Loading information, please wait...

close this window

Loading information, please wait...

Samsung Galaxy A25 5G: test / review

---

Published on: 24-04-2024 / Modified: 31-05-2024
I haven't tested an entry-level Samsung since the A21, which was 4 years ago, and 4 years in the world of smartphones is an eternity. I hadn't tested any other entry-level Samsung for lack of time, and I haven't even taken the time to write an article on the Samsung Galaxy S23, which I've been using on a daily basis for a year now. What led me to test this Samsung Galaxy A25 was pure chance. I saw an ad on Facebook for a Galaxy A25 for sale just a few kilometers from my home, and the price was right, so I went and picked it up the very next day. Beyond the opportunity, the timing was quite interesting, as I recently tested two Redmi brand smartphones and I think the comparison is going to be interesting. I did the same thing 4 years ago, and Samsung didn't come out on top... is that still the case today? Let's find out with my test of the Samsung Galaxy A25 5G.

Manufacturer web site:

https://www.samsung.com

Structure of my tests

I test the phones according to a pre-established structure (see below) to provide you with as much information as possible. Unfortunately, this takes a long time. Some tests like network performance tests take several days and for photo tests I sometimes have to wait until the weather is suitable to take pictures in good conditions. I am therefore obliged to publish the tests step by step, so I invite you to come back if the test is not complete at the time of your visit.

Price Samsung Galaxy A25

The list below shows the prices for the Samsung Galaxy A25 from more than 50 sites around the world. If you are not satisfied with any price, you can subscribe to a price alert to be the first to be notified when the price drops.

Timeline

April 23, 2024: purchase of the Samsung Galaxy A25 second-hand on Facebook, the test can begin and will probably take 2-3 weeks to complete.

Unpacking

Samsung has made a rather radical choice in terms of their packaging: they no longer supply chargers with their phones, so the box has been reduced to the bare essentials. The box contains the phone, a manual and a needle to open the sim drawer. Xiaomi has not yet made this choice, and at more or less the same price, Xiaomi is clearly more generous than Samsung

I'm not one to advocate keeping chargers in the boxes of all phones, but if it doesn't influence the price, I think it's a bit of a shame.

Finish

The Samsung Galaxy A25 broadly follows the visual identity of other models, with a uniform back and vertical alignment of three photo sensors. The back of this phone is made entirely of plastic with a shiny metallic effect; fingerprints are visible, but not as much as on a reflective surface. Here, Samsung has succeeded in creating a visual identity that makes a Samsung phone immediately recognizable. This is much less the case with Redmi, where the visual style still changes quite often from one model to the next. In the end, it's a matter of taste, but I think Samsung fares a little better than its Chinese rival



The 6.5-inch screen occupies 84% of the phone's front surface, the edges are quite visible, but what struck me most was the presence of a huge teardrop-shaped selfie sensor. This kind of configuration reminds me of phones from 3 or 4 years ago. This obviously doesn't affect the use of the phone, but when I switch from a Redmi Note 13 to a Samsung Galaxy A25, the difference is obvious. The Redmi's screen is bigger and the edges are thinner



In this photo with the screen on, the edges are clearly visible and as I mentioned in the previous paragraph, this screen format reminds me of the phones I was testing 3 or 4 years ago, so Samsung hasn't evolved much in this area



On the bottom edge we find the usual USB type C port, a sound output, a sound sensor and a jack-type audio output. There's no sound output on the top edge, which means either that this phone doesn't play stereo sound or that the headset speaker is used as a secondary speaker. I'll come back to this point in the audio section of this review.

The level of finish on this phone is quite decent, but in this price range, other brands do better.

Specifications

The information below comes from the Device Info HW application. The application provides detailed technical information about the tested phone. The Samsung Galaxy A25 runs on an Exynos architecture designed by and for Samsung, so this type of equipment is not used by other brands. This means that the CPU, GPU, FPU, Bluetooth, Wifi, GPS, audio chipset can only be compared with other Samsung phones. Other brands tend to use Qualcomm or Mediatek architecture, which makes it easier to compare phones. Instead, compare this phone with other Samsung models such as the Samsung Galaxy A33, Samsung Galaxy A53 or Samsung Galaxy M34. Most of these phones were launched two years ago. The entry-level model in 2024 therefore uses material from the mid-range model in 2022

You'll find the detailed specifications of this phone in the following screens, I didn't notice anything in particular, this phone basically uses components from older Samsung phones. It's a fairly common practice that allows you to get the equivalent of a mid-range phone for the price of an entry-level phone

CPU / GPU Performance

The Samsung Galaxy A25 is equipped with a Samsung Exynos 1280 CPU which is also present in the Samsung Galaxy A33 and A53, it's an old mid-range CPU with decent performance for normal everyday use. Power is a marketing argument that doesn't have much value for the vast majority of buyers, so I don't see the lack of big performance as a problem on this kind of phone

For the graphics part, this phone is equipped with a Mali-G68 type GPU that is also found in the A33 or A54, I had already tested it also on the Redmi Note 11 Pro Plus released in October 2021. So it's not a latest-generation GPU, but that in itself isn't a big problem for the average man or woman

This combination positions this phone in the entry-level segment. I quickly felt a certain slowness in use, but that's mainly because I test much faster phones, and switching from a fast phone to this one makes it possible to see a difference in every interaction with the phone.

Benchmark Antutu/3DMark

I obtained a score of 380383 points with Antutu v8. This score corresponded to a mid-range phone two years ago, today it corresponds to an entry-level phone, but without this really posing a problem in use. I find, for example, that transitions between screens are slower or that loading applications takes a little longer, but if you've always used phones in this price range, you probably won't notice any slowness.





Gaming

To test the performance in game, I download the mobile PUBG game and evaluate the in-game experience, graphics level and depth of vision. This game is quite demanding and should help you evaluating the performance of a phone.

The Samsung Galaxy A25 isn't a gamer's phone, but it's capable of running PUBG Mobile in HD without too many problems. The level of detail isn't as high as you'd expect from a gamer's phone, but you'll be able to play quite comfortably. The phone is equipped with two speakers, giving you a stereo experience with good sound quality.

Mobile network sensitivity

To test the sensitivity to the mobile network, I use a probe which measures the quality of the mobile signal 24 hours a day (eg: cell id, rssi, rsrq, snr, frequency,...) for more than 3 years. I then measure the phone signal under the same conditions to compare them to the probe's reference signal.

Phones tested:



I took 1,249 measurements to assess the 4G network sensitivity of the Samsung Galaxy A25 and was quite surprised to see that the signal was much weaker overall than that of my probe. I obtained an average signal of around -96 dBm with the phone and -89 dBm with the probe, which is quite a significant difference. This means that in areas with weaker network coverage, this phone will lose signal more quickly. I expected better from Samsung.

Wifi performance

To test a phone's ability to receive the network properly, I take measurements near my router and then remotely (and always at the same place). This gives me an average in dBm where a value of -90 dBm indicates poorer performance than a value at -30 dBm.


Wifi signal

I took 109 wifi signal measurements by placing the phone on my router and obtained an average signal of -21.90 dBm, which will place this phone in the low average of the measurements I took. I obtained better results with other brands in this price range. Here again, I expected better from Samsung.



Download/Upload speed

To test the speed in Wifi, I connect to my router in 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz (if available) and use the Ookla application to measure the speed.

GPS performance

To test the accuracy of the GPS signal, I use two positioning applications to evaluate the difference between the actual position and the position indicated by the phone. This test is done outdoors with nothing to obstruct the signal. An accuracy level of up to 3 meters can easily be corrected by an application (e.g. Google Maps).

I tested the accuracy of the GPS signal and compared it with my actual position in so-called normal conditions (outdoors and in the open). The level of accuracy reported by GPS applications was 3 meters, like many phones, but in reality this level of accuracy was less good. Comparing my position with the detected position, I measured a distance of around 5 meters, and it took over 30 seconds for the signal to stabilize. I wasn't expecting incredible performance from this phone, but other brands in the same price range do better. If you're using this phone with a roadside GPS application, it will probably manage to correct the discrepancy, but if you're in pedestrian mode (e.g. hiking), you're going to miss out on accuracy.

Battery range

To test battery life I developed an application that measures the battery level minute by minute until the battery is empty. This application consumes about ten percent of the phone's resources and I do a test with 100 brightness. This test aims to reproduce a contemplative use of a phone (e.g. surfing the internet, reading articles, spending time on social networks). These results are not valid for intensive gaming/streaming use.
Battery life



I achieved a battery life of 750 minutes with brightness at 50% and 1147 minutes with brightness at 100%. This is a perfectly decent level of autonomy that will last you about 2 days under normal conditions.

Charging speed



It took me 117 minutes to charge the battery from 1 to 100% with my UGREEN 100 watt charger. That's not very fast, and it's clearly not as fast as you can get with a Redmi at equivalent price. Charging is fairly linear up to approx. 80%, but noticeably slower on the last 20 percent. I got 20% in 21 minutes, 40% in 43 minutes, 60% in 65 minutes, 80% in 85 minutes and the last 20 percent took over 30 minutes

Energy performance

I measured the energy performance of each component (CPU, GPU, FPU) by pushing the phone to its maximum for almost 10 minutes. The CPU consumes an average of 6.14 watts when pushed to its maximum, while the GPU consumes 2.15 watts under the same conditions. The display consumes around 0.7 watts. When all components are pushed to maximum, the phone consumes 6.31 watts, meaning that it's not capable of running the CPU and GPU at full power at the same time. Not surprisingly, this is not a performance-oriented phone

The battery temperature reached 33.6 degrees at the end of this test, a fairly low temperature compared to the effort the phone had to deliver.

Photo camera test

To test the quality of photos produced by a phone, I do a technical test (resolution, sharpness, chromatic aberration,...) in studio (identical conditions) to evaluate the technical part objectively. From the second half of 2020, I built my own laboratory to take completely objective technical measurements. I then take pictures in real conditions to see how the camera performs. I then evaluate these photos according to my criteria but I publish the photos so that you can evaluate the result according to your criteria.

Hardware

Samsung has not been very explicit about the technical characteristics of the sensors used on this phone. The main sensor is a 50 megapixel sensor, which is probably a Sony sensor because I can't find the same characteristics in Samsung's 50 Mp range.

The secondary sensor is an 8-megapixel ultra-wide-angle sensor that could have been a Sony IMX 355, but here too the characteristics don't match with this model.

Photo quality

Photo quality (indoor/studio)

The studio test is carried out under the same conditions so that the results can be compared on an equal basis. I calibrate my lighting for each test to obtain the same brightness and colour temperature. This test is a preliminary analysis of the technical qualities of a camera. Most phones fail this test, so you should also read the results of the other tests in the following paragraphs.

Main sensor



I tested the different photo modes available for this first photo test, examples can be found in the image gallery below. As is often the case, the photo is underexposed when the phone is exposed to strong artificial light. No surprises here. There are a few things that need to be checked with an outdoor photo test. I find the photo to be very contrasty, with very dark areas more pronounced than usual, especially on the Statue of Liberty. There's also a shadowy area on the rubix cube. I also find that the yellow is a little pale and the colorimetry seems a little too cold. The sharpness, on the other hand, looks good and this is confirmed in the following photo:



The sharpness of the Canadian banknote is impeccable. If I zoom in on the photo at 100%, the lettering is perfectly sharp and outlined. At 200% this is still the case and I can't see any trace of artificially enhanced sharpness. Peripheral sharpness is also good. For a phone in this price range, I think the sharpness is really of a good standard



Secondary sensor



The ultra-wide-angle sensor does a little better than the main sensor for exposure time, the photo is brighter overall. Distortion is obviously visible, as this type of sensor is not designed for object photography, but for wide shots such as landscapes. Sharpness is not very good, because even at 100% the loss of detail is clearly visible.



I found the same findings on this photo to test sharpness. The exposure time is better, but the sharpness is really bad. If I zoom in at 100%, the lettering on the Canadian banknote is already illegible, and at the periphery of the photo it's even worse

Outdoor photo quality

50-megapixel main sensor



I tested this phone at the same time as the POCO F6 Pro, and their styles are completely different, which is also reflected in the photo quality. The POCO produces images that are too warm, as if a yellow veil were covering the whole picture, while the Samsung produces images that are too cold, as if a blue veil were covering the picture. Despite this too-cold tone, I find that the Samsung still manages to produce photos with well-saturated, dynamic colors. The sharpness processing is clearly forced, but if you look at the photos without zooming in, you'll no doubt appreciate the sharpness and level of detail. The rendering is therefore a little artificial, but the result is quite aesthetic



Secondary sensor



The secondary sensor has undeniable qualities for outdoor photography. Color tones are much more accurate than with the main sensor, and the photo is much more natural. It obviously has the same shortcomings as sensors of this type, such as lack of sharpness and a lower dynamic range, but in the realm of ultra-wide angles, this one does well. In fact, I think it's a Sony IMX 355, as its color rendering is very similar to what this sensor can produce



Test photo / night

Not yet available / tested

Video quality

Stabilisation



The video shows that this phone has a stabilization mechanism, but it can't completely absorb the vibration of my footsteps; it's attenuated but still visible.

Video normale conditions


This phone is capable of filming in 4k 30 fps and I was quite surprised by the rendering of the video part because it doesn't resemble the rendering of the photo part. The video seems overexposed, and the dynamic range is much lower than that of the photo. HDR is effective in the photo section, which no doubt explains the difference. Exposure jumps are clearly visible, with the phone moving from underexposed to overexposed areas.

I'm frankly a little disappointed by the video, Samsung is capable of doing better. Okay, it's an entry-level phone, but Samsung's entry-level is priced like Xiaomi's mid-range.

External audio quality

This test is intended to give you an overview of the volume and sound quality during calls and when listening to music through the external speakers.

Music / External speaker



The Samsung Galaxy A25 has two sound outputs for stereo sound, and the sound is generally of good quality and fairly well balanced, as is often the case with Samsung. The sound is not super-powerful, but just average. The volume is louder from the speaker at the bottom of the phone, as you can see from this video.

Call quality / Internal and external speaker



Call sound is of good quality when played through the speakerphone, the sound is softened and not too high-pitched. Volume, on the other hand, is average. If I switch the sound to the external loudspeaker, the volume is greater, but without being exceptional, it's also about average. Here, however, the sound becomes much higher-pitched without being unpleasant.

Audio quality (headphones)

To test the quality of the phone's audio output, I connect the device's audio output to a measuring tool, then play sounds on all frequencies and measure the differences between the original sound and the sound produced by the phone. In this way I measure the phone's ability to correctly reproduce all sounds.

Headphone sound quality



I measured the audio quality of the Samsung Galaxy A25 to obtain a totally objective value for sound quality. I then compared the results with the reference sound and the Samsung Galaxy S10+. The comparison with the other Samsung isn't very fair because the S10+ was a top-of-the-range phone and was very good at audio

The result for this Galaxy A25 is pretty good in this price range. The curve shows that it is capable of reproducing all frequencies fairly faithfully, but with some weakness in the bass and a more pronounced weakness in the treble. The difference with the S10+ is noticeable, but not gigantic - nothing that would justify such a big price difference.

Screen quality

To test the screen, I use a colorimetric probe that measures the color accuracy of a screen, as well as other parameters to see if a screen is able to correctly reproduce an image. I also test the brightness level to determine if the screen will be able to display an image in full sunlight.

Colorimetry



The Samsung Galaxy A25's screen is set to vivid mode by default, and with this mode I get a delta E of 2.75 for colors and 2.18 for grays. This is a good level of colorimetry by default, but it is possible to improve color fidelity by modifying the white balance in the screen's advanced settings. This involves lowering the green by two notches and lowering the blue to the second ball of the horizontal axis. With this configuration, the delta E falls to 2.5, with a more faithful white and less significant colorimetric deviations. Only cyan resists, deviating by more than 6.



Brightness / Contrast

I measured a brightness of 952 cd/m² in auto-lighting mode, which is simply enormous without having to change the configuration. With this level of brightness, you'll be able to use this phone under the sun without much loss of brightness

Contrast

I measured infinite contrast, as on most screens of this type. The brightness level in black is minimal

The Samsung Galaxy A25 therefore offers very good colorimetry and contrast for a phone in this price range.

Accessories Samsung Galaxy A25

Compare Samsung Galaxy A25 with the others

Test / Review conclusion

I've been using a Samsung Galaxy S23 on a daily basis (since 2023 and at the time of writing), the phone provided to me by my employer. I'm quite happy with this phone, it meets my expectations, the price difference with the Samsung Galaxy A25 is huge, so I was wondering if the satisfaction gap would also be huge. Apart from this purely personal element, I also wanted to be able to evaluate this Samsung Galaxy A25 against the latest generation of Redmi phones, in particular the Redmi Note 13 and Redmi Note 13 Pro. The last time I tested an entry-level Samsung, the comparison with the Redmi range didn't turn out to Samsung's advantage, and unfortunately that's once again the case with this model.
The level of finish on this Samsung is superior to the Redmi Note 13, and I find the Samsung more elegant, even if that's subjective and unnecessary for the phone's performance. The Samsung takes its cues from the more expensive models, with a streamlined design and good-quality plastics. The screen is of good quality, with good colorimetry, excellent contrast and a brightness that enables it to be used in direct sunlight. This is also the case on the Redmi, so I'd put them on a par for this criterion

In terms of performance, the Samsung is midway between the Redmi Note 13 and the Redmi Note 13 Pro. This level of performance means you can use it in just about any condition, you can also use it for gaming as long as you don't set the level of detail to maximum. Other phones do better for the same price, but performance is a marketing concept that only encourages you to buy a convenience you don't necessarily need.

Sensitivity to the mobile network is on the decline, so I can't yet classify this phone as one of the worst performers in the class, but Samsung is slowly slipping towards the low average. The same is true of the Redmi. If you live in an area with poor network coverage, this Samsung (and the Redmi) is probably not the phone for you. Wifi performance, on the other hand, is much better, while GPS speed and accuracy are average

Photo quality is good, but mainly thanks to the photo processing. Colorimetry is a little too cold, but dynamics, sharpness and saturation are good. I was disappointed by the video section, which obviously doesn't benefit from the same treatment as the photo; dynamic range is low and exposure jumps are visible. Stabilization isn't totally effective either.

Wifi sensitivity and speed are good, but GPS is losing precision. Accuracy at 3 meters slips more towards 5 meters, but nothing that can't be corrected by an application that will get you back on the road

If I were to evaluate this phone on its own without comparing it to others, I'd say it does pretty well in this test for an entry-level phone. Unfortunately, there are alternatives offering more for less, such as the Redmi Note 13 range. Samsung is therefore continuing to play with its image, but it's a dangerous game, as Redmi is gradually nibbling away at market share, and it's not Apple they're going to be looking to for that market share

Strengths

Screen

Sound quality

Performance

Photo quality

Finish

Weaknesses

Mobile network sensitivity

GPS accuracy

Button relief

Video dynamic range

Alternatives to this product

Not yet available / tested

---

Privacy Policy | Terms and conditions