Samsung Galaxy A56 vs Vivo iQOO 15

The Samsung Galaxy A56 (2025) runs on the Exynos 1580, while the Vivo iQOO 15 (2025) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5; launch prices were $499 and $599. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo iQOO 15 leads — 88/100 vs 61/100 (a 27-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo iQOO 15 has the bigger battery (7000 mAh vs 5000); the Vivo iQOO 15 is faster in AnTuTu (3,950,082 vs 1,251,512); the Samsung Galaxy A56 is noticeably lighter (198g vs 215g).

The Vivo iQOO 15 significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 by 27 points (88/100 vs 61/100).

Profile comparison

Category scores

Samsung Galaxy A56

Performance 65
Display 79
Camera 53
Battery 48
Portability 67
Value for money 44

Vivo iQOO 15

Performance 98
Display 99
Camera 78
Battery 85
Portability 48
Value for money 90

What makes Samsung Galaxy A56 better?

  • Lighter: 198g vs 215g
  • Cheaper at launch: $499 vs $599

  • Better portability (67/100 vs 48/100)

What makes Vivo iQOO 15 better?

  • Higher AnTuTu: 3950082 vs 1251512
  • Better Geekbench Single: 3639 vs 1353
  • Better Geekbench Multi: 11047 vs 3832
  • Bigger battery: 7000 vs 5000 mAh
  • Faster charging: 100W vs 45W
  • Higher refresh rate: 144Hz vs 120Hz

  • Higher performance (98/100 vs 65/100)
  • Better camera (78/100 vs 53/100)
  • Longer battery life (85/100 vs 48/100)
  • Better display (99/100 vs 79/100)

Comparison verdict

Comparing the Samsung Galaxy A56 vs the Vivo iQOO 15, the Vivo iQOO 15 scores 27 points higher (88/100 vs 61/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo iQOO 15 leads (98/100 vs 65/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo iQOO 15 leads (78/100 vs 53/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo iQOO 15 leads (85/100 vs 48/100). Value score: Samsung Galaxy A56 — 44/100, Vivo iQOO 15 — 90/100; 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 iQOO 15 significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (98/100 vs 65/100). In the "display" category, the Vivo iQOO 15 notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (99/100 vs 79/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo iQOO 15 notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (78/100 vs 53/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo iQOO 15 significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (85/100 vs 48/100). In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy A56 notably outperforms the Vivo iQOO 15 (67/100 vs 48/100).

Samsung Galaxy A56: The Samsung Galaxy A56 is a better fit for active users.
Vivo iQOO 15: The Vivo iQOO 15 is a better fit for gamers and power users, those who care about battery life, budget-conscious buyers.

Specs comparison

Specification Samsung Galaxy A56 Vivo iQOO 15
Processor Exynos 1580 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5
AnTuTu 1251512 3950082
Geekbench Single 1353 3639
Geekbench Multi 3832 11047
Display 6.7" Super AMOLED 6.8" LTPO AMOLED
Resolution 1080x2340 1440x3168
Refresh rate 120 Hz 144 Hz
Battery 5000 mAh 7000 mAh
Charging 45W 100W
Wireless charging 0W 40W
DXOMark (camera) 114 —
Main camera 50 MP 50 MP
Ultrawide 12 MP 50 MP
Telephoto 0 MP 50 MP
Front camera 12 MP 32 MP
RAM 6GB / 8GB / 12GB 12GB / 16GB
Storage 128GB / 256GB 256GB / 512GB / 1TB
OS Android 15, up to 6 major Android upgrades, One UI 7 Android 16
Brightness (peak) 1900 nits 6000 nits
NFC yes yes
Protection IP67 IP68
Dimensions 162.2×77.5×7.4 mm 163.7×76.8×8.1 mm
Weight 198 g 215 g
Launch price $499 $599

Camera comparison

Samsung Galaxy A56

  • Main: 50MP f/1.8
  • Ultrawide: 12MP
  • Front: 12MP
53
camera

Vivo iQOO 15

  • Main: 50MP f/1.9
  • Ultrawide: 50MP
  • Telephoto: 50MP
  • Front: 32MP
78
camera

Display comparison

Samsung Galaxy A56

  • 6.7" Super AMOLED
  • Resolution: 1080x2340
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz
79
display

Vivo iQOO 15

  • 6.8" LTPO AMOLED
  • Resolution: 1440x3168
  • Refresh rate: 144 Hz
99
display

Battery and charging

Samsung Galaxy A56

  • 5000 mAh
  • Wired: 45W
  • No wireless charging
48
battery

Vivo iQOO 15

  • 7000 mAh
  • NanoReview test: web browsing 18:52 hrs, total 39:26 hrs
  • Wired: 100W
  • Wireless: 40W
85
battery

Overall performance score

We compared Samsung Galaxy A56 and Vivo iQOO 15, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Samsung Galaxy A56 Exynos 1580
61/100
1251512 AnTuTu
Vivo iQOO 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5
88/100 +68.3%
3950082 AnTuTu

Vivo iQOO 15 leads Samsung Galaxy A56 by 68.3% in our overall performance rating.

Benchmarks

Launch prices and where to check today's

Samsung Galaxy A56

$499

Vivo iQOO 15

$599

Launch price difference: $100. Samsung Galaxy A56 was $100 cheaper at launch.

Detailed category analysis

performance

In the "performance" category, the Vivo iQOO 15 significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (98/100 vs 65/100).

display

In the "display" category, the Vivo iQOO 15 notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (99/100 vs 79/100).

camera

In the "camera" category, the Vivo iQOO 15 notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (78/100 vs 53/100).

battery

In the "battery" category, the Vivo iQOO 15 significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (85/100 vs 48/100).

portability

In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy A56 notably outperforms the Vivo iQOO 15 (67/100 vs 48/100).

Frequently asked questions

Which is better: the Samsung Galaxy A56 or the Vivo iQOO 15?

The Vivo iQOO 15 significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 by 27 points (88/100 vs 61/100).

What is the rating of the Samsung Galaxy A56 and the Vivo iQOO 15?

The Samsung Galaxy A56 has a MobileRank rating of 61/100, the Vivo iQOO 15 — 88/100.

Which has the better camera: the Samsung Galaxy A56 or the Vivo iQOO 15?

The Vivo iQOO 15 leads on camera score (78/100 vs 53/100).

Which is more powerful: the Samsung Galaxy A56 or the Vivo iQOO 15?

The Vivo iQOO 15 leads on performance (98/100 vs 65/100).

Should you choose the Samsung Galaxy A56 over the Vivo iQOO 15?

The Samsung Galaxy A56 is a better fit for active users. The Vivo iQOO 15 is a better fit for gamers and power users, those who care about battery life, budget-conscious buyers.