Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 71.5 | 80.2 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 13 | -- |
| -- | 2015-08-21 |
| 6.63 x 3.02 x 0.33 inches | 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches |
| 6.99 ounces | 6.03 ounces |
| Cerulean Blue, Cloudwing Grey and Flowing Purple | Black sapphire, Gold platinum, Silver titan and White pearl |
| -- | Glass and Metal |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.8 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 2460 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| 5000 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.6 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| MediaTek Helio G99 MT6789 (6 nm) chipset | Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset |
| Octa-Core 2200 MHz processor | ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2100 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G57 MC2 GPU | Mali-T760 MP8 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.18 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1 TB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 15.42 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 64.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| -- | f/1.90 aperture |
| -- | 28.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video |
| 8.69 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.6 | 6.3 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.8 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
Galaxy Note5 is much better than the Blackview Oscal Tiger 12, having an 80.2 score against 71.5. The Galaxy Note5 is a lighter and a bit thinner phone than the Blackview Oscal Tiger 12. Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 counts with a way better display than Samsung Galaxy Note5, because although it has a bit lower pixel amount in each inch of display and a quite lower resolution of 1080 x 2460px, it also counts with a bigger screen.
The Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 counts with much more memory for games and applications than Samsung Galaxy Note5, because it has 128 GB internal storage and a SD memory slot that supports a maximum of 1 TB. Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 features a bit more powerful processing unit than Galaxy Note5, and although they both have 8 cores, the Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 also has a higher amount of RAM memory.
The Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 has a much better battery duration than Galaxy Note5, because it has 5000mAh of battery capacity against 3000mAh. The Samsung Galaxy Note5 has a superior camera than Blackview Oscal Tiger 12, although it has a way worse resolution back camera.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.