Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 71.5 | 85.5 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 13 | Android 11, 10 |
| 0000-00-00 | 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 is much better than OSCAL Tiger 12, getting a overall score of 85.5 against 71.5. These phones work with Android operating system, but the Galaxy A51 has an older 11 version and OSCAL Tiger 12 has Android 13. Galaxy A51's construction is lighter and a bit thinner than the OSCAL Tiger 12.
The OSCAL Tiger 12 features a much sharper display than Galaxy A51, because although it has a little bit inferior pixels count per inch of screen, it also counts with a slightly better 1080 x 2460 resolution and a little larger display. OSCAL Tiger 12 and Samsung Galaxy A51 have really similar CPUs, and although the Samsung Galaxy A51 has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have a Octa-Core processor.
The Samsung Galaxy A51 captures greater videos and photos than OSCAL Tiger 12, although it has a much worse resolution camera. The OSCAL Tiger 12 counts with just a bit bigger memory for games and applications than Galaxy A51, and although they both have exactly the same 128 GB internal storage, the OSCAL Tiger 12 also has a SD extension slot that allows a maximum of 1 TB.
OSCAL Tiger 12 features improved battery lifetime than Galaxy A51, because it has 5000mAh of battery capacity instead of 4000mAh.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.