Samsung Galaxy A56 5G VS Samsung Galaxy S25

The most immediately noticeable design difference between the Galaxy A56 5G and the Galaxy S25 is size and weight. The A56 is a noticeably larger device — 162.2 × 77.5 mm versus the S25's 146.9 × 70.5 mm — and that translates into a significantly higher volume (93.02 cm³ vs 74.57 cm³). More practically, the A56 weighs 198 g compared to the S25's 162 g, a 36 g gap that is genuinely perceptible in daily one-handed use and in a pocket. Users who prioritize a compact, light form factor will find the S25 considerably easier to live with.

On water resistance, both phones are rated Waterproof, but the S25 holds a slight edge with an IP68 certification versus the A56's IP67. In practical terms, IP68 allows for deeper and longer submersion than IP67, making the S25 more resilient in accidental water exposure scenarios — a meaningful real-world advantage even if both phones handle rain and splashes equally well.

Repairability is essentially a wash: the French Repairability Index scores are 8.4 for the A56 and 8.5 for the S25 — a negligible difference that should not factor into a buying decision. Neither device has a rugged build or a folding form factor. Overall, the Galaxy S25 holds a clear design edge — it is lighter, more compact, and carries a superior IP rating — making it the stronger choice for users who value portability and durability in a standard candy-bar form factor.

Both phones use OLED/AMOLED panels with identical 1080 × 2340 px resolutions and matching 120Hz refresh rates, so the baseline viewing experience is comparable. Where they diverge meaningfully is screen size and pixel density: the A56's larger 6.7″ display trades sharpness for real estate, landing at 385 ppi, while the S25's more compact 6.2″ panel achieves a noticeably crisper 416 ppi — a difference that becomes visible when reading fine text or viewing detailed images up close.

The single most impactful differentiator in this group is brightness. The Galaxy S25 reaches 2600 nits typical brightness versus the A56's 1200 nits — more than double. In practice, this gap is transformative for outdoor usability: the S25 remains clearly legible in direct sunlight, while the A56 may struggle in the same conditions. For users who frequently use their phone outdoors, this alone is a compelling distinction.

On glass protection, the S25 steps up to Gorilla Glass Victus 2 compared to the A56's Gorilla Glass Victus — a generational improvement that offers better resistance to drops and scratches. HDR10+, Always-On Display, and touch screen support are shared across both, so those features create no differentiation. Taken together, the Galaxy S25 holds a clear display advantage, driven by its dramatically superior brightness and newer protective glass, making it the stronger performer in real-world daily conditions despite its smaller screen size.

The performance gap between these two devices is not subtle — it is generational. The Galaxy S25 is powered by the Snapdragon 8 Elite, Qualcomm's flagship 3 nm chip, while the A56 runs Samsung's mid-range Exynos 1580 on a 4 nm process. The benchmark numbers tell the story bluntly: the S25 scores 3,050,000 on AnTuTu versus the A56's 932,578 — roughly 3.3× higher. In Geekbench 6, the S25 achieves 3,175 single-core and 10,050 multi-core, compared to 1,360 and 3,893 on the A56. Single-core performance is especially telling for everyday responsiveness — app launches, UI animations, typing — and here the S25 is more than twice as fast.

GPU performance follows the same pattern. The S25's Adreno 830 packs 1,536 shading units against the A56's Xclipse 530 with just 256, and its memory subsystem is substantially faster at 85.1 GB/s bandwidth versus 51.2 GB/s. For gaming, video editing, or any GPU-intensive task, this is a decisive advantage. The S25 also supports OpenCL 3 versus OpenCL 2 on the A56, and while both cap RAM at 12 GB for their base configurations, the S25's RAM runs at 5,300 MHz compared to 3,200 MHz — meaning data moves between the processor and memory considerably faster.

Storage doubles too: the S25 ships with 512 GB internal storage to the A56's 256 GB. Taken as a whole, the Galaxy S25 holds an overwhelming performance advantage across every measurable dimension in this category. The A56 is capable enough for everyday tasks, but users who demand sustained high performance — whether for gaming, multitasking, or future-proofing — will find the S25 in a different league entirely.

At a glance, the two camera systems share a similar architecture — both feature a triple rear setup with a 50 MP main sensor, a 12 MP ultrawide, and matching apertures across all three lenses. The front cameras are identical at 12 MP. But the differences in the third lens reveal an important divergence: the S25 replaces the A56's 5 MP depth sensor with a 10 MP telephoto paired with 3× optical zoom. The A56 offers 0× optical zoom, meaning any zoom beyond the main lens is digital and therefore degrades image quality. For users who regularly photograph subjects at a distance — whether portraits, events, or travel shots — this is a meaningful real-world capability gap.

Video recording tells a similar story. The Galaxy S25 captures up to 8K (4320p) at 30 fps, while the A56 tops out at 4K (2160p) at 30 fps. The S25 also supports HDR10 video recording and RAW photo capture, neither of which are available on the A56. RAW support is particularly significant for enthusiast photographers, as it preserves full sensor data for post-processing flexibility. The S25 additionally gains a BSI (backside-illuminated) sensor and a dual-LED flash, both of which contribute to improved low-light photography and more accurate flash exposures.

The A56 does cover the fundamentals well — OIS, phase-detection autofocus, slow-motion, and manual controls for ISO, focus, exposure, and white balance are all present. However, the absence of optical zoom, RAW capture, and higher-resolution video recording are tangible limitations. The Galaxy S25 holds a clear camera advantage, with its telephoto lens, 8K video, RAW support, and BSI sensor combining to offer a substantially more versatile and capable imaging system.

From a software standpoint, these two devices are remarkably alike. Both launch on Android 15 and share an identical feature set across privacy controls, customization, and productivity — including dynamic theming, split-screen multitasking, picture-in-picture, on-device machine learning, offline voice recognition, and a full suite of notification and app-tracking controls. For the vast majority of day-to-day software use cases, a user switching between these two phones would notice no functional difference at the OS level.

Scanning the full spec list, only one differentiator emerges: the Galaxy S25 supports being used as a PC, while the A56 does not. This refers to a desktop mode capability — connecting the phone to a monitor, keyboard, and mouse to operate it like a computer. For users who travel light or want to consolidate their devices, this can be a genuinely useful feature, enabling productivity workflows without carrying a laptop.

Because the OS feature sets are otherwise completely mirrored, this category is effectively a near-tie with a narrow edge to the Galaxy S25, solely on the basis of its PC mode support. Users who have no interest in that functionality will find zero software-level difference between the two phones based on the provided data.

Battery capacity and charging speed split in opposite directions here, making this a genuine trade-off rather than a clear-cut win. The Galaxy A56 5G carries a 5000 mAh battery — 25% larger than the S25's 4000 mAh cell. Raw capacity directly correlates with time between charges, so the A56 has a structural advantage for endurance, particularly for heavy users or those frequently away from a power source. It also charges faster over a cable at 45W versus the S25's 25W, meaning it refills more quickly when plugged in — a practical benefit during short charging windows.

The S25, however, counters with wireless charging support — a feature entirely absent on the A56. Wireless charging adds meaningful everyday convenience: dropping the phone on a pad at a desk or nightstand without fumbling for a cable is a quality-of-life upgrade that many users come to rely on. It is worth noting that neither phone ships with a charger in the box, so both users will need to source one separately regardless.

Weighing the two sides, the answer depends on usage priorities. The A56 holds the edge for raw battery performance — more capacity and faster wired charging give it a genuine advantage for longevity and quick top-ups. The S25 trades some of that stamina for the added flexibility of wireless charging, which may matter more to users with compatible charging infrastructure already in place.

The shared foundations are solid: both phones ditch the 3.5 mm headphone jack, offer stereo speakers, and pack dual microphones for calls and recording. Neither includes a radio. For casual listening through the built-in speakers or standard Bluetooth earbuds, the day-to-day audio experience will feel comparable on both devices.

Where the S25 separates itself is in wireless audio codec support. It includes both LDAC and aptX Lossless — two high-resolution Bluetooth codecs that the A56 entirely lacks. LDAC transmits audio at up to three times the bitrate of standard Bluetooth, delivering near-lossless quality to compatible headphones. aptX Lossless goes further, enabling true CD-quality wireless audio when paired with a supported device. For users who invest in premium wireless headphones, these codecs can make a tangible difference in audio fidelity — but only if both the phone and the headphones support the same codec.

For general users streaming music through average earbuds, the absence of these codecs on the A56 will go largely unnoticed. But for audiophiles or anyone with high-end wireless audio gear, the gap is real. The Galaxy S25 holds a clear audio edge, with its support for lossless and high-resolution Bluetooth codecs standing as the sole but meaningful differentiator in this category.

Wireless connectivity is where the S25 pulls ahead most comprehensively in this category. While both phones support 5G, NFC, GPS, and share the same dual SIM and eSIM configuration, the S25 adds Wi-Fi 7 (802.11be) and Wi-Fi 6E to its stack — standards the A56 does not support. Wi-Fi 7 delivers significantly lower latency and higher throughput on compatible routers, and Wi-Fi 6E unlocks the less congested 6 GHz band, which translates to more stable connections in dense environments like apartments or offices. For users with modern networking hardware, this is a future-proof advantage the A56 simply cannot match.

The speed gap extends to cellular and USB as well. The S25 reaches download speeds of 10,000 Mbps versus the A56's 5,100 Mbps, and its USB port runs at 3.2 compared to the A56's USB 2.0 — meaning file transfers to a computer are dramatically faster on the S25. Bluetooth steps up marginally from 5.3 to 5.4, a minor but forward-compatible improvement. The S25 also adds a barometer and ANT+ support, the latter being relevant for users with fitness equipment or sports sensors that use the ANT+ protocol — a niche but real differentiator for athletes.

The A56 covers all the connectivity essentials competently, and for everyday use on a mid-range network, most of these gaps will remain invisible. However, for users who demand the fastest possible data throughput, modern Wi-Fi infrastructure compatibility, and broader sensor support, the Galaxy S25 holds a clear and well-rounded connectivity advantage across nearly every dimension in this group.

The miscellaneous specs for these two devices are identical across every data point provided. Both feature a video light, neither uses sapphire glass, neither has a curved or e-paper display. There is simply nothing here that separates them.

This is a complete tie — the provided data offers no basis for preferring one device over the other in this category, and neither phone carries any advantage or disadvantage based on these specs alone.