Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 71.5 | 85.5 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 13 | Android 11, 10 |
| -- | 2019-12-27 |
| 6.63 x 3.02 x 0.33 inches | 6.24 x 2.90 x 0.31 inches |
| 6.99 ounces | 6.07 ounces |
| Cerulean Blue, Cloudwing Grey and Flowing Purple | Prism Crush black, Prism Crush blue, Prism Crush pink and Prism Crush white |
| -- | Plastic and Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 282.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.8 inches | 6.5 inches |
| 2460 x 1080 pixels | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 405 pixels per inch |
| 5000 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.6 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| MediaTek Helio G99 MT6789 (6 nm) chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| Octa-Core 2200 MHz processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G57 MC2 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 15.42 | 14.14 |
| Camera | |
| 64.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| -- | f/2.00 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 8.69 | 11.55 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Battery | 4000mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.8 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Galaxy A51 has an overall score of 85.5, which is better than Blackview Oscal Tiger 12's score of 71.5. The Galaxy A51 design is a little thinner and lighter than the Blackview Oscal Tiger 12. These devices have Android operating system, but the Galaxy A51 has an older 11 version and Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 has Android 13.
The Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 has a much better looking display than Galaxy A51, because although it has a quite worse display density, it also counts with a little bit higher resolution of 1080 x 2460px and a little larger display. Galaxy A51 has a CPU that's just as good as the Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 one, and although the Galaxy A51 has lesser RAM, they both have the same number of cores.
Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 features a bit bigger memory capacity to install applications and games than Galaxy A51, and although they both have exactly the same 128 GB internal storage capacity, the Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 also has an external SD slot that allows a maximum of 1 TB. Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 features superior battery duration than Galaxy A51, because it has a 25% greater battery size.
Samsung Galaxy A51 features a lot better camera than Blackview Oscal Tiger 12, although it has a way less MP camera in the back.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.