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 — 88/100 vs 47/100 (a 41-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 (3,326,259 vs 615,425); 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 41 points (88/100 vs 47/100).

Profile comparison

Category scores

Samsung Galaxy A53

Performance 47
Display 80
Camera 26
Battery 44
Portability 64
Value for money 18

Vivo X300 Pro

Performance 94
Display 84
Camera 96
Battery 81
Portability 43
Value for money 88

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: 3326259 vs 615425
  • Better Geekbench Single: 3293 vs 956
  • Better Geekbench Multi: 10243 vs 2082
  • Bigger battery: 6510 vs 5000 mAh
  • Faster charging: 90W vs 25W
  • Better main camera: 200MP vs 64MP

  • Higher performance (94/100 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 41 points higher (88/100 vs 47/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (94/100 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 — 18/100, Vivo X300 Pro — 88/100; it shows how far a model sits above or below the usual level for its price, and is not part of the overall rating. In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A53 (94/100 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).

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 615425 3326259
Geekbench Single 956 3293
Geekbench Multi 2082 10243
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 f/1.8
  • Ultrawide: 12MP
  • Front: 32MP
26
camera

Vivo X300 Pro

  • Main: 200MP 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
615425 AnTuTu
Vivo X300 Pro Dimensity 9500
88/100 +81.5%
3326259 AnTuTu

Vivo X300 Pro leads Samsung Galaxy A53 by 81.5% 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 (94/100 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 41 points (88/100 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 — 88/100.

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 (94/100 vs 47/100).

Should you choose the Samsung Galaxy A53 over the 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.