Notebookcheck Logo

Samsung Galaxy A15 4G smartphone review – A lot of capabilities for daily use at a low cost

Who still needs high-end? Samsung now also uses a bright AMOLED screen in its entry-level phone of the Galaxy A series and includes much faster storage and a wide-angle camera. Will this dispense with the need for a more expensive smartphone? We find out in our test.

Affordable smartphones are favored and can handle more and more tasks. A contributing factor is the intense competition in this price range, since both smaller manufacturers of affordable smartphones as well as large brands that cover the whole spectrum are active here. Samsung belongs to the latter. We already tested the Galaxy A15 5G and found it to be a great update. Now we are taking a closer look at the LTE version of the Galaxy A15 that allows you to save another few dozen Euros.

The Galaxy A15 4G doesn't lack any equipment as well: a lot of storage, a bright and fairly fast AMOLED screen, and high load speeds are included in the highlights. We begin our extensive review to find out in detail what the affordable Galaxy can really do.

Samsung Galaxy A15 (Galaxy A10 Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio G99 8 x 2 - 2.2 GHz, Cortex-A76 / A55
Graphics adapter
Memory
4 GB 
Display
6.50 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 396 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, Super AMOLED, glossy: yes, 90 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash, 128 GB 
, 105 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: 3.5 mm audio port, Card Reader: microSD (shared, up to 1TB) , 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Sensors: accelerometer, compass
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.3, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B28/​B38/​B40/​B41), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.4 x 160.1 x 76.8 ( = 0.33 x 6.3 x 3.02 in)
Battery
5000 mAh Lithium-Ion, 25 Watt charging
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 14
Camera
Primary Camera: 50 MPix f/​1.8, phase comparison AF, LED flash, videos @1080p/​30fps (camera 1); 5.0MP, f/​2.2, wide angle lens (camera 2); 2.0MP, f/​2.4, macro lens (camera 3)
Secondary Camera: 13 MPix f/2.0
Additional features
Speakers: mono speaker, USB cable, 24 Months Warranty, SAR: 0.42W/​kg Head, 1.29W/​kg Body , fanless
Weight
200 g ( = 7.05 oz / 0.44 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
190 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
80 %
04/2024
Samsung Galaxy A15
Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2
200 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.50"2340x1080
80.2 %
02/2024
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
SD 685, Adreno 610
188.5 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.67"2400x1080
75.9 %
07/2023
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2
201 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.60"2408x1080
78.7 %
05/2023
Nokia G22
T606, Mali-G57 MP1
195 g64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.52"1600x720
80.7 %
10/2023
Motorola Moto G54
Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256
177 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.50"2400x1080

Case – Elegant plastic

If you place the Galaxy A15 4G and the 5G model next to each other, you won't see any external difference, since both smartphones are using the exact same case. So those who are looking for one specific version should be very careful in the store, since the Galaxy A15 4G can only be recognized by a very small sticker on the back with the model number A155F.

As with the sibling model, you get a plastic case. In our test unit, the back is night blue this time. The high-gloss surface shimmers in the light, so fingerprints are a frequent problem. The model is also available in a lighter blue color or in pastel yellow, which is the most daring of the three color versions.

The bezels around the front screen are fairly wide, while some of the competitors such as the Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G or the Moto G54 are already showing a more modern appearance in this regard.

The case of the smartphone is robust and shows good workmanship, even though it produces some slight creaking noises when we apply some pressure by trying to twist it, for example.

Size Comparison

167.7 mm / 6.6 inch 78 mm / 3.07 inch 9.1 mm / 0.3583 inch 201 g0.4431 lbs165 mm / 6.5 inch 76.2 mm / 3 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 195 g0.4299 lbs162.2 mm / 6.39 inch 75.6 mm / 2.98 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 188.5 g0.4156 lbs161.6 mm / 6.36 inch 73.8 mm / 2.91 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 177 g0.3902 lbs160.1 mm / 6.3 inch 76.8 mm / 3.02 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 200 g0.4409 lbs148 mm / 5.83 inch 105 mm / 4.13 inch 1 mm / 0.03937 inch 1.5 g0.00331 lbs

Equipment – More storage and NFC

There is a storage upgrade compared to the Galaxy A14 LTE predecessor, changing from 64 GB of slow eMMC Flash to the faster 128 GB UFS 2.2 storage. You continue to have to make do with 4GB of RAM, though.

In addition, there are most of the connections you would need in everyday use: a USB-C port with USB 2.0 speed for charging and data transfer, an NFC connection for wireless payment services for example, a 3.5mm audio port, and the modern Bluetooth 5.3.

Unfortunately, there is still no support for virtual SIM cards called eSIM. The Motorola Moto G54 is better equipped in this regard.

Bottom: 3.5mm audio port, microphone, USB-C port, speaker
Bottom: 3.5mm audio port, microphone, USB-C port, speaker
Top: microphone
Top: microphone
Left side: SIM slot
Left side: SIM slot
Right side: standby key, volume rocker
Right side: standby key, volume rocker

microSD Card Reader

Even though there are two SIM slots, if you also want to insert a microSD card, you have to use one of the two slots for this. The microSD card can be used for storage expansion or also for transferring data between devices.

We evaluate the speeds that are reached by the card reader using our Angelbird V60 reference card and are satisfied: 42.6 MB/s in the copy test is a very good value that is higher than that of most comparison devices. With this, the card reader accomplishes fairly fast data transfers, although it is still unable to make use of the full potential of the microSD card from Angelbird in terms of the transfer rates.

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 +17%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird V60)
42.6 MB/s
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash (Angelbird V60)
36.2 MB/s -15%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird V60)
24.3 MB/s -43%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird V60)
19.6 MB/s -54%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A15 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø35.2 (23-46.3)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø26.5 (17.2-40)
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)
Nokia G22 Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø37.6 (30.1-45.4)
Motorola Moto G54 IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø34.3 (21.6-47.4)
Samsung Galaxy A15 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø75.1 (47.4-81.9)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø76 (18.4-82.5)
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)
Nokia G22 Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø73.1 (39-81.8)
Motorola Moto G54 IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø71.9 (29.9-78.1)

Software – Galaxy smartphone with the promise of long update periods

The smartphone uses Android 14 with Samsung's own OneUI 6.1 user interface. There are many preinstalled apps, most of them from Samsung itself, but there are also some third-party advertising apps. Most of these can be uninstalled fairly easily, though. Some of the Samsung apps also double the functions that are offered by Google's preinstalled apps.

Thanks to an L1 certification for Google's Widevine digital rights management, you can enjoy streaming movies from the large services in full quality.

In terms of update periods, the manufacturer promises very long times with up to 5 years of security updates, so up to 2029, and up to 4 generations of Android, which would be Android 18. However, we also have to note that with the addition of the "up to" wording in this promise, things could also change, which is a significant limitation of this update guarantee. We can only hope that Samsung wouldn't want to risk a PR nightmare by breaking their promise.

In our test unit, the security patches are from January 1, 2024, which at the time of this test is still within the 3-month time frame that Samsung also promises. But to remain within this time frame, the next update should happen very soon.

Communication and GNSS – Connectivity suitable for everyday use

The fastest standard in which the Samsung Galaxy A15 4G is able to access the Internet via WLAN is WiFi 5. The class typical access speeds of 300 - 350 Mbit/s are basically reached, and the smartphone is only minimally slower than comparable devices when receiving data.

Close to the router, it still takes several seconds until images on large websites are loaded. At a 10m (~33 ft) distance and through 3 walls, we still get about half the signal strength with the smartphone, and websites load correspondingly slower.

Our test unit supports the necessary frequency bands to access the Internet via the mobile networks in Central Europe. But more than those aren't supported, and you should check beforehand whether the necessary LTE frequencies are supported if you travel to other countries and want to access the mobile Internet there. You can check some tables on the Internet (for example here in the Wikipedia) and compare them with the specs of the smartphone, which you can find above in this article.

In some spot checks during our approximately two-week-long test, the reception is unable to keep up with that of high-end devices from Apple or Honor. While the Galaxy A15 LTE succeeds in getting a signal wherever the other devices also have reception, the signal is often a bit weaker.

Networking
Samsung Galaxy A15
iperf3 receive AXE11000
285 (min: 259) MBit/s ∼44%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
364 (min: 352) MBit/s ∼53%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
iperf3 receive AXE11000
317 (min: 293) MBit/s ∼48%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
364 (min: 336) MBit/s ∼53%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
iperf3 receive AXE11000
337 (min: 68) MBit/s ∼51%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
365 (min: 331) MBit/s ∼53%
Nokia G22
iperf3 receive AXE11000
315 (min: 226) MBit/s ∼48%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
362 (min: 319) MBit/s ∼52%
Motorola Moto G54
iperf3 receive AXE11000
365 (min: 347) MBit/s ∼56%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
306 (min: 277) MBit/s ∼44%
Average of class Smartphone
iperf3 receive AXE11000
655 (min: 34.8) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
692 (min: 40.5) MBit/s ∼100%
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320340360Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A15; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø285 (259-304)
Samsung Galaxy A15; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø364 (352-375)
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors
Available satellite networks
Available satellite networks

To determine its location, the Samsung smartphone uses all the large satellite networks and SBAS for more exact locating. This allows it to reach a good accuracy of up to 1m (~3 ft) outdoors.

To find out more how the smartphone will fare in locating itself in practice, for example when using it as a navigation device, we take it on a bike tour, also taking the Garmin Venu 2 smartwatch, which is known for its high accuracy.

As a result, we find that the Galaxy A15 4G is also able to locate us relatively accurately on the routes we take. However, it generally does better in open areas than in the narrow alleys of the old town, where it often creates some slight detours, showing us riding through houses or almost falling into the river.

Generally, the Galaxy A15 4G can also be recommended for navigation, particularly if you travel through less built-up areas. But there will still be some slight inaccuracies from time to time, and those who need absolute accuracy should look for another device.

Samsung Galaxy A15 4G locating – overview
Samsung Galaxy A15 4G locating – overview
Samsung Galaxy A15 4G locating – turning point
Samsung Galaxy A15 4G locating – turning point
Samsung Galaxy A15 4G locating – bridge
Samsung Galaxy A15 4G locating – bridge
Garmin Venu 2 locating – overview
Garmin Venu 2 locating – overview
Garmin Venu 2 locating – turning point
Garmin Venu 2 locating – turning point
Garmin Venu 2 locating – bridge
Garmin Venu 2 locating – bridge

Telephone Functions and Voice Quality – Noises are present

While Samsung uses its own inhouse app for making phone calls, you can also install other phone apps without any trouble and set them as the default.

The voice quality using the earpiece is loud and fairly clear, but our conversation partner sounds slightly dull. The microphone does a good job recording our own voice without any distortions, although the owner of the Galaxy A15 4G shouldn't talk too quietly. Using the speaker mode, you can also make calls with a high volume. While the microphone is able to record our voice clearly as long as we don't talk too quietly, annoying background noises are hardly filtered out.

Cameras – Flexible camera system

Picture taken with the front camera
Picture taken with the front camera

We already know the camera setup from our test of the Galaxy A15 5G: The 50-Megapixel main camera in the LTE model also takes decent pictures for the price class. For example, the dramatic sky in our photo of the surroundings is depicted with some amount of detail. However, the sharpness delivered by the camera is only mediocre.

Even though the camera produces a good overall brightness under low-light conditions, the remaining bright areas of the image are then too bright and details are lost.

Similarly affordable smartphones only rarely include a wide-angle camera anymore, but the Galaxy A15 4G does include it. At 5 Megapixels, the resolution isn't very high, and as we already saw in the 5G model, the viewing angle isn't very large compared to other smartphones. The lens is suitable for snap shots, making the camera system slightly more flexible overall. But you shouldn't enlarge the pictures too much, since details are hardly recognizable.

You can also find a macro camera with a 2 Megapixel resolution on the back, which you can use for extreme closeups. While the resolution of the sensor is very low, it is still sufficient for viewing the image on the smartphone display.

Videos can be recorded at a maximum of 1080p and 30 fps. You have to choose between the ultrawide angle lens and the main camera before starting the recording, since this is not possible anymore during the recording. The image quality is solid overall, and the auto-focus and brightness adjustment work fairly quickly and are continuously variable.

The front camera is able to take selfies at a maximum of 13 Megapixels, which look fairly sharp overall and can also be enlarged easily. However, even in good light conditions, there are no recognizable details in dark areas anymore.

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 Camera: PlantMain Camera: SurroundingsMain Camera: Low LightWideangle Camera

We can exactly control the light conditions in our studio and test the main camera again here. Our test chart appears with a low sharpness and also misses some contrast. At only 1 Lux of remaining light, the object is hardly recognizable anymore.

The color reproduction looks poor in contrast overall.

ColorChecker
3.6 ∆E
10 ∆E
14.3 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
14.2 ∆E
11 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
16.4 ∆E
10.6 ∆E
2.8 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
3.4 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
5 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
15.5 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy A15: 8.82 ∆E min: 2.83 - max: 16.44 ∆E
ColorChecker
30.2 ∆E
54 ∆E
39.3 ∆E
34.1 ∆E
45.4 ∆E
60 ∆E
52.4 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
43.8 ∆E
28.5 ∆E
63.6 ∆E
63 ∆E
31.5 ∆E
46.3 ∆E
37.8 ∆E
74.7 ∆E
44.1 ∆E
41.2 ∆E
82.6 ∆E
69.1 ∆E
51.5 ∆E
36.4 ∆E
23.9 ∆E
14 ∆E
ColorChecker Samsung Galaxy A15: 45.98 ∆E min: 13.99 - max: 82.6 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty – The charger has to be purchased extra

The manufacturer doesn't include a charger, and the box only includes a USB cable, a SIM tool, and the most important papers. You can buy the corresponding 25-Watt charger from the manufacturer's online shop on Amazon for ~$15

There is a 24-month warranty for Samsung smartphones if purchased in the EU. The manufacturer offers numerous repair options such as a mobile service team or repair centers in many large cities.

Input Devices and Operation – Fast fingerprint sensor

The 90-Hz display makes the touch screen operation a bit smoother, since the display responds faster to inputs. In addition, movements look sharper, allowing you to still recognize the details when scrolling quickly.

On the right side of the case are the physical keys, which consist of the standby key and a volume rocker. They can be felt easily with the finger and are placed ergonomically also for lefthanded users. A fingerprint reader is integrated into the standby key. It responds reliably, unlocking the smartphone without any delays.

Face recognition is also available as a biometric method to unlock the smartphone, and it also works reliably in good light conditions. In dark surroundings, the reflected light from the display is sufficient to identify the face, although unlocking works even better in such situations if you use the fingerprint sensor.

Keyboard - portrait
Keyboard - portrait
Keyboard - landscape
Keyboard - landscape

Display – AMOLED Display with good brightness and 90 Hz

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid

Although an AMOLED display is not a given in this price class, Samsung still decided to use one in the Galaxy A15 4G, thus offering a good argument for purchase. With a resolution of 2340x1.080 pixels, a refresh rate of 90 Hz, and our measurement of an average maximum brightness of 711 cd/m², the panel would also be well-suited for a more expensive smartphone.

The brightness isn't quite sufficient for perfectly displaying HDR content. However, in smaller areas a slightly higher brightness is still possible, as our test with the spectral photometer and the CalMAN software shows. In any case, you get an attractive display with vibrant colors and good contrasts.

691
cd/m²
689
cd/m²
702
cd/m²
713
cd/m²
731
cd/m²
740
cd/m²
723
cd/m²
719
cd/m²
695
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 740 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 711.4 cd/m² Minimum: 1.7 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 93 %
Center on Battery: 731 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.31 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 1.7 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.091
Samsung Galaxy A15
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.50
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
PLS, 2408x1080, 6.60
Nokia G22
IPS, 1600x720, 6.52
Motorola Moto G54
IPS, 2400x1080, 6.50
Screen
27%
-215%
-71%
-62%
Brightness middle
731
940
29%
465
-36%
674
-8%
492
-33%
Brightness
711
922
30%
439
-38%
641
-10%
470
-34%
Brightness Distribution
93
96
3%
89
-4%
90
-3%
90
-3%
Black Level *
0.47
0.43
0.3
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
2.31
1.2
48%
8.5
-268%
4.45
-93%
3.9
-69%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
3.51
2.28
35%
15.8
-350%
7.41
-111%
6.26
-78%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
1.7
1.4
18%
11.8
-594%
5.1
-200%
4.3
-153%
Gamma
2.091 105%
2.27 97%
2.2 100%
2.072 106%
2.275 97%
CCT
6424 101%
6503 100%
10757 60%
7799 83%
7656 85%
Contrast
989
1567
1640

* ... 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 187 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 187 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 187 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17900 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

Minimal brightness
Minimal brightness
25% brightness
25% brightness
50% brightness
50% brightness
75% brightness
75% brightness
100% brightness
100% brightness

Measurement series at a fixed zoom level with various brightness settings

In our test, we also measure some flickering with a frequency of 187 Hz at very low brightness levels. Since it is very difficult to dim OLED diodes, many manufacturers use PWM (which is switching off the diodes for a short time) to simulate a lower brightness to the eyes. However, this might lead to some problems such as headaches for some people. Users that are sensitive to this should therefore try out the display for themselves before purchasing the smartphone.

The color reproduction is fairly accurate in the "Natural" mode, with only bright green and blue color tones deviating slightly from the target values. With this, the display can still be used for professional work.

CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Color Accuracy
CalMAN Color Accuracy
CalMAN sRGB Color Space
CalMAN sRGB Color Space
CalMAN AdobeRGB color space
CalMAN AdobeRGB color space
CalMAN DCI P3 color space
CalMAN DCI P3 color space
CalMAN Saturation
CalMAN Saturation

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
1.7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.8 ms rise
↘ 0.9 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 5 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1 ms rise
↘ 1 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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 5 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms).

Outdoors, the good brightness of the display is often sufficient to still keep the contents readable even with some strong reflections. But working in the shade still feels much more comfortable.

There are no complaints about the viewing angles. Even when looking at the display from the side, you can still see its contents without any distortions.

Using the smartphone outside
Using the smartphone outside
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance – Stutters cannot be not ruled out

The MediaTek Helio G99 is an SoC from 2022 that was originally used in some more expensive devices. Now the Galaxy A15 4G is also using it as its engine, reaching some good performance values for its price class. Our test unit even offers slightly more power with it than the 5G version.

Even though some smartphones such as the Motorola Moto G54 also show that you can even use more powerful SoCs in this price class, the Galaxy A15 4G doesn't fare badly at all: While you still have to accept some smaller stutters or even slightly longer delays from time to time, their occurrence is rarer than we are otherwise used to from this price class.

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 2138, n=218, last 2 years)
916 Points +66%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
697 Points +26%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
552 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (490 - 576, n=14)
546 Points -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
437 Points -21%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
350 Points -37%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
310 Points -44%
Multi-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (473 - 6681, n=218, last 2 years)
3004 Points +60%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
1903 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
1879 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1670 - 1981, n=14)
1834 Points -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
1775 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1334 Points -29%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
1318 Points -30%
Geekbench 6.2
Single-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (193 - 2930, n=103, last 2 years)
1409 Points +94%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
916 Points +26%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (710 - 738, n=8)
729 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
728 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
478 Points -34%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
413 Points -43%
Multi-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (845 - 7408, n=103, last 2 years)
3888 Points +100%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
2315 Points +19%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1864 - 2065, n=8)
1997 Points +3%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
1942 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
1544 Points -20%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1384 Points -29%
Antutu v9 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone
  (102602 - 1650926, n=153, last 2 years)
738503 Points +139%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
436096 Points +41%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
309291 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (229468 - 337968, n=6)
306552 Points -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
300122 Points -3%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
13268 Points +44%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4761 - 21385, n=213, last 2 years)
11798 Points +28%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (8973 - 11027, n=14)
9786 Points +6%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
9195 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
7305 Points -21%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
6637 Points -28%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
5720 Points -38%
CrossMark - Overall
Average of class Smartphone
  (200 - 1474, n=165, last 2 years)
837 Points +59%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
628 Points +19%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (526 - 602, n=8)
568 Points +8%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
526 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
369 Points -30%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
348 Points -34%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Average of class Smartphone
  (411 - 11438, n=165, last 2 years)
5745 Points +87%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
3773 Points +23%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
3076 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2855 - 3120, n=8)
3023 Points -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
2728 Points -11%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2226 Points -28%
System
Average of class Smartphone
  (2376 - 16475, n=165, last 2 years)
9678 Points +44%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
6911 Points +2%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
6743 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
6320 Points -6%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (5261 - 6776, n=8)
6309 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
5104 Points -24%
Memory
Average of class Smartphone
  (670 - 12716, n=165, last 2 years)
6250 Points +72%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
5004 Points +38%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (3454 - 4152, n=8)
3739 Points +3%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
3636 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
3285 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2650 Points -27%
Graphics
Average of class Smartphone
  (697 - 58651, n=165, last 2 years)
14101 Points +404%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
4200 Points +50%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2683 - 3002, n=8)
2819 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2798 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
2331 Points -17%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1811 Points -35%
Web
Average of class Smartphone
  (10 - 2145, n=165, last 2 years)
1494 Points +14%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
1394 Points +7%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
1306 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1201 - 1325, n=8)
1265 Points -3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
1144 Points -12%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1002 Points -23%
UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Average of class Smartphone
  (207 - 84787, n=150, last 2 years)
21814 Points +245%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (6323 - 9695, n=7)
8508 Points +35%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
6323 Points
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
6014 Points -5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
4615 Points -27%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
3630 Points -43%
AImark - Score v3.x
Average of class Smartphone
  (298 - 245629, n=105, last 2 years)
17833 Points +1838%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
920 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (877 - 982, n=6)
911 Points -1%
Motorola Moto G54
MediaTek Dimensity 7020, IMG BXM-8-256, 8192
865 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
780 Points -15%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 8192
382 Points -58%

You shouldn't expect too much in terms of the graphics performance. Only very simple graphics tasks can be handled really smoothly in the native resolution of the display. For computations in higher resolutions (for example when using an external display), the performance of the graphics chip is hardly sufficient.

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
326 Points
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
178 Points -45%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
135 Points -59%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
112 Points -66%
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
Points -100%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
332 Points
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
179 Points -46%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
139 Points -58%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
114 Points -66%
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
Points -100%
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1094 Points
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
716 Points -35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
634 Points -42%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
413 Points -62%
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
Points -100%
3DMark / Wild Life Score
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1195 Points
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
706 Points -41%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
645 Points -46%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
408 Points -66%
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
Points -100%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
3069 Points +33%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2410 Points +4%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2321 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2315 Points
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
2948 Points +25%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2352 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1383 Points -41%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1139 Points -52%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
2974 Points +27%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2344 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1519 Points -35%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1290 Points -45%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
3524 Points +6%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3329 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2739 Points -18%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2694 Points -19%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2411 Points
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
2397 Points -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1427 Points -41%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1178 Points -51%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
2580 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2568 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1597 Points -38%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1346 Points -48%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
69 fps +23%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
56 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
40 fps -29%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
37 fps -34%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
33 fps -41%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
74 fps +17%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
63 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
45 fps -29%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
41 fps -35%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
22 fps -65%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
57 fps +58%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
36 fps
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
25 fps -31%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
22 fps -39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
22 fps -39%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
62 fps +55%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
40 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
24 fps -40%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
23 fps -42%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
14 fps -65%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
33 fps +43%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
23 fps
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
17 fps -26%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
14 fps -39%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
13 fps -43%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
35 fps +40%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
25 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
16 fps -36%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
15 fps -40%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
8.7 fps -65%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
18 fps +50%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
12 fps
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
9.3 fps -22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
7.7 fps -36%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
7.6 fps -37%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
19 fps +27%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
15 fps
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
9 fps -40%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
8.8 fps -41%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5.2 fps -65%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
11 fps +24%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
8.9 fps
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
6.4 fps -28%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5.5 fps -38%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
4.8 fps -46%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
7.1 fps +20%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5.9 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3.6 fps -39%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
3.2 fps -46%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2 fps -66%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
19 fps +36%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
14 fps
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
10 fps -29%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
9.5 fps -32%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
7.5 fps -46%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
20 fps +25%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
16 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
10 fps -37%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
8.5 fps -47%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5.5 fps -66%
GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Motorola Moto G54
IMG BXM-8-256, Dimensity 7020, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
3 fps +20%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2.5 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1.5 fps -40%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1.4 fps -44%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
0.85 fps -66%

The values achieved by the smartphone in the browser benchmarks aren't bad, but this is in some part due to the more current browser version that we are using.

In everyday operation, the surfing experience isn't very convincing, and it is not unusual that loading of large web pages is fairly slow and you have to wait some time for images to load.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 351, n=173, last 2 years)
106.1 Points +43%
Motorola Moto G54 (Chrome 118.0.5993.80)
85.936 Points +16%
Samsung Galaxy A15 (Chrome 122)
74.154 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (46.9 - 74.2, n=7)
62.5 Points -16%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G (Chrome 120)
62.375 Points -16%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
40.02 Points -46%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (14.9 - 445, n=157, last 2 years)
107.1 runs/min +77%
Motorola Moto G54 (Chrome 118.0.5993.80)
76.5 runs/min +27%
Samsung Galaxy A15 (Chrome 122)
60.4 runs/min
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G (Chrome 120)
52.4 runs/min -13%
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (24.1 - 65.5, n=7)
45.8 runs/min -24%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
32 runs/min -47%
WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 202, n=160, last 2 years)
100.2 Points +28%
Motorola Moto G54 (Chrome 118.0.5993.80)
97 Points +24%
Samsung Galaxy A15 (Chrome 122)
78 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (39 - 81, n=7)
64.3 Points -18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G (Chrome 120)
49 Points -37%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
44 Points -44%
WebXPRT 3 - Overall
Average of class Smartphone (39 - 304, n=122, last 2 years)
133.1 Points +40%
Motorola Moto G54 (Chrome 118.0.5993.80)
120 Points +26%
Samsung Galaxy A15 (Chrome 122)
95 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (80 - 112, n=6)
91.8 Points -3%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
60 Points -37%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (4633 - 89112, n=212, last 2 years)
33588 Points +53%
Motorola Moto G54 (Chrome 118.0.5993.80)
28919 Points +32%
Samsung Galaxy A15 (Chrome 122)
21890 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (17228 - 25005, n=14)
20523 Points -6%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G (Chrome 120)
15900 Points -27%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
11782 Points -46%
Nokia G22 (Chrome 112)
10858 Points -50%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE (Chrome 114)
3347 ms * -67%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G (Chrome 120)
2534.6 ms * -26%
Average Mediatek Helio G99 (1922 - 2444, n=7)
2145 ms * -7%
Samsung Galaxy A15 (Chrome 122)
2009.6 ms *
Average of class Smartphone (388 - 9999, n=173, last 2 years)
1595 ms * +21%
Motorola Moto G54 (Chrome 118.0.5993.80)
1399.8 ms * +30%

* ... smaller is better

The Galaxy A15 4G uses UFS 2.2 storage, and in contrast to the Galaxy A15 5G, it is capable of using the full potential of the storage speeds in read mode due to a fast storage controller. When writing to the storage, the speed turns out slightly slower, though.

Samsung Galaxy A15Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4GSamsung Galaxy A14 LTENokia G22Motorola Moto G54Average 128 GB UFS 2.2 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-2%
-70%
-26%
17%
-15%
52%
Sequential Read 256KB
967.8
909.8
-6%
298.69
-69%
881
-9%
983.01
2%
Sequential Write 256KB
488.5
606.3
24%
200.17
-59%
367
-25%
817.55
67%
Random Read 4KB
233.2
177.1
-24%
55.9
-76%
131
-44%
232.74
0%
Random Write 4KB
229.6
228
-1%
55.86
-76%
172
-25%
224.58
-2%
182.5 ?(68.8 - 419, n=61)
-21%
Samsung Galaxy A15Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4GMotorola Moto G54Average 128 GB UFS 2.2 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
PCMark for Android
1%
70%
6%
113%
Storage 2.0 seq. read int.
775 ?(3.0.4061)
586 ?(3.0.4061)
-24%
549 ?(339 - 859, n=11)
-29%
Storage 2.0 seq. write int.
509 ?(3.0.4061)
436 ?(3.0.4061)
-14%
Storage 2.0 random read int.
18.2 ?(3.0.4061)
30.8 ?(3.0.4061)
69%
27.7 ?(18.2 - 35, n=11)
52%
Storage 2.0 random write int.
30.8 ?(3.0.4061)
22.2 ?(3.0.4061)
-28%
Storage 2.0
16137 ?(3.0.4061)
16582 ?(3.0.4061)
3%
27461
70%

Games – Limited gaming

The Samsung Galaxy A15 4G isn't really much of a gaming champion, lacking the necessary power for demanding games. We repeatedly see some drops in the frame rates in PUBG Mobile, when we measure this with the app from GameBench.

Due to some heavy stutters, Genshin Impact is hardly playable. If you still have to try this, you should at least use the lowest graphics settings.

So only when playing some simple casual games can you enjoy using the smartphone for gaming. This is too bad, since the control using the touchscreen and sensors works really well.

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Genshin Impact
Genshin Impact
0510152025303540Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A15; Genshin Impact; lowest 120 fps; 4.5.0_21307647_21321795: Ø26 (2-36)
Samsung Galaxy A15; Genshin Impact; highest 120 fps; 4.5.0_21307647_21321795: Ø17 (1-30)
Samsung Galaxy A15; PUBG Mobile; Smooth; 3.1.0: Ø37.7 (2-41)
Samsung Galaxy A15; PUBG Mobile; HD; 3.1.0: Ø28.4 (1-31)

Emissions – The smartphone can get hot

Temperatures

We measure the temperatures of the Galaxy A15 4G to see whether it gets hot under high loads. And indeed, we measure temperatures of up to 45.5 °C (113.9 °F) on the surface, which already feels uncomfortable to touch. You should also keep in mind that we measure the temperatures in room temperature, so the smartphone's heat development can even turn out higher on hot summer days.

The performance capabilities remain mostly untouched by this. Even though there are some minimal performance drops during our stress test with 3DMark, those are then balanced out quickly during the next run of the benchmark.

Max. Load
 43.8 °C
111 F
42.7 °C
109 F
33.8 °C
93 F
 
 44.8 °C
113 F
39.8 °C
104 F
33.8 °C
93 F
 
 43.8 °C
111 F
36.6 °C
98 F
33.9 °C
93 F
 
Maximum: 44.8 °C = 113 F
Average: 39.2 °C = 103 F
34 °C
93 F
36.5 °C
98 F
43.1 °C
110 F
34.3 °C
94 F
36.9 °C
98 F
45.5 °C
114 F
33.8 °C
93 F
37.8 °C
100 F
45.4 °C
114 F
Maximum: 45.5 °C = 114 F
Average: 38.6 °C = 101 F
Power Supply (max.)  43.2 °C = 110 F | Room Temperature 21 °C = 70 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 39.2 °C / 103 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 44.8 °C / 113 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 45.5 °C / 114 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 23 °C / 73 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
99.1 %
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
99 % 0%
Nokia G22
Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
96.8 % -2%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
96.4 % -3%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
96.4 % -3%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
98.7 % +3%
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 64 GB eMMC Flash
95.6 % 0%
Samsung Galaxy A15
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
95.6 %
01234567Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A15 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø2.05 (1.992-2.08)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø0.814 (0.81-0.82)
Samsung Galaxy A15 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø7.47 (7.42-7.49)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø3.91 (3.89-3.93)
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)
Nokia G22 Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø2.5 (2.44-2.52)
Heatmap - front
Heatmap - front
Heatmap - back
Heatmap - back

Speakers

There is a mono speaker on the bottom, which can get relatively loud. But since the highs are very overemphasized, it is hardly suitable for listening to music or watching movies.

The sound brings more enjoyment, if you listen to it through headphones or speakers connected via the 3.5mm audio port or Bluetooth. However, those who prefer to use more unusual or potentially higher quality audio codecs for wireless connections will be disappointed, since besides its own SSC, Samsung only makes SBC, AAC, aptX, and LDAC available.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2037.639.12537.637.53130.729.94033.432.55038.439.96324.527.48016.521.810015.82212513.130.516014.638.42008.6412507.846.13157.251.54008.557.150010.159.963010.960.680010.968.9100012.668.312509.17516009.673200010.173.2250010.869.1315012.769.1400013.270.3500015.270.8630014.373.9800015.377.61000016.166.41250016.358.21600017.252.7SPL24.983.8N0.657.2median 12.6median 66.4Delta2.99.540.845.83737.331.728.432.533.136.43628.92724.420.523.721.224.129.720.137.613.640.212.646.912.75011.254.313.562.314.766.31466.413.672.112.670.31169.610.867.211.567.913.865.71567.815.667.416.265.817.263.117.866.517.160.717.85726.779.70.845.5median 14median 65.72.49.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy A15Motorola Moto G54
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy A15 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Motorola Moto G54 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 25% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 46% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Battery Life – Endurance suitable for everyday use

Power Consumption

The power consumption of the Galaxy A15 4G turns out fairly moderate overall. Particularly under full load, you can be pleased with a fairly low consumption despite the decent power development.

If the battery is empty, you can recharge it at up to 25 watts. A charger isn't included, but various chargers such as those from Apple, Honor, or Motorola all worked without any problems, recharging the device from 0 to 100% within two hours.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.1 / 0.2 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.1 / 1.2 / 1.5 Watt
Load midlight 2.9 / 4.8 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 A15
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
5000 mAh
Motorola Moto G54
5000 mAh
Average Mediatek Helio G99
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-19%
-41%
-3%
-41%
-35%
Idle Minimum *
1.1
1.1
-0%
0.89
19%
0.9
18%
0.89 ?(0.7 - 1.1, n=7)
19%
Idle Average *
1.2
1.3
-8%
2.31
-93%
1.2
-0%
1.864 ?(1.1 - 4.02, n=7)
-55%
Idle Maximum *
1.5
1.5
-0%
2.34
-56%
1.5
-0%
2.12 ?(1.33 - 4.07, n=7)
-41%
Load Average *
2.9
3.6
-24%
4.11
-42%
3.3
-14%
5.18 ?(2.9 - 7.49, n=7)
-79%
Load Maximum *
4.8
7.8
-63%
6.46
-35%
5.6
-17%
7.19 ?(4.8 - 10.1, n=7)
-50%

* ... smaller is better

Power Consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

00.20.50.711.21.51.71.92.22.42.72.93.13.43.63.94.14.44.6Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A15; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø2.82 (1.125-4.84)
Samsung Galaxy A15; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.254 (1.128-1.485)

Power Consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

00.10.30.40.60.70.911.21.31.51.61.81.92.12.22.42.52.72.8Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy A15; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø2.55 (2.16-2.95)
Samsung Galaxy A15; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.254 (1.128-1.485)

Battery Life

The Samsung Galaxy A15 4G shows a significant increase in the battery life compared to its predecessor, also surpassing several comparison devices such as the Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G. However, this is overall only sufficient for a place in the middle of the field of similarly priced comparison devices.

We measure a runtime of 14:45 hours in our WLAN test, so those who want to spend a rainy day surfing the Internet with the smartphone won't have to recharge it.

The smartphone is particularly suited for movie fans, lasting even slightly longer than 24 hours when playing video files from the internal storage that were downloaded from streaming apps, for example. With this, even the complete Extended Edition of Lord of the Rings or all eight 8 Harry Potter movies shouldn't pose any problems for the battery.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
27h 02min
WiFi Websurfing
14h 45min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
24h 06min
Load (maximum brightness)
5h 58min
Samsung Galaxy A15
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 4G
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A14 LTE
5000 mAh
Nokia G22
5050 mAh
Motorola Moto G54
5000 mAh
Battery Runtime
-9%
-15%
19%
18%
Reader / Idle
1622
1509
-7%
1170
-28%
3481
115%
H.264
1446
1358
-6%
1044
-28%
1041
-28%
WiFi v1.3
885
742
-16%
896
1%
1052
19%
875
-1%
Load
358
334
-7%
348
-3%
301
-16%

Pros

+ leuchtstarker AMOLED-Bildschirm
+ NFC
+ langes Updateversprechen
+ schnelles Laden
+ exakte Ortung
+ flotter Fingerabdrucksensor
+ praxistaugliche Laufzeiten
+ Ultraweitwinkelkamera...

Cons

- ... mit eingeschränktem Blickfeld
- Bildschirmflackern bei geringer Helligkeit
- kein Ladegerät in der Packung
- Updateversprechen eingeschränkt
- hohe Erwärmung unter Last

Verdict – A good smartphone for everyday use

Testing the Samsung Galaxy A15 4G. Test unit provided by cyberport.de
Testing the Samsung Galaxy A15 4G. Test unit provided by cyberport.de

Even though those who decide for the LTE version of the Galaxy A15 won't get the most current mobile communication standard, they can save some money compared to the 5G model, while still getting a slightly higher performance in everyday use without having to make hardly any compromises in many other areas.

The case is identical. It is robust and shows good workmanship, but it is also prone to fingerprints. The bright AMOLED screen with a refresh rate of up to 90 frames per second is also included, and the same goes for the charging performance of up to 25 watts, which is fairly fast in the class comparison.

The update guarantee is very long, particularly when considering the quite low price of less than 200 Euros (~$215). However, you should still be aware that Samsung purposefully makes the wording of the promise pretty vague, so you won't really be able to rely on it completely.

The smartphone also offers some additional advantages such as fairly accurate locating capabilities, an ultrawide angle camera, and a good battery life. On the other hand, you also have to consider that you need to purchase a charger separately, that the device can get quite hot under load, and that you have to decide between dual-SIM and a microSD card with the shared card slot.

The Samsung Galaxy A15 is also a good choice in the 4G version among the smartphones costing less than 200 Euros (~$215), particularly with its bright AMOLED screen, fast charging speed, and good storage equipment.

The Galaxy A15 with 5G currently costs about 20 to 30 Euros (~$22-32) more, so those who need a faster mobile connection can also take a look at that. The Motorola Moto G54 offers significantly more power but doesn't have an AMOLED display.

Price and Availability

Samsung's own online store in the US only offers the 5G model for ~$200.

The 4G version is available from online shops such as Amazon for around $160, for example.

Samsung Galaxy A15 - 04/01/2024 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
82%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
88%
Connectivity
47 / 70 → 68%
Weight
88%
Battery
92%
Display
91%
Games Performance
27 / 64 → 42%
Application Performance
70 / 86 → 81%
Temperature
88%
Noise
100%
Audio
68 / 90 → 76%
Camera
58%
Average
74%
80%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Transparency

The present review sample was made available to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or a shop for the purposes of review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review.

Pricecompare

Read all 3 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!