Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.6 | 83.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 9.0 Pie | -- |
| 2019-05-27 | 2019-03-15 |
| 6.76 x 3.09 x 0.38 inches | 6.24 x 2.93 x 0.30 inches |
| 7.58 ounces | 5.86 ounces |
| Black and Red | Black, Blue, Coral and White |
| Aluminum | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 600.00 | $ 202.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 6.4 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 385 pixels per inch | 403 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 SM8150 chipset | Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 9610 chipset |
| Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 640 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.72 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 13.3 | 14.14 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 16.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 25.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 27.00mm focal length |
| 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor | 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (15 fps) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 11.88 | 10.12 |
| 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, Dual SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.8 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| -- | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The Galaxy A50 has a score of 83.8, which is much better than the nubia Red Magic 3's overall score of 75.6. The Galaxy A50 construction is noticeably lighter and thinner than the nubia Red Magic 3, even though both of them were released only 2 months apart. Galaxy A50 features a display that is very similar to the display in nubia Red Magic 3, because although the Galaxy A50 has a bit smaller screen, and they both have the same exact 1080 x 2340 pixels resolution, it also counts with a little bit greater pixels number per screen inch.
Galaxy A50 features just a bit more storage to store more games and applications than nubia Red Magic 3, because although it has just 128 GB internal memory, it also counts with a slot for SD memory cards that allows up to 512 GB. The nubia Red Magic 3 has a bit superior processing unit than Samsung Galaxy A50, and although they both have 8 cores, the nubia Red Magic 3 also has a larger amount of RAM.
The nubia Red Magic 3 takes much better photographs and videos than Galaxy A50, and although they both have a F1.7 diafragm aperture, the nubia Red Magic 3 also has a way more MP camera, a way bigger back camera sensor providing a lot higher image quality and a way higher 7680x4320 video quality. The nubia Red Magic 3 has better battery performance than Galaxy A50, because it has a 25 percent bigger battery capacity.
Even being the best phone of the ones we compare here, the Galaxy A50 is also by far the cheapest one, making it a no doubt choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.