Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 73.1 | 75.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 9.0 Pie, 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2018-07-13 | 2016-06-10 |
| 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.34 inches | 5.86 x 2.95 x 0.39 inches |
| 6.38 ounces | 6.53 ounces |
| Blue | Camo green, Sandy gold and Titanium gray |
| -- | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 107.00 | $ 247.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 1280 x 720 pixels (HD) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| TFT | Super AMOLED |
| 267 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| -- | 500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.1 | 9.3 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7870 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 1600 MHz) processor | Kryo, 64-bit, 14 nm (Quad-Core 2150 MHz) processor |
| 2 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-T830 MP1 GPU | Adreno 530 GPU |
| 8.73 | 8.91 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 32 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 400 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 200 GB) external memory slot |
| 9.44 | 8.56 |
| Camera | |
| 13.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.33 inches (1/3.06") sensor | -- |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 9.13 | 9.46 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | -- |
| LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.6 | 3 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4000mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 5.28 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy S7 Active is slightly better than the Galaxy J7 Star, with a score of 75.8 against 73.1. Despite being the best in this comparison review, Samsung Galaxy S7 Active is an a lot older, somewhat thicker and just a little bit heavier cellphone than Galaxy J7 Star. The Galaxy S7 Active counts with a little better processing power than Galaxy J7 Star, because although it has 4 lesser CPU cores , it also counts with more RAM.
The Samsung Galaxy S7 Active features an incredibly better looking display than Galaxy J7 Star, because although it has a little bit smaller screen, it also counts with a way higher resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels and a lot more pixels per inch in the display. The Samsung Galaxy S7 Active has a bit better camera than Galaxy J7 Star, because although it has a camera in the back with lesser mega pixels resolution, and they both have the same camera aperture, the Samsung Galaxy S7 Active also counts with a way better (4K) video definition.
The Galaxy J7 Star has a bigger memory capacity for applications, games, photos and videos than Galaxy S7 Active, and although they both have the same 32 GB internal storage capacity, the Galaxy J7 Star also has an external memory card slot that supports a maximum of 400 GB. The Samsung Galaxy S7 Active features greater battery performance than Galaxy J7 Star, because it has 4000mAh of battery capacity.
Although Galaxy S7 Active is a better device, it is way more expensive than Galaxy J7 Star, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as the Galaxy J7 Star. If you prefer to save some money, you can buy the Galaxy J7 Star, letting go a couple features and specs, but you'll get the most out of your budget.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.