Samsung Galaxy A53 vs Vivo X300 Pro

The Samsung Galaxy A53 (2022) runs on the Samsung Exynos 1280, while the Vivo X300 Pro (2025) runs on the Dimensity 9500; launch prices were $450 and $899. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo X300 Pro leads — 87/100 vs 47/100 (a 40-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo X300 Pro has the bigger battery (6510 mAh vs 5000); the main camera is 64 MP vs 200 MP; the Vivo X300 Pro is faster in AnTuTu (3,269,794 vs 613,957); per DXOMark lab testing, the Vivo X300 Pro has the stronger camera (171 vs 79); the Samsung Galaxy A53 is noticeably lighter (189g vs 226g).

The Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A53 by 40 points (87/100 vs 47/100).
Profile comparison
Category scores
Samsung Galaxy A53
Performance 47
Display 80
Camera 26
Battery 44
Portability 64
Value for money 26
Vivo X300 Pro
Performance 93
Display 84
Camera 96
Battery 81
Portability 43
Value for money 86
What makes Samsung Galaxy A53 better?
  • Lighter: 189g vs 226g
  • Cheaper at launch: $450 vs $899

  • Better portability (64/100 vs 43/100)
What makes Vivo X300 Pro better?
  • Higher AnTuTu: 3269794 vs 613957
  • Better Geekbench Single: 3228 vs 957
  • Better Geekbench Multi: 9553 vs 2095
  • Bigger battery: 6510 vs 5000 mAh
  • Faster charging: 90W vs 25W
  • Better main camera: 200MP vs 64MP

  • Higher performance (93/100 vs 47/100)
  • Better camera (96/100 vs 26/100)
  • Longer battery life (81/100 vs 44/100)
  • Better display (84/100 vs 80/100)
Comparison verdict

Comparing the Samsung Galaxy A53 vs the Vivo X300 Pro, the Vivo X300 Pro scores 40 points higher (87/100 vs 47/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (93/100 vs 47/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (96/100 vs 26/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (81/100 vs 44/100). Value score: Samsung Galaxy A53 — 26/100, Vivo X300 Pro — 86/100; it is biased by price level, so it should not be compared directly between devices at different prices. In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A53 (93/100 vs 47/100). In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Pro and the Samsung Galaxy A53 are nearly equal (84/100 vs 80/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A53 (96/100 vs 26/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A53 (81/100 vs 44/100). In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy A53 notably outperforms the Vivo X300 Pro (64/100 vs 43/100).

Samsung Galaxy A53: The Samsung Galaxy A53 is a better fit for everyday use.
Vivo X300 Pro: The Vivo X300 Pro is a better fit for gamers and power users, mobile photography enthusiasts, those who care about battery life, budget-conscious buyers.
Specs comparison
Specification Samsung Galaxy A53 Vivo X300 Pro
Processor Samsung Exynos 1280 Dimensity 9500
AnTuTu 613957 3269794
Geekbench Single 957 3228
Geekbench Multi 2095 9553
Display 6.5" AMOLED 6.8" AMOLED
Resolution 1080x2400 1260x2800
Refresh rate 120 Hz 120 Hz
Battery 5000 mAh 6510 mAh
Charging 25W 90W
Wireless charging 0W 40W
DXOMark (camera) 79 171
Main camera 64 MP 200 MP
Ultrawide 12 MP 50 MP
Telephoto 0 MP 50 MP
Front camera 32 MP 32 MP
RAM 6GB / 8GB 12GB / 16GB
Storage 128GB / 256GB 256GB / 512GB / 1TB
OS Android 12, One UI 4.1 Android 16
Brightness (peak) 800 nits 4500 nits
NFC yes yes
Protection IP67 IP68
Dimensions 159.6×74.8×8.1 mm 161.2×75.5×8.0 mm
Weight 189 g 226 g
Launch price $450 $899
Camera comparison
Samsung Galaxy A53
  • Main: 64MP
  • Ultrawide: 12MP
  • Front: 32MP
26
camera
Vivo X300 Pro
  • Main: 200MP f/f/1.57
  • Ultrawide: 50MP
  • Telephoto: 50MP
  • Front: 32MP
96
camera
Display comparison
Samsung Galaxy A53
  • 6.5" AMOLED
  • Resolution: 1080x2400
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz
80
display
Vivo X300 Pro
  • 6.8" AMOLED
  • Resolution: 1260x2800
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz
84
display
Battery and charging
Samsung Galaxy A53
  • 5000 mAh
  • Wired: 25W
  • No wireless charging
44
battery
Vivo X300 Pro
  • 6510 mAh
  • NanoReview test: web browsing 13:30 hrs, total 24:37 hrs
  • Wired: 90W
  • Wireless: 40W
81
battery
Overall performance score

We compared Samsung Galaxy A53 and Vivo X300 Pro, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Samsung Galaxy A53 Samsung Exynos 1280
47/100
613957 AnTuTu
Vivo X300 Pro Dimensity 9500
87/100 +81.2%
3269794 AnTuTu

Vivo X300 Pro leads Samsung Galaxy A53 by 81.2% in our overall performance rating.

Benchmarks
Launch prices and where to check today's
Samsung Galaxy A53
$450
Vivo X300 Pro
$899

Launch price difference: $449. Samsung Galaxy A53 was $449 cheaper at launch.

Detailed category analysis
performance

In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A53 (93/100 vs 47/100).

display

In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Pro and the Samsung Galaxy A53 are nearly equal (84/100 vs 80/100).

camera

In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A53 (96/100 vs 26/100).

battery

In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A53 (81/100 vs 44/100).

portability

In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy A53 notably outperforms the Vivo X300 Pro (64/100 vs 43/100).

Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Samsung Galaxy A53 or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A53 by 40 points (87/100 vs 47/100).

What is the rating of the Samsung Galaxy A53 and the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Samsung Galaxy A53 has a MobileRank rating of 47/100, the Vivo X300 Pro — 87/100.

Which has the better camera: the Samsung Galaxy A53 or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro leads on camera score (96/100 vs 26/100).

Which is more powerful: the Samsung Galaxy A53 or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro leads on performance (93/100 vs 47/100).

Should you choose the Samsung Galaxy A53 over the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Samsung Galaxy A53 is a better fit for everyday use. The Vivo X300 Pro is a better fit for gamers and power users, mobile photography enthusiasts, those who care about battery life, budget-conscious buyers.