We analyzed 147 verified reviews from actual users for the Samsung Galaxy A05 to understand its real-world performance. Our team read each review to identify what owners said about the phone’s key aspects, including its screen, battery, camera, design, and performance.
We then tallied every positive, negative, and neutral mention for these features. This process allowed us to calculate a percentage-based satisfaction score for each, revealing exactly where the phone shines and where it falls short according to the people who use it every day.
💰 Value for Money: Upgrade, Not Bargain
For the Samsung Galaxy A05, the story of its value for money is not one of simple satisfaction, but of calculated compromise. The key factor driving positive sentiment is its role as an Upgrade Justification, with a 64% positive rating for justifying the switch from an older device—a full 5 points above the category average of 59%.
For users moving on from much older phones, the A05 feels like a worthy and modern step up. This sentiment is perfectly captured by one owner’s experience after upgrading from an A03:
upgraded from A03 to A05 and am loving it
Another confirmed it feels like a huge improvement from what came before. For these buyers, the value is found in the forward progress.
Frustrating Performance and Value
However, this positive view is significantly undermined when looking at overall satisfaction relative to its cost. Here, the A05 scores an 80% positive rating, which sounds decent until compared to the hidden category average of 84%.
This 4-point deficit points to a tangible gap in user happiness, rooted in frustrating performance issues. Owners frequently report problems that detract from the phone’s value proposition, with one stating:
Even for a lower range model I would expect better than this, constantly locking up for no reason, incredible frustrating to work with.
For some, the experience was outright disastrous, leading one user who had two separate units fail to warn:
I recommend avoiding this phone to prevent wasting money.
Lags Behind the Competition
This sense that better value can be found elsewhere is confirmed by a look at the competition. The A05’s 80% satisfaction-for-cost score lags behind key rivals like the Motorola Moto G05 (87%) and Moto E14 (85%), indicating that buyers of competing budget phones are simply more pleased with their purchases.
Most tellingly, the A05 is completely overshadowed by its own family member, the Samsung Galaxy A04e, which boasts an incredible 93% satisfaction score in the same value metric.
This stark difference shows that while the A05 is a reasonable upgrade, it fails to deliver the pure price-to-performance happiness that Samsung itself has offered in the past, a point reinforced by users who advise:
Add 130 dirhams to the price and buy the much better version A05s.
Trade-Off: The A05 presents a compelling upgrade from older budget phones, but its frustrating performance and lower satisfaction compared to direct rivals and its own predecessor make it a calculated risk rather than a clear-cut bargain.
📸 Camera: 50MP, 5MP Reality
The camera on the Samsung Galaxy A05 tells a story of deep division, where a segment of users finds it perfectly adequate while a larger, more vocal group feels let down by a perceived gap between marketing and performance.
For those with basic needs, the camera is satisfactory. Users report it’s capable of “taking photographs in great quality” and are pleased that “the pictures taken are of good quality,” suggesting that for casual snapping, the phone gets the job done.
Image and Video Quality
However, a significant undercurrent of disappointment defines the user experience, rooted in a single, powerful factor: image and video quality. The A05’s positive sentiment score for this factor is just 53%, a staggering 25 points below the category average of 78%. This is a gulf that users attribute to a failure to live up to the advertised 50-megapixel specification.
This frustration is palpable, with one owner stating:
In spec showing 50mp camera but its result is 5mp. I think it is the lowest, the poorest quality phone for the camera.
Another user confirmed this sentiment:
I have had a phone that is 50 megapixels of camera and this phone is not that, it is not at all.
The disappointment extends beyond image clarity to other camera functions, with one user offering a vivid critique of the facial recognition:
Face recognition is similar to your friend’s, (who lost their glasses) on a drunken night out in a dark alley-way.
Competitive Context
This subpar performance becomes even more stark when placed in competitive context. The A05’s 53% positive score for image quality trails far behind direct competitors like the Motorola Moto G05 (68%) and the Moto E14 (63%).
This means that for a similar price, buyers could have chosen a device with a camera experience that users rate substantially higher. Perhaps most telling is that the A05 is even outmatched by its own brand’s value alternative, the Galaxy A04e, which scores a more respectable 62% for the same factor, highlighting a regression in perceived quality that can lead to significant buyer’s remorse.
Dealbreaker: For buyers who trust the advertised specifications, the camera’s failure to deliver on its 50MP promise represents a fundamental breach of trust that makes it a liability in a competitive market.
📱 Screen: Gamble on Reliability
The screen on the Samsung Galaxy A05 proves to be a deeply polarizing feature, where the user experience is less about nuanced quality and more about a fundamental lottery of reliability.
For a minority of owners, the display is perfectly adequate for its budget-friendly purpose. These users, representing a 43% positive sentiment on display quality and vibrancy, focus on the basics, appreciating:
a good-sized screen for viewing/working
Many feel the resolution is more than sufficient, with one user noting:
720p is excellent on a phone and it doesn’t look any worse than my 1080p phone.
For these satisfied customers, the screen simply works, providing a large canvas for media consumption that meets their expectations for the price.
Widespread Hardware Failure
However, this satisfaction is completely overshadowed by a far more alarming narrative of hardware failure. The A05’s 43% positive score for display quality plummets when compared to the 83% category average, a staggering 40-point deficit that points to a severe, widespread issue.
Users report critical malfunctions that render the device unusable. One owner documented a catastrophic experience:
the display malfunctioned within a week… the second phone also began showing display issues after two weeks.
This testimony highlights a recurring problem rooted in hardware fragility. The problem often starts with:
a small flicker in the display… eventually leading to the display turning off completely.
Others echo this sentiment with reports of sudden defects, such as when:
within 2 months Display have lines
…turning the phone into a source of immense frustration.
Competitor Comparison
This gamble on quality becomes even more stark when placed against its direct competitors. The Motorola Moto G05 and Moto E14 boast display quality satisfaction scores of 80% and 73%, respectively, leaving the Galaxy A05 trailing by a massive margin.
The data suggests that for a similar price, buyers can get a screen that is not only perceived as better but, more importantly, is significantly more reliable. The choice is not between good and great, but between a working display and one that carries a significant risk of failing. This reality makes one user’s claim particularly poignant, though statistically unsupported:
Samsung has better screens than Motorola
Dealbreaker: Widespread reports of fundamental display failures and a massive deficit against the category average make the screen a critical liability rather than a simple budget compromise.
✨ Design: Looks Great, Feels Cheap
For the Samsung Galaxy A05, the story of its design is one of brilliant visual appeal undermined by tangible material compromises. The phone’s aesthetics are, without question, its standout achievement.
This factor earned a perfect 100% positive sentiment score among users, soaring 12 points above the category average of 88%. This isn’t just a number; it represents a powerful emotional win for buyers on a budget.
A Premium Look
Users feel they are getting more than they paid for. One owner states:
“It looks like you have a high-end mobile.”
Another praised how the “Plastic back reflects light like glass.” This feeling of premium design is a recurring theme, as another user simply put it:
“I love the design it’s very sleek and light weight.”
However, the conversation shifts dramatically when the discussion turns from how the phone looks to how it feels. The underlying build quality and materials are the design’s primary weakness, with a positive sentiment score of just 64%.
This figure falls a significant 12 points short of the 76% category average, highlighting a clear point of user frustration. This isn’t an abstract complaint; it’s a tactile disappointment rooted in the choice of materials.
Compromised Materials
One user described the issue in vivid detail, articulating a sense of hollowness that betrays the device’s premium look:
“Back side panel it’s plastic wrap tap tap sounds There, the plastic on the back of the mobile goes up and down.”
This compromise becomes even clearer in a competitive context. The A05’s 64% build quality score represents a notable step down from the 77% achieved by its predecessor, the Samsung Galaxy A04e, suggesting a deliberate cost-saving measure in materials.
While it lags behind its own lineage and competitors like the Motorola Moto E14 (83%) in material feel, its perfect 100% aesthetics score easily trumps the looks of both the Moto E14 (91%) and the Moto G05 (92%).
This data reveals Samsung’s strategy: prioritizing a visually stunning first impression over a durable, high-quality feel in the hand.
Trade-Off: Users receive a phone that appears far more expensive than its price tag suggests, but they must accept the tangible compromise of a cheaper-feeling and less robust physical construction.
🐌 Performance: Basic Needs, Big Lags
When evaluating the performance of the Samsung Galaxy A05, users tell a deeply divided story. For those with basic needs, the phone proves to be a competent daily companion. A significant portion of owners, reflected in a 61% positive sentiment for processing power, feel it delivers on its promise as a budget device.
They describe it as being perfectly “good for handling daily tasks” and a “good phone for normal use like calls and texting.” For these users, the value proposition is clear; they feel the phone “performed well running everything we have tried very smoothly,” considering its entry-level position.
Performance Under Pressure
However, this satisfaction quickly evaporates under pressure. The A05’s processing power score of 61% falls a dramatic 22 points short of the 83% category average, a gap that manifests as tangible frustration for more demanding users.
This isn’t just a minor slowdown; it’s a consistent source of irritation. One owner detailed the core issue, stating:
The downsides to this phone is lag, it doesn’t like lots running at the same time and the delay is visible.
This experience can escalate from simple lag to debilitating freezes, with another user recounting a severe problem: “This did improve the performance but it still freezes once a day,” rendering the device inaccessible for hours at a time. The sentiment is a common thread, with another simply stating:
when I open an app, the app doesn’t load quickly.
Competitive Landscape
This performance gap becomes even starker in the competitive landscape. The Motorola Moto G05, a direct competitor, boasts an 87% positive rating for processing speed—a full 26 points higher than the Galaxy A05. This isn’t just a number on a spec sheet; it represents the difference between a fluid experience and the daily “delay or lag” A05 users report.
While the A05 does show a minor improvement over its predecessor, the Galaxy A04e (57%), and the competing Moto E14 (54%), it’s a step that isn’t significant enough to escape the fundamental criticism of being slow, particularly for anyone accustomed to a more responsive device.
Trade-Off: The Galaxy A05’s performance is a clear compromise: it competently handles basic, single-application use, but the significant lag and freezing under load make it unsuitable for users who demand smooth multitasking or consistent speed.
💔 Software & Operating System: Smooth UI, Unstable OS
The software and operating system of the Samsung Galaxy A05 presents a stark and frustrating contradiction for its users. While on the surface it offers a familiar and welcoming experience, this is profoundly undermined by severe underlying instability.
The phone scores a 77% positive rating for User Experience and UI Smoothness, just edging out the category average of 74%. This success is rooted in its accessibility, with users calling it “user friendly” and praising its performance.
“interface is so smooth, running Android 13… Just great to use because everything runs smoothly.”
For many, especially those looking for simplicity, this is a significant draw. One customer bought it for their elderly mother, noting that after finding other devices “a little hard for her to navigate,” with this one, “She is so happy with the Samsung.”
Crippling Reliability Issues
However, this initial satisfaction quickly evaporates when confronted with the phone’s crippling reliability issues. The A05 scores an abysmal 4% positive sentiment for software stability, a massive 23 points below the category average of 27%.
This isn’t a minor inconvenience; it’s a fundamental failure that renders the phone unusable for extended periods. Users describe a harrowing experience of the device failing completely, with one person detailing their struggle:
“for the last two or three months it constantly freezes.”
Another user shared an even more alarming story of trying every trick to fix the problem, only to conclude the phone was completely inaccessible.
“now the phone is frozen and I can not access the phone for the last 4 hours.”
This transforms the device from a helpful tool into a source of extreme stress.
Falling Behind the Competition
This catastrophic instability is not a universal problem in the budget market; in fact, the Galaxy A05 is a dramatic outlier. Direct competitors like the Motorola Moto G05 score 27% for stability, aligning with the category average and offering a significantly more reliable experience.
Even more damning is the comparison to Samsung’s own value alternative, the Galaxy A04e, which boasts a far healthier 47% positive score for stability. This shows that the A05’s issues are not an acceptable compromise for a budget phone but a significant regression that leaves users with a device far less dependable than its peers and even its own predecessor.
Dealbreaker: The intuitive user interface is rendered meaningless by catastrophic software instability that frequently locks users out of their own device, making it fundamentally unreliable for daily use.
🔋 Battery: High Hopes, High Risk
The battery performance of the Samsung Galaxy A05 is a story of stark contradictions. For a fortunate group of users, the device delivers on its promise of longevity, becoming a reliable multi-day companion.
This satisfaction is rooted in the phone’s raw staying power, with a 69% positive score for its battery life factor. Owners celebrate this endurance, with one describing it as a:
huge battery that charges fast and lasts for days.
Another was delighted to achieve:
excellent battery life (2-3 days of my usage),
freeing them from the constant need to find a power outlet.
Severe Functional Failures
However, this positive experience is dangerously undermined by a significant undercurrent of severe functional failures. The phone’s 69% satisfaction score for battery life is notably 5 points below the category average of 74%, and the user reviews reveal why.
Many customers report alarming issues, from unpredictable power loss to complete charging failures. One user noted the phone:
will overheat and suddenly drains the battery.
Another was shocked that after a full charge, the battery level plummeted:
within 1 hours of browsing it’s reduce to 81%.
Even more concerning are reports of fundamental defects, with users stating their phone was:
acting up from beginning for chargimg issues and after several days it stop charging at all,
rendering the device completely unusable.
Market Comparison
This inconsistency becomes even more pronounced when viewed against other options in the market. While the A05 slightly outperforms the Motorola Moto E14 (69% vs 66% on battery life), it falls short of the direct competitor, the Motorola Moto G05, which scores a more reliable 74%.
The most revealing comparison, however, is with Samsung’s own value alternative, the Galaxy A04e. That model boasts an 87% positive score for battery life, a massive 18 percentage points higher than the A05. This suggests that in the quest for an affordable, long-lasting Samsung, users may find that the newer A05 is actually a significant downgrade in reliability compared to its sibling.
Trade-Off: The potential for multi-day endurance is directly pitted against a significant risk of unpredictable draining and catastrophic charging failures, making the battery a gamble.
Bottom Line
- ✅ Premium on a Budget: The phone’s sleek, high-end appearance is its best feature, earning a perfect 100% positive score from users for its aesthetic design.
- ⚠️ Critically Unreliable: The biggest complaint is catastrophic failure, with widespread reports of screen malfunctions and software freezes rendering the device completely unusable.
- ⚠️ A Frustrating Upgrade: Users feel let down by performance that “constantly locks up,” and camera quality that scores a shocking 25 points below the category average.
- 🔻 Worse Than Its Predecessor: It’s a significant downgrade in key areas, scoring 18 percentage points lower in battery satisfaction than the older Galaxy A04e.
- 🏁 Outclassed by Competitors: The rival Motorola G05 soundly beats the A05, scoring 26 points higher for performance and a massive 37 points higher for screen satisfaction.
- 💡 The Verdict: Avoid this phone. While it looks good, the high risk of crippling hardware and software failures makes it a poor value compared to more reliable competitors and even its own predecessor.