Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarSamsung Galaxy A32 5G review: There's more than just progress in the 5G smartphone
5G smartphones are no longer rare even in the mid-range price segment below 300 Euros (~$359). Therefore, it is not surprising that the industry giant Samsung has also launched a corresponding version.
Last year's model didn't support the fast mobile standard yet, but it still had a Super AMOLED display, partially higher-resolution cameras as well, and it was cheaper. In our review, we explain why some of the technological steps backwards are not necessarily a bad thing.
Possible contenders in comparison
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Best Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 79.3 % | 03/2021 | Samsung Galaxy A32 5G Dimensity 720, Mali-G57 MP3 | 205 g | 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.50" | 1600x720 | |
| 77.7 % | 12/2020 | Samsung Galaxy A31 Helio P65, Mali-G52 MP2 | 185 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.40" | 2400x1080 | |
| 80.1 % | 01/2021 | Oppo A73 5G Dimensity 720, Mali-G57 MP3 | 177 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.50" | 2400x1080 | |
| 80.1 % | 11/2020 | realme 7 5G Dimensity 800U, Mali-G57 MP3 | 195 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.50" | 2400x1080 | |
| 81.8 % | 10/2020 | Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC SD 732G, Adreno 618 | 215 g | 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.67" | 2400x1080 | |
| 79.9 % | 01/2021 | Vivo Y70 SD 665, Adreno 610 | 171 g | 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.44" | 2400x1080 |
Case - Heavy despite the use of lots of plastic
The Samsung Galaxy A32 5G has become bigger and heavier compared to the predecessor. A proper camera hump is no longer present. Instead, only three of the camera rings protrude slightly, which is why it hardly wobbles when lying flat on a table. The color options are black, white, blue, and violet.
The display is protected by Corning Gorilla Glass 5 on the front; the back is made of a fiberglass-reinforced plastic, and the frame has a metallic look but is also made of plastic. The build quality of the Galaxy A32 is good and convinces with narrow and even gap dimensions. However, the Samsung smartphone looks quite clunky in the hand and is comparatively heavy.
The card slot is wider than in other phones because the slots are arranged next to each other. Either two nano SIM cards or a microSD card instead of the second SIM can be used. The slot doesn't sit flush with the frame, but it curves slightly outwards instead.
The battery of the A32 5G is permanently installed and can't be replaced by the user. Moreover, there is no certification against dust and water ingress.
Connectivity - Galaxy A32 with microSD and audio jack
The Samsung Galaxy A32 5G's USB port has the Type-C design; it supports the 2.0 transfer standard and OTG. The microSD slot supports exFAT, but it's only used for storing media files. It can't be formatted as internal storage.
Wired audio output is possible via USB-C as well as via the audio jack (3.5 mm). However, only headphones plugged into the jack can serve as an antenna for the integrated radio receiver.
The Galaxy A32 5G is available with 64 or 128 GB of internal storage; the latter costs an additional 20 Euros (~$24) (MSRP).
Software - Samsung smartphone with Android 11
The Galaxy A32 5G comes with Android 11 and Samsung's One UI 3.1. At the time of our test, the security patches are at the level of January 1, 2021; therefore, they are still quite up to date.
Besides the Google apps, Samsung also preinstalls some of its own apps like the Galaxy Store. Third-party apps from Facebook, Netflix, Microsoft, and Spotify are also found on the smartphone, and not all of them can be uninstalled.
Communication and GNSS - Decent positioning with the A32 5G
In the best case, the Galaxy A32 5G can access the Internet via the modern 5G standard, which has a fairly broad frequency support just like the other mobile standards. The Samsung phone's reception capabilities didn't show any problems in the test.
The WLAN module works according to the Wi-Fi 5 specifications, but it doesn't use MIMO antenna technology, which is why the transmission speeds aren't outstanding. However, the A32 5G is fast considering its potential; most importantly, it provides stable data rates when using our reference router, the Netgear Nighthawk AX12.
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Average of class Smartphone (16.9 - 1368, n=70, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Average of class Smartphone (32.7 - 953, n=71, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
The most common satellite networks including the SBAS support system are supported in single-band operation for positioning. The satellite fix is quite fast and precise even inside buildings.
The Galaxy smartphone has to face a comparison with the Garmin Edge 500 on a short bike ride. The deviations on the overall route are kept within limits, and a look at the detailed route also shows a similar performance in determining the position as the bike computer.
Telephone and call quality
When held to the ear, the Samsung Galaxy A32 5G delivers good clarity, and even the suppression of ambient noise works well in the test. Very loud noises are also filtered out, but the user's voice sounds a bit hollow then.
The speaker reverberates slightly when it's close to the person talking, and short interruptions in voice pickup are already noticeable from a distance of one meter. Therefore, the speaker doesn't provide much range of motion.
The Galaxy A32 has a hybrid SIM slot and can consequently accept up to two nano SIMs, provided that a microSD card is not used. Features like VoLTE and Wi-Fi calling are available, but the use of an eSIM is not.
Cameras - Quad-camera setup for the Galaxy A32 5G
The front-facing camera of the Samsung Galaxy A32 5G has a resolution of 13 MP (A31: 20 MP) and can record videos in Full HD at 30 frames per second at best. We like the image quality better than in the predecessor despite the lower resolution, which is mainly due to the richer color reproduction. Furthermore, noise is considerably lower in daylight.
The main camera looks quite similar to that of the Galaxy A31 on the spec sheet, but the resolution of the depth sensor has been reduced. The main sensor delivers decent imaging performance, but it visibly loses sharpness towards the edges. Pixel-binning also eliminates one or the other fine detail in the focus area. The subject is still well illuminated in low light, but it looks a bit blurry in some areas, something that can only be minimally corrected with Night mode.
The ultra-wide angle reveals significant distortions towards the edges, and depending on the incoming light, aberrations can become visible around the borders. The Galaxy A32 quickly reaches its limits due to the lack of an optical zoom. At least the maximum available is 10x digital magnification, but this isn't recommended.
The macro pictures are brutally over-sharpened, and they also lack fine details due to the low resolution. However, the lens can still deliver interesting results for visualization purposes or social media.
The main camera can record videos in Ultra HD at best, but only 30 FPS is possible at all times regardless of the resolution. Using UHD is not recommended, because the electronic image stabilization doesn't work and the image lags a lot.
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.
Wide angleWide angleLow lightNight mode
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.
Ultra wide angleZoom (5x)Macro
Accessories and warranty - A32 still comes with a power adapter and further accessories
The Samsung Galaxy A32 5G comes with a 24-month warranty that can't be extended through Care+.
Besides the smartphone, a modular power adapter (up to 15 watts), a USB cable (Type-A to Type-C), a SIM tool, and two leaflets with a quick-start guide and warranty information are included.
Input devices and handling - Side-mounted fingerprint scanner in the Galaxy smartphone
The capacitive touchscreen has good gliding properties and responds reliably to inputs. Samsung hasn't applied a factory screen protector and seems to rely solely on the Gorilla Glass 5.
A notification LED is not present. However, the flash can alternatively blink for incoming messages. The physical buttons leave a solid impression, but they are flat and have a long travel. The multifunctional button is recessed and houses the fingerprint scanner. By default, pressing it launches Bixby, but this can be adjusted in the settings.
The vibration motor is very perceptible, a bit imprecise, but not too loud. The aforementioned fingerprint scanner is available for biometric security, and it unlocks the Galaxy A32 5G reliably in most cases. The front-facing camera's 2D facial recognition is faster but not as secure.
Display - HD LCD in the Galaxy A32 5G
The display of the Galaxy A32 5G measures a generous 6.5 inches (16.51 cm, 102 cm²), but it only has a resolution of 1600x720 pixels, so that pixel structures are quite visible. The brightness distribution is okay, but it drops a bit in some areas, although this doesn't have a negative impact in everyday use.
The luminosity is lower than in the predecessor, and in combination with the higher black level, the contrast ratio is only average. In the APL50 measurement, the brightness in the center of the screen is even lower at 509 cd/m², and the black level (0.67 cd/m²) increases slightly in parallel, which then results in a rather weak contrast ratio of 760:1. If you deactivate the ambient light sensor, you will only have 460 cd/m² available. Although this sensor adjusts the display brightness quite quickly, it still dims the panel a bit too sharply for our taste.
Compared with last year's Galaxy A31, not only is the reduced display resolution a tough pill to swallow but also the change from Super AMOLED to a TFT LCD. The latter could be an advantage for users who are sensitive to PWM at least.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 85 %
Center on Battery: 543 cd/m²
Contrast: 862:1 (Black: 0.63 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.9 | 0.55-29.43 Ø5.2
ΔE Greyscale 6.3 | 0.57-98 Ø5.4
96.1% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.23
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G TFT-LCD, 1600x720, 6.50 | Samsung Galaxy A31 Super AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.40 | Oppo A73 5G IPS, 2400x1080, 6.50 | realme 7 5G IPS, 2400x1080, 6.50 | Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC IPS, 2400x1080, 6.67 | Vivo Y70 AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.44 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 30% | 24% | 4% | 31% | 29% | |
| Brightness middle | 543 | 594 9% | 527 -3% | 490 -10% | 623 15% | 573 6% |
| Brightness | 512 | 595 16% | 499 -3% | 455 -11% | 600 17% | 572 12% |
| Brightness Distribution | 85 | 99 16% | 87 2% | 84 -1% | 93 9% | 97 14% |
| Black Level * | 0.63 | 0.38 40% | 0.69 -10% | 0.54 14% | ||
| Contrast | 862 | 1387 61% | 710 -18% | 1154 34% | ||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.9 | 2.02 59% | 3.5 29% | 4.01 18% | 1.8 63% | 2.7 45% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 8.6 | 8.11 6% | 7.3 15% | 8.1 6% | 4.7 45% | 4.9 43% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 6.3 | 1.8 71% | 2.9 54% | 2.6 59% | 3.3 48% | 2.9 54% |
| Gamma | 2.23 99% | 2.098 105% | 2.29 96% | 2.23 99% | 2.26 97% | 2.19 100% |
| CCT | 8120 80% | 6552 99% | 6502 100% | 6828 95% | 6712 97% | 6665 98% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18889 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
The color reproduction, which we determined with the CalMAN analysis software, also shows a decline compared to the predecessor. Although the smaller sRGB color space is still used, the deviations have become much larger, which also results in a cooler image. In addition, Samsung has removed from the software the option to manage the display profiles.
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 40.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 19.2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 21.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 97 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (22.3 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 66.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 32 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 34.8 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 98 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (35.2 ms). | ||
Outdoors, the Galaxy A32 5G leaves us with mixed feelings. In principle, the brightness is sufficient to be able to make out something on the display even on brighter days, but it's often necessary to readjust the slider manually for this to succeed.
The Galaxy A32 5G's viewing-angle stability is decent, and color inversions don't occur at any viewing angle. We didn't detect bothersome screen bleeding, either. However, brightness drops quickly at flatter viewing angles.
Performance - Fast MediaTek SoC
The Samsung Galaxy A32 5G is powered by a MediaTek Dimensity 720 and can make use of 4 GB of RAM, which is not much within our comparison field; however, it doesn't have a negative impact in everyday use.
In terms of performance, the CPU performance is comparable with that of a Snapdragon 765G, and the ARM Mali-G57 MP3 graphics unit works at a similar level as the Adreno 619.
The SoC helps the A32 5G achieve a fast system speed, but minor stutters slip in from time to time. The A73 does a better job, and it also achieves about 20% more performance in the system benchmarks despite having the same SoC.
| Geekbench 5.4 | |
| Single-Core (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (472 - 516, n=3) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (119 - 1885, n=242, last 2 years) | |
| Multi-Core (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (1511 - 1638, n=3) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (473 - 5538, n=242, last 2 years) | |
| Vulkan Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (1418 - 1637, n=2) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (79 - 9992, n=178, last 2 years) | |
| OpenCL Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (1525 - 1584, n=3) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (368 - 10711, n=167, last 2 years) | |
| PCMark for Android | |
| Work performance score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (7158 - 10673, n=2) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (9875 - 19297, n=4, last 2 years) | |
| Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (6145 - 7395, n=2) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (5279 - 13282, n=28, last 2 years) | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
| T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (55 - 60, n=3) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (22 - 165, n=187, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (67 - 69, n=3) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (19 - 497, n=187, last 2 years) | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (37 - 54, n=3) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (6.8 - 161, n=188, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (37 - 41, n=3) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (9.2 - 331, n=189, last 2 years) | |
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (24 - 51, n=3) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 143, n=189, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (26 - 27, n=3) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (6.2 - 223, n=189, last 2 years) | |
| AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (252308 - 253013, n=2) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (101336 - 725649, n=40, last 2 years) | |
| AImark - Score v2.x (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| realme 7 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (12331 - 13120, n=3) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (1043 - 286905, n=121, last 2 years) | |
Internet browsing is possible with the Galaxy A32 5G at an appealing speed and is on par with other smartphones with this SoC.
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (16.9 - 282, n=165, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G (Chrome 88) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (34 - 38.3, n=3) | |
| Oppo A73 5G (Chrome 83) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 (Chrome 87) | |
| realme 7 5G (Chrome 68) | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (26.7 - 414, n=79, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (67.3 - 75.3, n=3) | |
| Oppo A73 5G (Chrome 83) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G (Chrome 88) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 (Chrome 87) | |
| realme 7 5G (Chrome 86) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Average of class Smartphone (13.3 - 375, n=154, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Oppo A73 5G (Chrome 83) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (35.3 - 37.7, n=2) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 (Chrome 87) | |
| realme 7 5G (Chome 86) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - --- | |
| Average of class Smartphone (28 - 292, n=145, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (49 - 57, n=3) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 (Chrome 87) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G (Chrome 88) | |
| Oppo A73 5G (Chrome 83) | |
| realme 7 5G (Chrome 86) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (4633 - 74261, n=194, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (14156 - 17637, n=3) | |
| Oppo A73 5G (Chrome 83) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G (Chrome 88) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 (Chrome 87) | |
| realme 7 5G (Chrome 86) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score | |
| realme 7 5G (Chrome 86) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A31 (Chrome 87) | |
| Oppo A73 5G (Chrome 83) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G (Chrome 88) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 (2475 - 4059, n=3) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (414 - 10797, n=168, last 2 years) | |
* ... smaller is better
The storage capacity of 64 GB is a bit smaller than in some rivals, but Samsung also offers a 128 GB variant for the Galaxy A32 5G. Thanks to UFS 2.1, the internal storage's speeds are very high.
The memory card slot supports media with a size of up to 1 TB. Unfortunately, we couldn't determine any reliable data in regard to transfer speeds. They were way too high for reading data and extremely low for writing data. However, the slot worked flawlessly in everyday use.
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | Samsung Galaxy A31 | Oppo A73 5G | realme 7 5G | Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | Vivo Y70 | Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -51% | -34% | -35% | -40% | -25% | -34% | 45% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 858 | 301.5 -65% | 860 0% | 877 2% | 506 -41% | 509 -41% | 697 ? -19% | 1180 ? 38% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 381.7 | 216.3 -43% | 193 -49% | 188.4 -51% | 173.1 -55% | 218.5 -43% | 217 ? -43% | 741 ? 94% |
| Random Read 4KB | 174.6 | 97.5 -44% | 102.2 -41% | 92.6 -47% | 123.4 -29% | 149.5 -14% | 136.6 ? -22% | 207 ? 19% |
| Random Write 4KB | 167.1 | 79.1 -53% | 88.1 -47% | 95.1 -43% | 112.6 -33% | 164.3 -2% | 81.6 ? -51% | 217 ? 30% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 82.7 ? | 84.3 ? | 75.2 ? | 43.11 ? | 68.6 ? | |||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 66.9 ? | 63.7 ? | 55.6 ? | 37.03 ? | 52.2 ? |
Games - A32 5G is suitable for demanding, casual gamers
The ARM Mali-G57 MP3 in the Samsung Galaxy A32 5G provides decent gaming performance, and combined with the low panel resolution, the smartphone requires less processing power to run games smoothly.
Simple titles can be played on the Samsung smartphone without any problems. However, in our test with Wild Rift, which we performed with GameBench, there was a larger frame drop when the highest display quality was selected.
PUBG Mobile is immediately set to 30 FPS and can be played in the HD setting at most, and it runs quite smoothly then. Although small frame drops are noticeable, they aren't too bothersome.
The touchscreen is great for gaming, and the large display provides a good overview of what's happening.
Emissions - Samsung phone with good mono speaker
Temperature
The surface temperatures of the Samsung Galaxy A32 5G are decent, and the smartphone does get warmer under load, but it doesn't even reach 34 °C (~93 °F).
The Samsung phone manages its internal components without any flaws, too. In the GFXBench battery test, it suffers a small drop in the T-Rex setting, but it fully recovers until the end of the test. In the more demanding Manhattan scenario, it even remains quite constant almost throughout the entire time, and it only has to put up with a small performance drop in the last run.
| 3DMark - Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
| Vivo Y70 | |
| Oppo A73 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33.7 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 34.9 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 33 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 33.7 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.6 °C / 91 F.
Speaker
In terms of speaker design, Samsung takes a very traditional approach with the Galaxy A32 5G and only provides the smartphone with a mono speaker at the bottom edge. However, it offers a surprisingly good sound in return and is definitely one of the best performers in the smartphone segment.
The Koreans didn't skimp when it comes to wired connectivity either and allow sound output via the audio jack as well as via USB-C. The former delivers a linear reproduction but only a mediocre signal-to-noise ratio of around 75 dBFS.
Only the audio codecs SBC, AAC, aptX, and LDAC are available for Bluetooth. Music Share, Adapt Sound, and Dolby Atmos are also supported, and equalizers can be defined for external output devices. However, dual audio didn't work in the test, and it was only possible to switch between the connected Bluetooth devices.
Samsung Galaxy A32 5G audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (93.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.9% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.8% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 8% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 85% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 33% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%
Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.9% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 14% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 40% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%
Battery life - Trade-offs in exchange for longer battery life
Energy consumption
The Galaxy A32 5G's power consumption is at a good level for a smartphone with an LCD. Only during very intensive CPU use are the rates quite high.
The 5,000 mAh battery can be fully recharged within 145 minutes using the included power adapter, and the 50%-mark is reached precisely after one hour. The A32 5G doesn't support wireless charging.
| Off / Standby |   0.01 / 0.18 Watt |
| Idle |  0.64 / 1.95 / 1.98 Watt |
| Load |
6.77 / 11.42 Watt |
    
| |
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G 5000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A31 5000 mAh | Oppo A73 5G 4040 mAh | Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC 5160 mAh | Vivo Y70 4100 mAh | Average MediaTek Dimensity 720 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 7% | 26% | -9% | 26% | 18% | 15% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.64 | 1 -56% | 0.58 9% | 0.93 -45% | 0.83 -30% | 0.673 ? -5% | 0.884 ? -38% |
| Idle Average * | 1.95 | 1.6 18% | 1.86 5% | 2.47 -27% | 1.4 28% | 1.67 ? 14% | 1.485 ? 24% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.98 | 1.9 4% | 1.88 5% | 2.51 -27% | 1.68 15% | 1.787 ? 10% | 1.699 ? 14% |
| Load Average * | 6.77 | 5 26% | 3.1 54% | 5.62 17% | 2.61 61% | 4.52 ? 33% | 4.27 ? 37% |
| Load Maximum * | 11.42 | 6.7 41% | 5.01 56% | 6.93 39% | 5.12 55% | 7.04 ? 38% | 7.08 ? 38% |
* ... smaller is better
Battery life
The Samsung Galaxy A32 5G's battery life is very good and has been improved in all areas compared with the predecessor. However, the Galaxy smartphone certainly pays for this with the lower-resolution panel.
Only the Oppo A73 managed a better runtime in our practical Wi-Fi test despite having a smaller battery and more pixels.
| Samsung Galaxy A32 5G 5000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A31 5000 mAh | Oppo A73 5G 4040 mAh | realme 7 5G 5000 mAh | Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC 5160 mAh | Vivo Y70 4100 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -13% | 15% | -17% | -17% | -34% | |
| Reader / Idle | 2958 | 2453 -17% | 2427 -18% | |||
| H.264 | 1323 | 1255 -5% | 1188 -10% | |||
| WiFi v1.3 | 1235 | 1160 -6% | 1426 15% | 1026 -17% | 1116 -10% | 819 -34% |
| Load | 393 | 306 -22% | 280 -29% |
Pros
Cons
Verdict - In the name of efficiency
Regarded as a standalone product, the Samsung Galaxy A32 5G is a good 5G smartphone for under 300 Euros (~$357) that can convince in everyday use with good system performance, long battery life, and useful features like an audio jack and a radio receiver.
However, the panel quality is the main shortcoming in a direct comparison with the predecessor. The fact that an AMOLED display is no longer used is less important, because a PWM-free alternative is certainly welcome in this price segment. However, the built-in TFT LCD seems to have been chosen a bit carelessly, because it requires the user to be willing to compromise in all areas, be it brightness, contrast or pixel density.
However, the lower pixel density also plays a role in the fact that battery life has been improved compared to the Galaxy A31.
The Samsung Galaxy A32 5G forces its users to accept a few compromises, but it's a reliable companion in everyday use that offers long battery life and fast system performance.
The storage configuration could have been a bit more generous in the base version; we would have liked to see two more gigabytes of RAM in particular to make the A32 5G more future-proof.
There are certainly better alternatives than the A32 5G at full price, but we expect the smartphone to become much cheaper in the future, making it an exciting alternative at that point.
Price and availability
The Samsung Galaxy A32 5G isn't officially available in the United States yet, but it's presumed that it will be in the future. For now, you can at least find it in online stores like ebay, where there's currently a version with 128 GB of storage and 6 GB of RAM for around $375.
Samsung Galaxy A32 5G
-
03/11/2021 v7
Daniel Schmidt