OnePlus rolled out the first stable build of OxygenOS 12 based on Android 12 to the OnePlus 8 family and the OnePlus 9R back in March. The update reached to the European OnePlus 8 variants recently in the form a newer build (C.15). However, it seems the software is half-baked and littered with bugs and inconsistencies, as users have been reporting a wide range of issues after installing the Android 12 update. Now, OnePlus has released a fresh new build of OxygenOS 12 for the OnePlus 9R and the OnePlus 8 series that adds to the previous update with a few more optimizations and bug fixes.
Thanks to OnePlus Community member G_Mr_…. for the screenshot!
The new OxygenOS 12 stable update (build number C.16) for the OnePlus 8, 8 Pro, 8T, and the OnePlus 9R has started rolling out gradually across the globe, according to a number of posts on the OnePlus Community forums. The update brings the following changes:
System
[Optimized] the power consumption in some scenarios, improved battery life performance
While the changelog is fairly minimalistic, we hope that there are a plethora of under-the-hood changes to address the glitches. Some users reportedly faced SafetyNet failure events after installing this update, but it got automatically resolved after a few reboots. Notably, the underlying Android security patch level is still March 2022.
Download: OxygenOS 12 C.16 for the OnePlus 8 series and OnePlus 9R
As with all OxygenOS updates, OnePlus is rolling out the latest OxygenOS 12 build for the OnePlus 9R and the OnePlus 8 lineup in a staged fashion. This means that the new release will initially be delivered to a limited number of users, with a broader rollout to follow in the next few days. Once the company confirms that there aren’t any major issues with the update, it will be pushed to more users.
You can either wait for your device to get picked up on the staggered rollout, or you can sideload the update using the download links provided below. We’ll continue to update this article as we get more download links.
Before Magisk became a thing, it was Xposed Framework that vastly shaped the device-agnostic Android modding approach. Rather than having to decompile applications, modify bits and pieces, recompile, and push the modded files back to our devices, we can replace any method in any class at runtime using Xposed and a purpose-built module. The framework is essentially a modification of /system/bin/app_process to load additional JAR files on startup, which allows developers to hook into the Zygote process and can act in its context.
Since Magisk offers an overlay-based modding mechanism (often referred to as “systemless”), one can theoretically create a Magisk module to tinker with the Zygote process without physically modifying the app_process executable. This is where Riru comes in.
What is Riru?
Created by two developers named Rikka and yujincheng08, Riru is a specially crafted Magisk module that offers Xposed-esque functionalities without the need of installing the old school Xposed Framework. It injects into Zygote in order to allow other modules to run their codes in apps or the system server.
How does Riru work?
The initial implementation of Riru relied on the replacement of a particular system library called libmemtrack. However, the method was later abandoned in favor of a system property known as the “native bridge” (ro.dalvik.vm.native.bridge). By exploiting the property, the developers can dynamically load and unload shared libraries of their choice, which ultimately leads to injecting into the Zygote process.
How to download and install Riru?
As mentioned earlier, Riru is available as a Magisk module. Due to the fact that the Magisk app no longer comes with a built-in module browser, you need to download Riru straight from its GitHub repository.
After downloading the release ZIP file, you can install it using the Magisk app.
If you’re downloading on a PC or a Mac, then connect your Android device to it and copy the downloaded ZIP file to the internal memory of the target device.
Open the Magisk app on your phone and switch to the Modules tab using the bottom navigation menu.
Tap on the button named Install from storage.
Browse and select the module ZIP you downloaded earlier.
Magisk will now install the module and prompt you to restart.
If everything goes right, you can see Riru listed under the Modules tab of the Magisk app after rebooting.
What can I do with Riru?
Riru itself is just a doorway for other modules to hook into the Zygote process. As such, you need to install Riru-compatible modules via the Magisk app, just like any other Magisk modules. After a successful installation, Riru modules will be listed alongside Magisk modules in the Magisk app. You can then open the module-specific configuration front-end to modify its parameters. For the modules that have no interface, you can simply continue using your modded Android instance and Riru will take care of everything in the background.
What is the difference between Riru and Zygisk?
On newer versions of Magisk, you may face a situation where Riru is disabled after installation due to the presence of Zygisk.
The reason behind this conflict is rather simple, though. Zygisk (e.g. Magisk in Zygote) is the spiritual successor to Riru. It’s the evolution of the systemless interface that XDA Senior Recognized Developer topjohnwu (i.e. the creator of Magisk) and several other developers have been working on for a while. As both Riru and Zygisk target the Android Zygote process, these two can’t exist simultaneously. However, you can disable Zygisk from Magisk’s setting, reboot the device, and then enable Riru.
As a matter of fact, the maintainers of Riru practically stopped developing the project a while ago. They suggested module developers switch to Zygisk in the future. However, Zygisk is still in a nascent stage and there is a lot of scope for improvement, hence the migration will take time. Meanwhile, you can continue to use Riru and its modules.
Before Magisk became a thing, it was Xposed Framework that vastly shaped the device-agnostic Android modding approach. Rather than having to decompile applications, modify bits and pieces, recompile, and push the modded files back to our devices, we can replace any method in any class at runtime using Xposed and a purpose-built module. The framework is essentially a modification of /system/bin/app_process to load additional JAR files on startup, which allows developers to hook into the Zygote process and can act in its context.
Since Magisk offers an overlay-based modding mechanism (often referred to as “systemless”), one can theoretically create a Magisk module to tinker with the Zygote process without physically modifying the app_process executable. This is where Riru comes in.
What is Riru?
Created by two developers named Rikka and yujincheng08, Riru is a specially crafted Magisk module that offers Xposed-esque functionalities without the need of installing the old school Xposed Framework. It injects into Zygote in order to allow other modules to run their codes in apps or the system server.
How does Riru work?
The initial implementation of Riru relied on the replacement of a particular system library called libmemtrack. However, the method was later abandoned in favor of a system property known as the “native bridge” (ro.dalvik.vm.native.bridge). By exploiting the property, the developers can dynamically load and unload shared libraries of their choice, which ultimately leads to injecting into the Zygote process.
How to download and install Riru?
As mentioned earlier, Riru is available as a Magisk module. Due to the fact that the Magisk app no longer comes with a built-in module browser, you need to download Riru straight from its GitHub repository.
After downloading the release ZIP file, you can install it using the Magisk app.
If you’re downloading on a PC or a Mac, then connect your Android device to it and copy the downloaded ZIP file to the internal memory of the target device.
Open the Magisk app on your phone and switch to the Modules tab using the bottom navigation menu.
Tap on the button named Install from storage.
Browse and select the module ZIP you downloaded earlier.
Magisk will now install the module and prompt you to restart.
If everything goes right, you can see Riru listed under the Modules tab of the Magisk app after rebooting.
What can I do with Riru?
Riru itself is just a doorway for other modules to hook into the Zygote process. As such, you need to install Riru-compatible modules via the Magisk app, just like any other Magisk modules. After a successful installation, Riru modules will be listed alongside Magisk modules in the Magisk app. You can then open the module-specific configuration front-end to modify its parameters. For the modules that have no interface, you can simply continue using your modded Android instance and Riru will take care of everything in the background.
What is the difference between Riru and Zygisk?
On newer versions of Magisk, you may face a situation where Riru is disabled after installation due to the presence of Zygisk.
The reason behind this conflict is rather simple, though. Zygisk (e.g. Magisk in Zygote) is the spiritual successor to Riru. It’s the evolution of the systemless interface that XDA Senior Recognized Developer topjohnwu (i.e. the creator of Magisk) and several other developers have been working on for a while. As both Riru and Zygisk target the Android Zygote process, these two can’t exist simultaneously. However, you can disable Zygisk from Magisk’s setting, reboot the device, and then enable Riru.
As a matter of fact, the maintainers of Riru practically stopped developing the project a while ago. They suggested module developers switch to Zygisk in the future. However, Zygisk is still in a nascent stage and there is a lot of scope for improvement, hence the migration will take time. Meanwhile, you can continue to use Riru and its modules.
Shortly after the first image of the Pixel Watch leaked, it seems that we’re getting a complete look at the full device for the first time. According to a report from Android Central, one of the publication’s readers found an abandoned Pixel Watch in a restaurant, took photos, and sent it in. While we don’t know much about the specs of the watch, we know that it’ll likely be unveiled at this year’s Google I/O.
Sadly the reader had no luck in booting the watch and taking a look around the software. The furthest they could apparently see into the device was the boot-up logo being a “G”, and it doesn’t go further than that. The source said this watch could be “a testing model for the Internal Pixel team,” though it isn’t confirmed.
However, the images above match what we’ve seen already, suggesting that this is indeed the Pixel Watch — or a very good copy. It also seems that there’s a button below the crown for sure, and what may be another button above the crown. Previous rumors have suggested that this watch has two buttons, with one of them being a dedicated voice assistant button. The source also said that the bottom of the watch “looks metallic but feels like it’s coated with glass.”
As for the wristband, it seems that it’s a proprietary Google band made of some kind of jelly material. This means that you won’t be able to just slot any watch band on and that you’ll likely need to use Google’s official bands that it will presumably sell.
What’s most interesting about this leak is not that the Pixel Watch was apparently found in a restaurant, but that it was left alongside the box. Assumedly, a Google employee had this device with them and forgot it, but why would they have brought the box with them?
According to Android Central, a message at the bottom of the box states: “This device has not been authorized as required by the rules of the Federal Communications Commission and Industry Canada, nor has it been tested for compliance with EU regulations.”
The same note also states that the model is for “internal testing and development only” and that the “markings and packaging are not final.”
When it comes to comparing phones, there is no comparison more apt than Apple’s iPhone against Samsung’s Galaxy, because they are the two biggest and most prominent phone brands in the world, and in chunks of the world including and especially the US, they represent iOS vs Android for the average consumer. We’ve already pitted the absolute best premium offerings from both brands against each other, now it’s time for the mid-range battle: the third-generation iPhone SE vs the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G.
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Price and Availability
Both the Galaxy A53 and third-generation iPhone SE, which we will call iPhone SE 3 going forward for simplicity, are available practically across the globe. Prices are:
The iPhone SE 3 starts at $429 for the 64GB base variant and jumps to$479 for 128GB or $579 for 256GB storage
The Galaxy A53 in the US comes in only a 128GB variant, priced at $449. Although in some parts of the world, including Hong Kong where I am based, the A53 has a 256GB variant priced at the equivalent of around $510
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Specifications
Specifications
Apple iPhone SE (2022)
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
Build
Aluminum mid-frame
Glass front and back
Plastic mid-frame
Plastic back
Gorilla Glass 5 front
Dimensions & Weight
138.4 x 67.3 x 7.3 mm
144g
74.8 x 159.6 x 8.1mm
189 g
Display
4.7-inch Retina IPS LCD
750 x 1334
60Hz refresh rate
6.5-inch Super AMOLED
1080 x 2400
120Hz refresh rate
SoC
A15 Bionic
Exynos 1280
RAM & Storage
RAM not disclosed
64GB/128GB/256GB
6/8GB RAM
128GB/256GB
Battery & Charging
Battery size not disclosed
15W wired fast charging
8W wireless charging
No charger in box
5,000mAh
25W wired fast charging
No charger in box
Security
Touch ID capacitive fingerprint scanner
Optical in-display fingerprint scanner
Rear Camera(s)
Primary: 12MP f/1.8
64MP f/1.8 Main (with OIS)
12MP f/2.2 Ultra-wide
5MP f/2.4 Depth sensor
5MP f/2.4 Macro
Front Camera
7MP, f/2.2
32MP, f/2.2
Port(s)
USB-C
Lightning
Audio
Stereo speakers
Stereo speakers
Connectivity
5G (mmWave)
Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) with 2×2 MIMO
Bluetooth 5.2
NFC
5G (mmWave) for almost all regions and carriers except AT&T in the US
Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) with 2×2 MIMO
Bluetooth 5.2
NFC
Software
iOS 15.4
One UI 4.1 over Android 12
Other features
Single physical SIM
Dual physical SIM
About this comparison:This review was written after testing an iPhone SE (2022) provided by Apple Hong Kong and a Galaxy A53 provided by Samsung Hong Kong for the past couple of weeks. Neither Apple nor Samsung had any input in this article
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Design and Hardware
In order to meet this sub-$500 price that’s less than half of what their top phones cost, both Apple and Samsung had to compromise on hardware and features, and it’s interesting to see the opposing approach each brand has taken. Apple has just about sacrificed looks and modern design with the iPhone SE 3: it recycles the same outer shell and components of the five-year-old iPhone 8. And if we’re being honest, the iPhone 8’s design was outdated even back in 2017 — so the iPhone SE 3’s nearly inch-thick bezels, 60Hz LCD display with pointy screen corners feel even older than five years old. But while the phone is no looker, it packs Apple’s absolute flagship 4nm A15 Bionic chip, which is currently the most powerful mobile processor in the world. Let that sink in.
Samsung’s Galaxy A53 5G, meanwhile, has modern looks, with thin bezels, a 120Hz OLED display, and a quad-lens camera system. Of course, if you know your smartphones and you nitpick, you can quickly find areas of compromise like the plastic back and the fact that two of the cameras are somewhat pointless depth and macro sensors. But to the layman’s eyes, the Galaxy A53 5G would not look out of place next to other 2022 release. However, the Galaxy A53 5G is powered by a noticeably mid-tier Exynos SoC.
Apple chose to settle on looks, Samsung chose to settle on brains
In other words, Apple chose to settle on looks, and Samsung chose to settle on brains.
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Display
The giant bezels of the iPhone SE 3 are a divisive point. For a gadget geek like me, and I’m guessing many XDA readers, they’re just far too large, eating into what should be real estate for the screen. But I have heard other consumers — generally the older, more casual crowd — say they don’t mind the bezel, and even welcome the return of the home button, which offers a tactile way to operate the phone as well as bring back Touch ID. That’s fine, I’m willing to concede maybe not everyone cares about thin bezels.
But what can’t be argued is that iPhone SE 3’s 60Hz LCD screen is objectively inferior to the Galaxy A53’s 120Hz OLED panel. Whether it’s looking at photos, watching videos, or reading text, it’s just a more enjoyable experience on the Galaxy A53 — colors pop off the screen more, the display gets brighter and pumps out better contrast. The iPhone SE 3’s 4.7-inch screen is also very cramped by almost any modern smartphone standards. And despite the Galaxy A53 having a much larger 6.5-inch display, I don’t find the phone more difficult to use with one hand, because Android is more one-hand friendly: I can, for example, just put all my core apps at the bottom of the screen, I can use a more dense grid so the space between app icons are smaller (thus less likely to spill out of reach of my thumb vertically or horizontally).
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Silicon and Performance
Apple’s A15 Bionic has no problem outperforming the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 that’s powering Samsung’s Ultra flagship, so it of course takes an easy win against Samsung’s mid-tier Exynos 1280 chip. I’m not just talking about benchmark numbers, where the A15 Bionic crushes the Exynos 1280, but in real-world usage, I can feel that slight sluggishness in the Galaxy A53 that reminds me “ah this is a mid-tier phone” while the iPhone SE 3 mostly behaves like a flagship (save for the fact I’m viewing content on a display that belongs in 2015).
I want to clarify that the performance of the Galaxy A53 isn’t bad in a vacuum, and if you’re jumping over from another mid-tier Android device, you may not notice anything, but when compared against the iPhone SE 3 (or Android flagships), there are noticeable occasional stutters when doing things like exiting out of an app. One noticeable example of performance is when I jump into each phone’s default photo gallery app to make simple edits to videos, the process is almost instantaneous on the iPhone SE 3 while the Galaxy A53 needs significantly more time to process. Just check out the below clip, the Galaxy A53 takes a second or two just to load the video edit menu, and then took 30 seconds to process a short trim (while the process was instant on the iPhone SE 3).
If you are not a demanding smartphone user — if your usage consists of texting, reading websites, watching YouTube — the Galaxy A53 will be absolutely fine just like the iPhone SE 3. But if you are a heavier user who plays graphically intensive games or does more complicated tasks like editing videos, then the iPhone SE 3 is noticeably more powerful. But then again, do you really want to play graphically intensive games or edit videos on the iPhone SE 3’s screen?
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Cameras
The iPhone SE 3 packs just two cameras: a 12MP, f/1.8 main shooter and a 7MP, f/2.2 front-facing selfie camera. The Galaxy A53 5G has five cameras in all: a quad-lens rear system consisting of a 64MP, f/1.8 main camera, 12MP ultra-wide, and a pair of mostly pointless macro and depth sensors. Around the front, the Galaxy A53 offers a 32MP, f/2.2 selfie camera.
As the number suggests, Samsung’s camera hardware is more powerful. So if you do things like zoom into an image and pixel peep, the Galaxy A53’s more pixel-dense shots will often be sharper, more detailed. Likewise, due to the use of pixel-binning technology and having a larger image sensor, the Galaxy A53’s main camera can gather more light. So if you’re shooting in a really dark scene, the iPhone SE 3 will sometimes outright fail (like in the last set of samples below). Samsung’s camera also tends to dial up the contrast, which produces a shot that may be more visually appealing even if it’s slightly less natural.
However, it’s not all about camera hardware. Software processing is very important, and the A15 Bionic’s ISP (image signal processor) is likely vastly superior to the Exynos 1280’s ISP, because in challenging shots like against harsh backlight (which requires the phone’s brain to analyze the scene and try to produce an HDR shot), sometimes the Galaxy A53 will misfire badly, like in the sample below.
Selfies are fine for both phones. Just like the main camera, the iPhone SE 3’s selfie camera hardware is very dated so it will struggle very badly in low light scenes. But in most normal conditions, it’s perfectly serviceable. If I have to nitpick, I’d say I prefer the iPhone SE 3’s consistency in exposure and keeping my skin tone looking more natural.
One area the Galaxy A53 wins is ultra-wide photography because the iPhone SE 3 doesn’t have an ultra-wide lens at all. So the Galaxy A53’s camera system is just a bit more versatile, able to capture shots like these.
Video recording is another major win for the iPhone SE 3, as it brings over Apple’s best-in-class electronic image stabilization and real-time HDR adjustments. The Galaxy A53, in fact, can’t offer stabilization at 4k/30, so you almost certainly must shoot at just 1080p if you’re hand-holding the phone.
Other Components
While the iPhone SE 3 looks more outdated, it is built with more premium glass and aluminum material compared to the Galaxy A53’s mostly plastic body. Still, my black version of the iPhone SE 3 attracts fingerprints badly and when it is smudged up, looks quite bad.
In terms of in-hand feel, both phones feel comfortable in the hand for me, but the iPhone SE 3’s absolute dainty size and weight is particularly easy to hold. This is a phone I can hold onto while riding bikes or climbing stairs and not worry about it slipping out of my hand.
The iPhone SE 3’s traditional capacitive fingerprint scanner also works better than the Galaxy A53’s optical in-display scanner, which is noticeably slower than not just the ultrasonic scanner in the Galaxy flagship phones, but also the optical scanners used in Chinese.
In terms of battery capacity and battery life, the Galaxy A53 takes a much-needed win: Samsung’s mid-ranger packs a 5,000 mAh cell that can power the Galaxy A53 all day, while the iPhone SE 3’s battery is tiny by comparison. Apple doesn’t disclose battery specs, but teardowns have revealed it’s a 2,018 mAh cell, one that can’t quite power the iPhone SE 3 all day for my heavy use.
Neither phone pack chargers in the box, but the iPhone SE 3 supports wireless charging while the Galaxy A53 5G can only be charged wired. Fast charging on either phone is nothing to write home about, but the iPhone SE 3 does fast charging worse than the Galaxy A53 5G.
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Software
We have covered iOS vs OneUI enough so we won’t dive too deep here. For the most part, if you’ve used an iPhone or a Galaxy phone in recent years, the user experience will be familiar in the respective family. The noticeable change for the iPhone SE 3 is that, due to it using the older circular home button design, it still uses the old iOS method of button-driven navigation instead of swiping. This also means the iOS Control Center is activated by swiping up from the bottom of the display instead of swiping down from the upper right corner.
The Galaxy A53 5G also behaves mostly like a typical Samsung phone, except it is missing the ability to run Samsung DeX. As mentioned earlier, there are slight performance issues with the Galaxy A53, as I see the occasional animation stutter when jumping in and out of apps.
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Which one should you buy?
Both the iPhone SE 3 and Galaxy A53 5G are capable mid-rangers that excel in some areas while clearly cutting corners in others, so your personal preferences should make this a straightforward decision. If you are someone who really values the display in your gadgets — if your smartphone usage is mostly for visually-driven content like surfing TikTok or watching Netflix — then the Galaxy A53 5G’s much more immersive, superior display has a clear edge. It also has a battery that lasts all day when you push it.
But if your phone usage isn’t driven by consuming content, then the iPhone SE 3 is just a better performer, with a far more powerful brain, smoother UI, and a camera that’s generally more consistent with much better video capabilities too.
When it comes to comparing phones, there is no comparison more apt than Apple’s iPhone against Samsung’s Galaxy, because they are the two biggest and most prominent phone brands in the world, and in chunks of the world including and especially the US, they represent iOS vs Android for the average consumer. We’ve already pitted the absolute best premium offerings from both brands against each other, now it’s time for the mid-range battle: the third-generation iPhone SE vs the Samsung Galaxy A53 5G.
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Price and Availability
Both the Galaxy A53 and third-generation iPhone SE, which we will call iPhone SE 3 going forward for simplicity, are available practically across the globe. Prices are:
The iPhone SE 3 starts at $429 for the 64GB base variant and jumps to$479 for 128GB or $579 for 256GB storage
The Galaxy A53 in the US comes in only a 128GB variant, priced at $449. Although in some parts of the world, including Hong Kong where I am based, the A53 has a 256GB variant priced at the equivalent of around $510
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Specifications
Specifications
Apple iPhone SE (2022)
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
Build
Aluminum mid-frame
Glass front and back
Plastic mid-frame
Plastic back
Gorilla Glass 5 front
Dimensions & Weight
138.4 x 67.3 x 7.3 mm
144g
74.8 x 159.6 x 8.1mm
189 g
Display
4.7-inch Retina IPS LCD
750 x 1334
60Hz refresh rate
6.5-inch Super AMOLED
1080 x 2400
120Hz refresh rate
SoC
A15 Bionic
Exynos 1280
RAM & Storage
RAM not disclosed
64GB/128GB/256GB
6/8GB RAM
128GB/256GB
Battery & Charging
Battery size not disclosed
15W wired fast charging
8W wireless charging
No charger in box
5,000mAh
25W wired fast charging
No charger in box
Security
Touch ID capacitive fingerprint scanner
Optical in-display fingerprint scanner
Rear Camera(s)
Primary: 12MP f/1.8
64MP f/1.8 Main (with OIS)
12MP f/2.2 Ultra-wide
5MP f/2.4 Depth sensor
5MP f/2.4 Macro
Front Camera
7MP, f/2.2
32MP, f/2.2
Port(s)
USB-C
Lightning
Audio
Stereo speakers
Stereo speakers
Connectivity
5G (mmWave)
Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) with 2×2 MIMO
Bluetooth 5.2
NFC
5G (mmWave) for almost all regions and carriers except AT&T in the US
Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) with 2×2 MIMO
Bluetooth 5.2
NFC
Software
iOS 15.4
One UI 4.1 over Android 12
Other features
Single physical SIM
Dual physical SIM
About this comparison:This review was written after testing an iPhone SE (2022) provided by Apple Hong Kong and a Galaxy A53 provided by Samsung Hong Kong for the past couple of weeks. Neither Apple nor Samsung had any input in this article
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Design and Hardware
In order to meet this sub-$500 price that’s less than half of what their top phones cost, both Apple and Samsung had to compromise on hardware and features, and it’s interesting to see the opposing approach each brand has taken. Apple has just about sacrificed looks and modern design with the iPhone SE 3: it recycles the same outer shell and components of the five-year-old iPhone 8. And if we’re being honest, the iPhone 8’s design was outdated even back in 2017 — so the iPhone SE 3’s nearly inch-thick bezels, 60Hz LCD display with pointy screen corners feel even older than five years old. But while the phone is no looker, it packs Apple’s absolute flagship 4nm A15 Bionic chip, which is currently the most powerful mobile processor in the world. Let that sink in.
Samsung’s Galaxy A53 5G, meanwhile, has modern looks, with thin bezels, a 120Hz OLED display, and a quad-lens camera system. Of course, if you know your smartphones and you nitpick, you can quickly find areas of compromise like the plastic back and the fact that two of the cameras are somewhat pointless depth and macro sensors. But to the layman’s eyes, the Galaxy A53 5G would not look out of place next to other 2022 release. However, the Galaxy A53 5G is powered by a noticeably mid-tier Exynos SoC.
Apple chose to settle on looks, Samsung chose to settle on brains
In other words, Apple chose to settle on looks, and Samsung chose to settle on brains.
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Display
The giant bezels of the iPhone SE 3 are a divisive point. For a gadget geek like me, and I’m guessing many XDA readers, they’re just far too large, eating into what should be real estate for the screen. But I have heard other consumers — generally the older, more casual crowd — say they don’t mind the bezel, and even welcome the return of the home button, which offers a tactile way to operate the phone as well as bring back Touch ID. That’s fine, I’m willing to concede maybe not everyone cares about thin bezels.
But what can’t be argued is that iPhone SE 3’s 60Hz LCD screen is objectively inferior to the Galaxy A53’s 120Hz OLED panel. Whether it’s looking at photos, watching videos, or reading text, it’s just a more enjoyable experience on the Galaxy A53 — colors pop off the screen more, the display gets brighter and pumps out better contrast. The iPhone SE 3’s 4.7-inch screen is also very cramped by almost any modern smartphone standards. And despite the Galaxy A53 having a much larger 6.5-inch display, I don’t find the phone more difficult to use with one hand, because Android is more one-hand friendly: I can, for example, just put all my core apps at the bottom of the screen, I can use a more dense grid so the space between app icons are smaller (thus less likely to spill out of reach of my thumb vertically or horizontally).
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Silicon and Performance
Apple’s A15 Bionic has no problem outperforming the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 that’s powering Samsung’s Ultra flagship, so it of course takes an easy win against Samsung’s mid-tier Exynos 1280 chip. I’m not just talking about benchmark numbers, where the A15 Bionic crushes the Exynos 1280, but in real-world usage, I can feel that slight sluggishness in the Galaxy A53 that reminds me “ah this is a mid-tier phone” while the iPhone SE 3 mostly behaves like a flagship (save for the fact I’m viewing content on a display that belongs in 2015).
I want to clarify that the performance of the Galaxy A53 isn’t bad in a vacuum, and if you’re jumping over from another mid-tier Android device, you may not notice anything, but when compared against the iPhone SE 3 (or Android flagships), there are noticeable occasional stutters when doing things like exiting out of an app. One noticeable example of performance is when I jump into each phone’s default photo gallery app to make simple edits to videos, the process is almost instantaneous on the iPhone SE 3 while the Galaxy A53 needs significantly more time to process. Just check out the below clip, the Galaxy A53 takes a second or two just to load the video edit menu, and then took 30 seconds to process a short trim (while the process was instant on the iPhone SE 3).
If you are not a demanding smartphone user — if your usage consists of texting, reading websites, watching YouTube — the Galaxy A53 will be absolutely fine just like the iPhone SE 3. But if you are a heavier user who plays graphically intensive games or does more complicated tasks like editing videos, then the iPhone SE 3 is noticeably more powerful. But then again, do you really want to play graphically intensive games or edit videos on the iPhone SE 3’s screen?
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Cameras
The iPhone SE 3 packs just two cameras: a 12MP, f/1.8 main shooter and a 7MP, f/2.2 front-facing selfie camera. The Galaxy A53 5G has five cameras in all: a quad-lens rear system consisting of a 64MP, f/1.8 main camera, 12MP ultra-wide, and a pair of mostly pointless macro and depth sensors. Around the front, the Galaxy A53 offers a 32MP, f/2.2 selfie camera.
As the number suggests, Samsung’s camera hardware is more powerful. So if you do things like zoom into an image and pixel peep, the Galaxy A53’s more pixel-dense shots will often be sharper, more detailed. Likewise, due to the use of pixel-binning technology and having a larger image sensor, the Galaxy A53’s main camera can gather more light. So if you’re shooting in a really dark scene, the iPhone SE 3 will sometimes outright fail (like in the last set of samples below). Samsung’s camera also tends to dial up the contrast, which produces a shot that may be more visually appealing even if it’s slightly less natural.
However, it’s not all about camera hardware. Software processing is very important, and the A15 Bionic’s ISP (image signal processor) is likely vastly superior to the Exynos 1280’s ISP, because in challenging shots like against harsh backlight (which requires the phone’s brain to analyze the scene and try to produce an HDR shot), sometimes the Galaxy A53 will misfire badly, like in the sample below.
Selfies are fine for both phones. Just like the main camera, the iPhone SE 3’s selfie camera hardware is very dated so it will struggle very badly in low light scenes. But in most normal conditions, it’s perfectly serviceable. If I have to nitpick, I’d say I prefer the iPhone SE 3’s consistency in exposure and keeping my skin tone looking more natural.
One area the Galaxy A53 wins is ultra-wide photography because the iPhone SE 3 doesn’t have an ultra-wide lens at all. So the Galaxy A53’s camera system is just a bit more versatile, able to capture shots like these.
Video recording is another major win for the iPhone SE 3, as it brings over Apple’s best-in-class electronic image stabilization and real-time HDR adjustments. The Galaxy A53, in fact, can’t offer stabilization at 4k/30, so you almost certainly must shoot at just 1080p if you’re hand-holding the phone.
Other Components
While the iPhone SE 3 looks more outdated, it is built with more premium glass and aluminum material compared to the Galaxy A53’s mostly plastic body. Still, my black version of the iPhone SE 3 attracts fingerprints badly and when it is smudged up, looks quite bad.
In terms of in-hand feel, both phones feel comfortable in the hand for me, but the iPhone SE 3’s absolute dainty size and weight is particularly easy to hold. This is a phone I can hold onto while riding bikes or climbing stairs and not worry about it slipping out of my hand.
The iPhone SE 3’s traditional capacitive fingerprint scanner also works better than the Galaxy A53’s optical in-display scanner, which is noticeably slower than not just the ultrasonic scanner in the Galaxy flagship phones, but also the optical scanners used in Chinese.
In terms of battery capacity and battery life, the Galaxy A53 takes a much-needed win: Samsung’s mid-ranger packs a 5,000 mAh cell that can power the Galaxy A53 all day, while the iPhone SE 3’s battery is tiny by comparison. Apple doesn’t disclose battery specs, but teardowns have revealed it’s a 2,018 mAh cell, one that can’t quite power the iPhone SE 3 all day for my heavy use.
Neither phone pack chargers in the box, but the iPhone SE 3 supports wireless charging while the Galaxy A53 5G can only be charged wired. Fast charging on either phone is nothing to write home about, but the iPhone SE 3 does fast charging worse than the Galaxy A53 5G.
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Software
We have covered iOS vs OneUI enough so we won’t dive too deep here. For the most part, if you’ve used an iPhone or a Galaxy phone in recent years, the user experience will be familiar in the respective family. The noticeable change for the iPhone SE 3 is that, due to it using the older circular home button design, it still uses the old iOS method of button-driven navigation instead of swiping. This also means the iOS Control Center is activated by swiping up from the bottom of the display instead of swiping down from the upper right corner.
The Galaxy A53 5G also behaves mostly like a typical Samsung phone, except it is missing the ability to run Samsung DeX. As mentioned earlier, there are slight performance issues with the Galaxy A53, as I see the occasional animation stutter when jumping in and out of apps.
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G vs Apple iPhone SE 3: Which one should you buy?
Both the iPhone SE 3 and Galaxy A53 5G are capable mid-rangers that excel in some areas while clearly cutting corners in others, so your personal preferences should make this a straightforward decision. If you are someone who really values the display in your gadgets — if your smartphone usage is mostly for visually-driven content like surfing TikTok or watching Netflix — then the Galaxy A53 5G’s much more immersive, superior display has a clear edge. It also has a battery that lasts all day when you push it.
But if your phone usage isn’t driven by consuming content, then the iPhone SE 3 is just a better performer, with a far more powerful brain, smoother UI, and a camera that’s generally more consistent with much better video capabilities too.
