Samsung Galaxy F13

Samsung Galaxy F13

Triple Setup

207 gram

6000 mAh

Android 12

6.6" (Inch)

4GB RAM

Vivo Y20s

Vivo Y20s

Triple Setup

192.3 gram

5000 mAh

Android 10

6.51" (Inch)

4GB / 6GB / 8GB RAM

Announced

Date

June 2022

October 2020

Official announcement date only, not the date for product release.

Model Detail

GTIN / MPN

SM-E135F / SM-E135DS

V2029

Product identifier details, such as a unique serial number, build number, or model ID.

Platform

OS

Android 12

Android 10

Operating system type (OS) and version number.

Firmware

One UI 4.1

FuntouchOS 10.5

Specific firmware name used on the device.

Network

Bands

2G / 3G / 4G

2G / 3G / 4G

Available mobile network support options.

SIM

Dual SIM, Nano SIM

Dual SIM, Nano SIM

Type and support for Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) feature.

Score

90
90

Mobile network functionality is an important feature that must be available on modern devices. This feature enables users to use a SIM card to access online networks, facilitating connections between individuals. Good mobile networks must have a fast connection, use the latest technology, and adopt extra features to support the needs of users.

In our matrix calculation, we calculate the mobile network score using a technology adoption approach. If a device offers more complete features on the network bands and uses extra features on the SIM card function, it will receive a higher score. A higher score on this segment will provide a faster and more flexible experience when using the mobile network function.

Connectivity

WLAN

Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, Dual Band

Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, Dual Band

Available enabled features on wireless internet network connection hardware.

Bluetooth

5.0, A2DP, LE

5.0, A2DP, LE

Version and features of Bluetooth hardware.

USB

USB Type-C

MicroUSB 2.0

Type of connectivity port hardware.

Score

90
90

Similar to the mobile network function, the connectivity feature is also an important feature for modern devices. With this feature, devices can connect to other supporting gadgets, such as internet routers, computers, speakers, wearable devices, and others.

Good connectivity features on devices must adopt all the latest wireless connection technologies available. This ability allows devices to make more connections to other devices using the latest Bluetooth technology with lower latency and achieve faster internet connection from the WLAN network.

In this situation, we use a calculation methodology with a technology approach. If a device supports more features on the WLAN function, uses the latest Bluetooth version, and has a modern universal connection port, we can assign a high score to the device. This means that a higher score will bring a more flexible user experience in terms of connectivity.

Body & Design

Dimension

165.4 x 76.9 x 9.3 mm

164.4 x 76.3 x 8.4 mm

Dimensions of the device in millimeters (Height x Width x Length).

Weight

207 g

192.3 g

Weight of the device in grams.

Material

Plastic

Plastic

Type of main body materials and any extra features if available.

Color Options

Blue, Brown, Green

Black, Blue

Official available body color options.

Score

75
75

The body material is an important consideration for users who want a premium device or need the device for long term use. Therefore, the device must have a good and strong body material component.

In this segmentation, we measure the body and design score using a quality and variety color approach. If a device uses good materials like aluminum and stainless steel, the score will be higher than a device that adopts plastic as the main body material component. If a device uses a more premium body material component and also provides extra protection from water and dust damage, the score will be even higher.

However, we do not include body dimensions and weight information in our matrix calculation because these factors are subjective and can vary from user to user. Some users may prefer larger and bolder devices, while others may prefer smaller and lighter ones. Therefore, we do not include this information in the score calculation.

Performance

CPU

Exynos 850

Qualcomm Snapdragon 460

Chipset (CPU) hardware name and series.

GPU

Mali-G52

Adreno 610

Graphic (GPU) hardware name and series.

Score

95
95

The chipset performance on a device is a vital aspect that concerns most people. This is reasonable because most users want a device that can process tasks quickly. The CPU and GPU are the main components that affect performance.

The CPU processes tasks, and the GPU renders images. Both are related to providing the best experience for users. The better the CPU, the more efficient the device will be in terms of battery consumption, because the best CPU is smarter and more advanced in handling system logic.

We calculate the matrix for this segmentation using a performance result approach, where the data is obtained from several benchmark tools. This is done to bring more relevance to the actual data from the performance score. Additionally, the latest chipset model is not always better than the older chipset model because we use an overall performance approach that calculates based on real performance and not just based on the chipset model.

The total score is calculated from the combination of the CPU and GPU scores. The higher the score, the faster and smoother the processing will be for the user's needs.

Memory

RAM

4GB

4GB / 6GB / 8GB

Amount of random access memory (RAM) in size capacity.

Internal

64GB / 128GB

128GB

Total amount of internal memory storage capacity.

External

MicroSDXC

MicroSDXC

Type of third party memory expansion feature, if available.

Score

95
100

Besides the chipset, memory is also an important component that users must consider when purchasing a device, as it is closely related to the device's performance.

For instance, multitasking is a simple example that highlights the importance of memory performance. If the RAM storage is insufficient, the user may not be able to run several apps simultaneously, and if the RAM runs out, the apps may crash, which can cause the device to reboot automatically.

Moreover, modern apps require large RAM usage to run smoothly, making the RAM sector a crucial factor in our matrix calculation score. We can say that 65% of the score comes from the RAM performance.

We also consider the internal storage when calculating our score. A larger internal storage size will result in a higher score, as the internal storage is crucial for multimedia purposes, among others. Therefore, we pay more attention to this sector.

However, we do not include external storage in our matrix score calculation because several modern users prefer to use cloud storage services instead of physical expansion memory. Furthermore, cloud storage services offer many benefits such as ease of use, safety, and lower cost, as opposed to buying external memory expansion, which is more expensive and less safe.

Screen & Display

Size

6.6"

6.51"

Screen size in inches.

Panel

IPS LCD

IPS LCD

Type of display panel hardware.

Resolution

1080 x 2408 pixels

720 x 1600 pixels

Screen resolution in pixels.

Other

20:9 ratio, (~400 ppi density)

20:9 ratio, (~270 ppi density)

Any extra display and screen features if available.

Score

90
90

To ensure the best user experience while using a device, the display and screen sector must be given special attention by the user. This is because the display and screen sector is the first thing that users see on their device, and high definition images on the display screen will enhance the user experience.

A good display screen hardware and software can greatly enhance activities such as navigating, using apps and games, and enjoying entertainment content on the device. When measuring the quality of a display panel, we look at the technology used, screen resolution, and extra features such as screen refresh rate, PPI, and screen protector. However, screen size is not included in our calculation matrix because it is relative and difficult to quantify.

A higher score on the display and screen segmentation means that the device will have excellent visual quality and provide the user with the best experience for any image or visual activity.

Battery

Type

Li-Po

Li-Po

Type of battery model.

Capacity

6000 mAh

5000 mAh

Battery capacity in milliampere hours (mAh).

Feature

Fast charging 15W

Fast charging 18W

Any extra features related to the power sector, if available.

Charger Model

USB Type-C

MicroUSB 2.0

Charging method and type of charger port model.

Score

100
100

A good device is one that can last all day. Modern devices can typically endure for more than 20 hours under normal use, although some may only last for 16 to 18 hours. Therefore, if you want a device with a good battery life, you should pay attention to the battery segmentation on the device.

To help users determine how good the battery sector is on a device, we calculate a score using several metrics. First, we calculate the battery capacity and also consider battery features such as whether it supports fast charging or not.

We also factor in the charger method support to create a score. If the device supports multiple charge methods, such as wireless charging, we give it a higher score in the battery segmentation. However, we do not include battery type information in our matrix calculation because it is unnecessary.

It's important to note that a higher score on the battery segmentation does not necessarily mean that the device will have better battery endurance life than other devices. Although it is usually the case, our score is not based solely on battery life but also on the advanced battery features and support available on the device.

Camera

Rear

Triple Setup

Triple Setup

Total number of rear cameras.

+

(Main) 50 MP, f/1.8

(Main) 13 MP, f/2.2, PDAF

Details of the main camera unit.

+

(Ultrawide) 5 MP, f/2.2, 123˚

(Macro) 2 MP, f/2.4

Details of the secondary camera unit, if available.

+

(Depth) 2 MP, f/2.4

(Depth) 2 MP, f/2.4

Details of the third camera unit, if available.

+

-

-

Details of the fourth camera unit, if available.

Front

Single Setup

Single Setup

Total front camera number, if available.

+

8 MP, f/2.2

8 MP, f/1.8

Details of the main front camera unit, if available.

+

-

-

Details of the secondary front camera unit, if available.

Feature

Video Recording 1080p@30fps

Video Recording 1080p@30fps

Available video recording support and features.

Score

90
90

The camera feature is a brilliant thing that modern devices offer. With this feature, we can capture any moment as quickly as possible and share the result directly on social media to show others the interesting moments we capture.

Generally, modern devices come equipped with a single camera, while others have more than one camera setup. This is amazing because with a variety of camera lens styles on a single device, we can take photos in multiple styles, including portrait photos, landscape photos, or take photos of faraway objects using zoom cameras.

A good camera feature should produce high quality, clear images with low noise and offer multiple lens styles. You can determine the quality of the camera feature by looking at the score on the camera segmentation. If the score is high, that means the camera feature on that device is brilliant and very good.

For the matrix calculation, we not only consider individual camera specifications but also combine all information data. We consider how many camera lenses are available on the device, how good the main camera features are for both rear and front cameras, and how good the camera can be used for recording video. All of these factors directly impact the matrix calculation score.

Audio & Sound

Type

Loudspeaker

Loudspeaker

Primary sound system type.

Extras

3.5mm jack

3.5mm jack

Extra sound system features.

Score

95
95

For those who love listening to music, watching movies, and playing competitive online games on their device, it's important to pay attention to the audio and sound quality. Not all modern devices have good audio and sound quality, with many only being average.

To determine the quality of audio and sound, you can check the score we have calculated for this segmentation. Our matrix calculation is based on available features, such as the presence of a 3.5mm jack and stereo speaker support. If a device has these extra features, it will receive a higher score. Additionally, we may give extra points if the device collaborates with popular and trusted sound system makers, as this ensures a higher quality of sound.

Sensor

Biometric

Fingerprint (at the side)

Fingerprint (at the side)

Biometric security hardware model, if available.

GPS

Yes, A-GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO

Yes, A-GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO

Global Positioning System (GPS) hardware support and features.

NFC

Yes

-

Near Field Communication (NFC) function support.

Other

Accelerometer, Proximity, Compass

Accelerometer, Proximity, Compass

Available sensor hardware type and function.

Score

100
90

Sensors are an essential part of modern devices, providing various functionalities such as security, utility, payment, navigation, and specialized features for specific situations. A good device should have complete sensor features to fully meet the user's needs. While most modern devices have all standard sensor features, some devices have more complete sensor features than others.

To assess the quality of a device's sensor features, we calculate a score that takes into account all sensor information. However, we focus on two key sensor features, that are common security sensor and the NFC sensor. These are industry standards for all modern devices and play a critical role in ensuring security and convenience for the user.

The score resulting from the matrix calculation reflects how good a device is in terms of sensor features. A higher score indicates that the device has more complete sensor features and is more flexible in use. This, in turn, makes the user happier with the device.

Price

USD

~ $160

~ $230

Price in US dollars (USD).

EUR

~ €150

~ €210

Price in Euros (EUR).

Comparison Breakdown

Durability

Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s share a similar build quality as both devices are constructed with plastic materials. In this instance, as both phones employ the same build material, it results in a tie in terms of build quality. The overall durability and resilience of the devices would likely be comparable, and any distinctions would likely arise from additional design features or engineering considerations beyond the basic material used. Therefore, the build quality comparison between the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s becomes a neutral factor due to their shared use of plastic.

Both of devices share a common feature in their covers, making their build quality comparable. The utilization of the same material underscores their uniformity in terms of both aesthetics and durability, leaving consumers to make their choices based on other distinguishing features or preferences in the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s.

Visual Quality

In the domain of visual quality, the Samsung Galaxy F13 outshines the Vivo Y20s, owing to its superior pixel density measured in pixels per inch (ppi). With an impressive ppi of ~400, the Samsung Galaxy F13 surpasses the Vivo Y20s, which boasts ~270 ppi. the ppi is represents the number of pixels densely packed within a one inch square on a display.

A higher ppi indicates a more concentrated pixel arrangement, resulting in a sharper and more detailed visual experience. This characteristic proves especially advantageous for tasks such as reading text, viewing images, and watching videos. Consequently, the Samsung Galaxy F13 elevated ppi contributes to a visually appealing and clear display, ultimately enhancing the overall user experience in comparison to the Vivo Y20s.

In the realm of display panel technology, the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s share a common ground, both featuring IPS LCD screens. IPS LCD brings forth advantages such as wide viewing angles, accurate color reproduction, and enhanced visibility. The identical utilization of IPS LCD in both devices ensures that users can expect a consistent and reliable visual experience. This similarity becomes particularly notable in scenarios where display technology plays a pivotal role, providing users with a comparable and satisfactory viewing experience on both the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s.

From the screen refresh rate features, the Samsung Galaxy F13 and the Vivo Y20s align with their 60Hz screen refresh rates. This commonality suggests that both devices deliver a comparable level of smoothness and responsiveness in visual interactions. The refresh rate, measured in hertz (Hz), determines how frequently a display refreshes per second, playing a pivotal role in optimizing the user experience, particularly during activities such as scrolling or gaming. In this comparison, the Samsung Galaxy F13 and the Vivo Y20s find themselves in a tie, providing users with an equally display performance.

Connectivity Features

If we compare the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s, both are supported by 4G networks, their performance in this aspect will be a tie. The absence of a distinction in their network support positions the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s on equal footing, making the performance in this regard identical. Users seeking advanced 4G connectivity features can find both devices to be equally capable, offering a comparable experience in terms of network performance.

Concerning Wi-Fi sector technology, Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s are on the same level, featuring with the Wi-Fi 5 technology. This similarity in wireless capabilities results in a tie when comparing their Wi-Fi technology. Both devices deliver similar performance in terms of data transfer speeds, connectivity, and efficiency. In this scenario, neither Samsung Galaxy F13 nor Vivo Y20s holds a distinct advantage over the other, as they share the same technological foundation in the realm of wireless connectivity.

Next, in the Bluetooth technology sector, the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s both come equipped with Bluetooth 5.0 technology. This condition results in a tie for both devices, as they use the same Bluetooth version. So, in terms of Bluetooth connectivity, there is no distinct advantage between the Samsung Galaxy F13 and the Vivo Y20s, as they offer comparable features and performance within the realm of Bluetooth technology.

Leveraging NFC technology, the Samsung Galaxy F13 emerges as the superior choice over the Vivo Y20s due to its NFC functionality, a feature notably absent in the Vivo Y20s. The NFC (Near Field Communication) are stands as a wireless technology facilitating swift and seamless data transfer between devices in close proximity. The absence of NFC in the Vivo Y20s hampers its capacity for convenient interactions, whether it be quick file sharing, contactless payments, or efficient connectivity with other NFC enabled devices. In contrast, the inclusion of NFC in the Samsung Galaxy F13 enhances its versatility and practicality, providing users with a broader range of seamless applications.

RAM & Storage

In this RAM comparison, our focus is specifically on evaluating the performance of the highest variant RAM option available for both devices. By narrowing the scope to the top tier RAM configurations, we aim to provide a targeted analysis of the devices capabilities in terms of memory capacity and speed. This approach allows for a more direct and relevant assessment, particularly for users who prioritize and invest in the most robust RAM configurations offered by each device.

Examining the specification data, Samsung Galaxy F13 offers a RAM configuration of 4GB, while the Vivo Y20s boasts a more substantial 4GB / 6GB / 8GB RAM range. Clearly, the Vivo Y20s holds a significant advantage with its larger RAM capacity. A greater RAM amount is advantageous for various reasons. Firstly, it enables the seamless execution of resource intensive applications, resulting in enhanced performance and quicker responsiveness. Moreover, a larger RAM capacity facilitates smoother multitasking, allowing users to effortlessly switch between applications without experiencing lags or slowdowns.

Similar to our approach in comparing RAM, we focus exclusively on evaluating the highest variant of internal memory available for both devices. This targeted comparison ensures a comprehensive analysis of the devices storage capabilities by considering their top tier configurations. By concentrating on the highest internal memory variants, we provide users with insights relevant to those seeking maximum storage capacity and performance. This approach acknowledges that consumers who opt for the highest memory configurations prioritize ample storage for various applications, multimedia content, and files.

Turning attention to the internal memory specifications, Samsung Galaxy F13 presents a range of 64GB / 128GB of internal memory storage, while Vivo Y20s offers a 128GB internal memory storage. In this context, both devices share an identical internal memory capacity, resulting in a tie between them. The parity in internal memory amounts suggests that users can expect a similar level of storage capabilities from both Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s. This tie indicates that, in terms of internal memory storage alone, neither device holds a distinct advantage over the other, providing users with a comparable storage experience regardless of their choice between the two.

Differing from the Samsung Galaxy F13, the Vivo Y20s stands out by offering an extra feature external memory expansion option. This feature, notably absent in the Samsung Galaxy F13, proves to be quite beneficial for users seeking versatility and increased storage flexibility. With this capability, users can enhance the device existing storage by adding a compatible external memory card. It's particularly advantageous for individuals needing extra space to store large files, multimedia content, or additional applications, all without being confined to the limitations of the device internal storage. The external memory expansion feature empowers users to personalize and expand their storage capacity based on their evolving needs, providing a convenient solution for those with dynamic or expanding data requirements.

Gaming Experience

Within the domain of gaming experience comparisons, evaluating performance by individual devices on a global scale becomes a more viable approach, given the inherent challenges associated with directly comparing devices side by side based solely on CPU and GPU specifications. The complexity, nuanced software optimizations, and diverse user preferences make a comprehensive side by side comparison using hardware specifications alone a difficult task. Relying solely on such technical data may lead to ambiguous or misrepresented results. Therefore, focusing on the overall performance of individual devices can provides a more holistic perspective.

First, The Samsung Galaxy F13 adopts an entry-level hardware configuration, featuring the Exynos 850 processor coupled with the Mali-G52. While this combination is suitable for basic tasks and casual use, it falls short in delivering a robust gaming experience for more demanding titles. Technically adept at handling low to mid graphic presets, the Samsung Galaxy F13 may struggle with the demands of hardcore gaming, limiting its ability to provide optimal performance and graphical fidelity. Users seeking a device primarily for casual or less graphics intensive gaming may find the Samsung Galaxy F13 sufficient, but those with a penchant for more resource intensive games might need to explore higher tier options for a smoother and more immersive gaming experience.

Next, Vivo Y20s features a balanced hardware configuration, incorporating the Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 processor and Adreno 610. Positioned as a device catering to the middle-class gaming segment, this combination allows for a satisfactory gaming experience at mid-level presets. While it may not compete with flagship devices in terms of extreme graphics performance, the Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 and Adreno 610 tandem enables the Vivo Y20s to proficiently handle gaming tasks at mid to high graphic presets. Overall, the device delivers a commendable performance, ensuring users a smooth and enjoyable experience across various gaming scenarios, striking a practical balance between performance and affordability.

Move to RAM specification hardware, the fact is Samsung Galaxy F13 comes with less RAM than Vivo Y20s. Technically, a larger RAM amount can significantly enhance the capability to handle extensive game resources. In the realm of gaming performance, the Vivo Y20s holds an advantage over the Samsung Galaxy F13 due to its superior RAM capacity. The larger RAM allows for smoother, quicker data access, and more efficient handling of resource intensive game elements. This translates to a better overall gaming experience on the Vivo Y20s, as it can navigate demanding games with ease, minimizing lags, and providing users with a more immersive and responsive gameplay environment.

When it comes to optimizing the gaming experience on mobile phones, screen size plays a crucial role in determining visual clarity and immersion. In the context of the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s, the Samsung Galaxy F13 boasts a slightly larger 6.6" screen compared to the Vivo Y20s is 6.51" display. This slight difference in size can contribute to a more immersive gaming experience for users. A larger screen provides a more expansive field of view, allowing gamers to perceive in game details with greater clarity and precision. This enhanced visibility becomes particularly important in fast paced games where quick reactions are essential. Additionally, a larger screen can make gaming sessions more enjoyable by offering a more engaging and immersive visual experience.

Considering the screen refresh rate for gaming experience, both the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s stand on equal footing with identical 60Hz screen refresh time features. This parity in refresh rates implies that both devices offer the same level of performance in this aspect, resulting in a tie between them. The 60Hz refresh rate shared by Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s ensures smoother transitions between frames, reducing motion blur and contributing to an enhanced gaming experience. As neither device holds a distinct advantage in this particular feature, users can expect a comparable and satisfactory gaming performance from both the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s, making the choice between them more dependent on other factors.

Camera Features

When it comes to the main camera features, both the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s share a common ground, utilizing a Triple Setup. The similarity in their camera configurations suggests that the two devices offer a comparable photography experience. So, in this case, the outcome is a tie, as both the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s provide similar main camera capabilities, making it a matter of user preference and other device features when choosing between the two.

Navigating the landscape of main camera resolution, the Samsung Galaxy F13 emerges as a standout against the Vivo Y20s, showcasing an impressive 50 MP camera, while the Vivo Y20s only comes with 13 MP. Higher megapixel counts typically correlate with finer details and heightened clarity in captured images. This increased resolution opens up possibilities for more extensive cropping and zooming without sacrificing image quality, a significant boon for photography enthusiasts keen on capturing intricate details.

Furthermore, elevated megapixel counts contribute to heightened performance in well lit conditions, yielding sharp and vibrant images. While it's crucial to acknowledge that megapixels alone do not determine camera quality, a larger count, exemplified in the Samsung Galaxy F13, often signals a camera potential for delivering visually stunning and meticulously detailed photographs.

When discussing front camera features, the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s appear to be on par, as both devices feature a Single Setup camera configuration. This similarity results in a tie when considering the basic front camera setup. However, it's crucial to note that the differentiation may lie in specific features unique to each devices camera system. Examining additional specifications, such as sensor quality, image processing capabilities, and any specialized features, will likely reveal distinctions that can influence the overall performance and user experience of the front cameras on the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s. While they share a common Single Setup, the truth may be in the details when comparing the specific attributes that contribute to the overall imaging capabilities of these devices.

When look on to front camera features of the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s, a striking similarity becomes apparent, as both devices are equipped with an 8 MP front facing camera. This identical camera setup results in a tie when evaluating this specific aspect of the devices. While the resolution remains the same, it's important to note that factors such as sensor quality, image processing algorithms, and additional features can still contribute to nuanced differences in the overall front camera performance. However, in terms of the basic front camera megapixel count, the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s stand on equal footing with an 8 MP configuration.

Sadly, the both of Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s are lack Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) feature in the video recording sector, leaving them with standard video recording capabilities. OIS is crucial for video recording as it helps mitigate the effects of hand movements, shakes, and vibrations, ensuring that the captured footage remains smooth and stable. Without OIS, videos recorded on devices like the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s may suffer from noticeable jitteriness, particularly in situations where the camera is handheld or subject to external movements. The absence of OIS limits the devices ability to deliver professionally looking and steady video content, which can be a significant consideration for users who prioritize high quality video recording in various environments.

Battery Endurance

Comes to the battery power, it becomes evident that the Samsung Galaxy F13 surpasses the Vivo Y20s. The Samsung Galaxy F13 boasts a substantial 6000 mAh battery, while the Vivo Y20s falls slightly behind with a 5000 mAh capacity. This discrepancy in battery size positions the Samsung Galaxy F13 as the more potent device in terms of power. With a higher milliampere-hour rating, the Samsung Galaxy F13 is poised to deliver extended usage and endurance, providing users with a more robust and long lasting battery performance compared to the Vivo Y20s.

In a positive development, both the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s incorporate the advantageous Fast Charging feature. However, when delving into the specifics, the Vivo Y20s emerges as the more advanced choice. The Vivo Y20s boasts a Fast Charging capability of 18W, surpassing the Samsung Galaxy F13 15W Fast Charging. This notable difference in charging speeds positions the Vivo Y20s as the superior option in terms of battery replenishment time. With its faster charging performance, the Vivo Y20s ensures a swifter and more efficient charging experience, making it a preferred choice for users who prioritize rapid battery charging without compromising on overall device performance.

Security Features

Luckly, users can find satisfaction in both the Samsung Galaxy F13 and Vivo Y20s, as both devices are equipped with dedicated biometric sensors. This inclusion enhances the security features of both devices, providing users with a robust means of safeguarding their data and device access. Having a dedicated biometric sensor, offers users a more secure and convenient method of authentication. The uniqueness and precision of biometric data make it challenging for unauthorized users to gain access, contributing to an overall heightened level of security. This not only protects sensitive information but also enhances the user experience by providing a swift and personalized means of unlocking and accessing the device.

Advantages

Pros list

No notable advantages found on this device

  • Multiple rear camera options
  • NFC capability
  • Large internal memory
  • Expandable storage with external memory card
  • Fast charging feature
  • Dedicated biometric sensor

No notable advantages found on this device

  • Multiple rear camera options
  • Large RAM capacity
  • Large internal memory
  • Expandable storage with external memory card
  • Fast charging feature
  • Dedicated biometric sensor

Disadvantages

Cons list

No significant disadvantage features found on this device

  • Lacks 5G network support
  • Low quality body material used
  • Relatively small RAM capacity
  • Average WLAN connection speed
  • Uses old Bluetooth version

No significant disadvantage features found on this device

  • Lacks 5G network support
  • Lacks NFC feature
  • Low quality body material used
  • Uses outdated USB port model
  • Average WLAN connection speed
  • Uses old Bluetooth version

Benchmark

Point Result

Samsung Galaxy F13

Build Quality : 75
Display : 90
Camera : 90
Performance : 95
Memory : 95
Network : 90
Connectivity : 90
Battery : 100
Sensor : 100
Audio : 95

Vivo Y20s

Build Quality : 75
Display : 90
Camera : 90
Performance : 95
Memory : 100
Network : 90
Connectivity : 90
Battery : 100
Sensor : 90
Audio : 95

Final Score

/ 1000

/ 1000

The total score is calculated based on all segmentation scores, and the maximum score is 1000. The total score reflects the overall quality of the device. If a device has a higher total score than its competitors, it is considered better overall.

However, a high total score does not necessarily mean that the device is excellent in all segmentation scores. If you are looking for a device with specific features, it is best to look at the score for that particular segmentation to make an informed decision.

Based on our calculation matrix, the best device overall on this comparison page is :

The Winner is :

Samsung Galaxy F13

Samsung Galaxy F13

After comparing the specifications data above, we can confidently say that Samsung Galaxy F13 has better overall performance than Vivo Y20s, based on the final score data.

The Winner is :

Both are Winner!

After comparing the specifications data above, we can conclude that Samsung Galaxy F13 has a very similar overall performance to Vivo Y20s, based on the final score data.

The Winner is :

Vivo Y20s

Vivo Y20s

After comparing the specifications data above, we can confidently say that Vivo Y20s has better overall performance than Samsung Galaxy F13, based on the final score data.

[*] This means that there are multiple series numbers (GTIN/MPN) associated with this product.

Prices listed are for reference only and may not reflect the actual market price. Additionally, the price of the product may vary between different countries.

It's important to note that it may not always be 100% correct. Factors such as missing information from the manufacturer or third-party sources, differences in how information is reported, and human error during data collection can impact accuracy.

May Your Lucky Day

Other Popular Comparison From Both Devices :

Samsung Galaxy F13

Samsung Galaxy F13

Amazon
Vivo Y20s

Vivo Y20s

Amazon