Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 81.3 | 85.5 |
| Basic Information | |
| LG | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11, 10 |
| 2018-06-08 | 2019-12-27 |
| 5.97 x 2.97 x 0.29 inches | 6.24 x 2.90 x 0.31 inches |
| 5.57 ounces | 6.07 ounces |
| Black and Gray | Prism Crush black, Prism Crush blue, Prism Crush pink and Prism Crush white |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) | Plastic and Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 261.00 | $ 282.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 6.5 inches |
| 2880 x 1440 pixels | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| P-OLED | Super AMOLED |
| 537 pixels per inch | 405 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.8 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2800 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 6 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 630 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.63 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 14.66 | 14.14 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.60 aperture | f/2.00 aperture |
| 30.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.32 inches (1/3.09") sensor | 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 10.01 | 11.55 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4000mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.28 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy A51 is slightly better than LG V35 ThinQ, getting an 85.5 score against 81.3. Although Samsung Galaxy A51 is newer than the LG V35 ThinQ, it is just a little bit thicker and a little heavier. The LG V35 ThinQ has a slightly better display than Samsung Galaxy A51, because although it has a little smaller display, it also counts with a better resolution of 1440 x 2880 and more pixels per display inch.
LG V35 ThinQ features a bit better performance than Samsung Galaxy A51, and although they both have the same number of cores, the LG V35 ThinQ also has 2 GB more RAM memory. The LG V35 ThinQ counts with just a bit bigger storage to install games and applications than Galaxy A51, because although it has just 64 GB internal storage capacity, it also counts with a SD extension slot that holds a maximum of 1,95 TB.
The Galaxy A51 counts with greater battery performance than LG V35 ThinQ, because it has a 21% more battery capacity. The Samsung Galaxy A51 shoots much clearer photographs and videos than LG V35 ThinQ, because although it has a smaller diafragm aperture, and they both have the same 3840x2160 (4K) video quality and the same 30 fps video frame rate, the Samsung Galaxy A51 also counts with a way more MP back-facing camera and a lot bigger back-facing camera sensor providing a much better image quality.
Galaxy A51 is a little more expensive than LG V35 ThinQ, but you can get a better phone for that few extra dollars.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.