Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.4 | 82.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 14 |
| 2016-03-30 | -- |
| 6.37 x 3.19 x 0.31 inches | -- |
| 7.41 ounces | -- |
| Black, Gold and White | -- |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass Victus 2) |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 800.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 6.2 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 367 pixels per inch | 416 pixels per inch |
| -- | 2600 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.8 | 9.7 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 652 8976 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 4 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A72 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 28 nm (Octa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 510 GPU | Yes GPU |
| 8.91 | 6.21 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 8.88 | 10.1 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 12.00 MP |
| f/1.90 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 24.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.64 inches (1/1.56") sensor |
| -- | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 7.7 | 12.54 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G) and LTE (4G) | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 5.6 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.8 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Galaxy S25 has an overall score of 82.6, which is better than the Galaxy A9 Pro (2016)'s 74.4 global score. Both phones we compare here use Android operating system, but the Galaxy S25 has older 14 version and Galaxy A9 Pro (2016) has Android 8.0 Oreo. Galaxy S25's body is thinner and a lot lighter than Galaxy A9 Pro (2016).
The Galaxy A9 Pro (2016) features a much greater hardware performance than Galaxy S25, although it has 4 GB lesser RAM, they both have the same number of cores. Galaxy S25 counts with a way better looking display than Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), because it has a just a little more pixels per screen inch, a slightly higher 1080 x 2340 pixels resolution and a little bigger screen.
Samsung Galaxy S25 counts with a better memory to store more games and applications than Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), because although it has no SD extension slot, it also counts with 96 GB more internal memory capacity. The Galaxy A9 Pro (2016) features superior battery duration than Samsung Galaxy S25, because it has a 25% larger battery size.
The Samsung Galaxy S25 captures a lot better videos and photos than Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), because it has a much higher resolution back facing camera, a much bigger back-facing camera sensor taking way higher quality photos and videos and a larger aperture.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.