For the entire consumer electronics industry, April 1, 2022 is obviously a "new product" day. On the one hand, brands such as Lenovo and Razer have all released some new products that look strange. Of course, everyone knows that they are naturally "April Fool's Day limited", just for the sake of the product of Tu Yi Le.
But on the other hand, there is actually a new machine that is really on the market today, which has also attracted a lot of attention, that is, the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G. At first glance, this one with a starting price of 3299 yuan seems to be a typical mid-range product of 2022, but a closer look at its hardware configuration and the product ideas reflected will find that this new machine does not seem to be as simple as it seems on the surface.
How good is it? Just looking at the performance is really not high
6.5-inch FHD + Super AMOLED 120Hz screen, Samsung's self-produced Exynos1280 master control, 8GB + 128GB storage configuration, 5000mAh battery, 25W PD fast charging, plus the front 32 million pixels, by the 64 million pixel main camera + 12 million pixels ultra-wide angle + 5 million pixel macro + 5 million pixel bokeh lens composed of the rear camera module, basically the galaxy A53 5G overall configuration.
Many of your friends may not be familiar with the Exynos 1280 SoC, but its internal code name is S5E8825 (yes, this means that it actually belongs to the old Exynos8 series, not the latest 9 series). It integrates two Cortex-A78 large cores at 2.4GHz and six Cortex-A55 small cores at 2GHz, and is equipped with a Mali-G68 MC4 GPU solution.
Obviously, from the basic hardware architecture, it can be seen that the performance level of Exynos 1280 is certainly not as good as the star product of this year's flagship market, MediaTek Tianji 8100, not only that, it is not even as good as the main SoC Snapdragon 778G in this price segment last year. In fact, from the parameter point of view, exynos 1280, whether CPU or GPU design, is very close to MediaTek Tianji 920, the performance should basically be the level of Tianji 920. In other words, it is equivalent to the level of some 5G models with a high cost performance of 1500-2000 yuan on the market.
However, the first price of the Galaxy A53 5G in the domestic market is 3299 yuan. Even if you count the multiple preferential policies on the official website (including the trade-in subsidy of 300 yuan, the points gift of 300 yuan, and the free one-year broken screensaver), it can only be converted to the level of almost 2500 yuan at most, and there is still a certain gap in the pricing of other brands of Tianji 900 and Tianji 920 models. It's not very low in terms of performance/price "value for money", but it is definitely not high.
However, it also has many rare feature highlights of its peers
So does this mean that the Galaxy A53 5G is a typical, "unsatisfactory" overseas brand mid-range machine?
If you think so, you are actually wrong. Because a closer look at the configuration of this model will find that compared with other mainstream 2000-3000 yuan price segment models, Samsung does pile some uncommon configurations on the Galaxy A53 5G.
For example, its Super AMOLED screen has a brightness of up to 800nit, which is actually very rare in mid-range machines. It also means that the Galaxy A53 5G can provide better readability in outdoor sunshine environments, and will not make the screen look black due to insufficient screen brightness.
For example, it has stereo speakers and built-in Dolby Atmos sound. To know that dual speakers and sound certification, tuning are real money costs, such a configuration is very common in various flagship and sub-flagship models, but in the mid-range machine is really not much.
In addition, the Galaxy A53 5G card slot is currently a very rare "two-of-three" design, which means that it supports TF card expansion. Considering that this model is not originally based on "game performance" as a selling point, it means that consumers have little to spend more money to buy higher-capacity versions.
And that's not all, if you compare the camera configuration of the Galaxy A53 5G with its peers, it's actually better than most competitors in this price segment. On the one hand, the 32-megapixel front camera is almost the top level that non-flagship functions can use (only the flagship will use the 44 million or 50 million level of the front outsole program); on the other hand, its rear main camera has optical image stabilization, the rear ultra-wide-angle secondary camera is larger than most non-flagship machines, and even if it is two 5-megapixel secondary cameras, the specifications are one level higher than the common 2 million pixel macro/bokeh scheme.
The most powerful thing is that as a product that is completely incompatible with the "flagship", the Galaxy A53 5G also has IP67-level dust and water resistance, and there will be no problem with daily light rain, occasional dust and water washing.
Cost-effective≠ running points÷ performance, mid-range machines also need to be diversified
To tell the truth, after counting the functional highlights of the Galaxy A53 5G compared to most mid-range models, we suddenly had an idea, if purely based on the cost of hardware design, in fact, it is not necessarily lower than many competitors, and may even be more "thick".
But why is it that even if we three easy life, when we first see the price of this Samsung Galaxy A series new machine, we still have a "low cost performance" judgment?
It is very simple, because using simple SoC computing power to judge the "hardware value" of mobile phones has actually become the inherent thinking of the vast majority of people. Behind this inherent thinking, there are both factors that are more and more driven by the performance of today's large-scale mobile games, and there is also the "credit" of mobile phone manufacturers.
However, if you think about it, for the cost-constrained mid-range model, it is necessary to spend the cost mainly on SoC performance? Can't there be users who don't play games, and pursue better cameras, stronger body workmanship, and better display effects on mid-range models?
In fact, the "sex" of "cost performance" itself should not only be based on performance, or even only on running points as the only criterion. Whether it is a mobile phone or another product, its use value should be determined according to the actual user needs. To put it bluntly, since not every user necessarily needs "high-score" hardware, we should naturally allow more mid-range products like the Galaxy A53 5G that spend the cost on the needs of other users.
【The picture of this article comes from the network】