?(0.37 - 1.6, n=8)
-15%
Idle Average *
2.31
1.6
31%
1.1
52%
1.3
44%
1
57%
2.04 ?(0.9 - 4.22, n=8)
12%
Idle Maximum *
2.34
2.1
10%
1.5
36%
1.9
19%
1.5
36%
2.35 ?(1.6 - 4.37, n=8)
-0%
Load Average *
4.11
3.6
12%
2.9
29%
4.6
-12%
4.8
-17%
4.18 ?(2.8 - 6.12, n=8)
-2%
Load Maximum *
6.46
5.3
18%
5
23%
6.8
-5%
6.7
-4%
6.95 ?(4.9 - 9.14, n=8)
-8%

* ... smaller is better

Power Consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

01234567Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE Mediatek Helio G80; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø3.42 (1.21-7.1)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø2.51 (0.839-6.72)
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE Mediatek Helio G80; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.33 (1.278-1.755)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.289 (0.996-1.847)

Power Consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

00.20.50.70.91.21.41.61.92.12.42.62.83.13.33.53.844.24.5Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE Mediatek Helio G80; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø3.25 (3.04-4.71)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø2.82 (2.47-4.26)
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE Mediatek Helio G80; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.33 (1.278-1.755)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.289 (0.996-1.847)