Samsung Galaxy Star S5280
Roll over image to zoom in
Best Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 Amazon.com Deals for Monday 27th of April 2026
Best Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 Ebay.com Deals for Monday 27th of April 2026
Samsung Galaxy Star Blue Silicon Cover S5280...
$0.99
Luxury Crystal Bling Sparkle Diamond Pull Up Cord Tab Case Cover Pouch Samsung M...
$3.95
Fast CHARGING 2A BATTERY CHARGING LEAD FOR SAMSUNG GALAXY STAR (S5280)/star 2...
$4.38
Power Adaptor & USB Wall Charger For SAMSUNG GALAXY STAR (S5280)/star 2...
$11.25
Design
| Audio | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 vs average Samsung audio details comparison | Difference in units | Difference in % | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 | Difference in % | Difference in units | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 vs average smartphone audio details comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volume | 72.471 cm³ vs 88.5 cm³ | 16 cm³ lower volume | -18.1% | 72.471 cm³ | -22.3% | 20.83 cm³ less volume | 72.471 cm³ vs 93.3 cm³ |
| Microphones Number | 1 vs 1.7 | 0.65 less microphone(s) | -39.4% | 1 | -37.5% | 0.6 less microphone(s) | 1 vs 1.6 |
| 3.5 mm Audio Jack Socket | YES vs 98.3% YES | YES | YES vs 96.1% YES | ||||
| Built-in FM Radio | YES vs 88.6% YES | YES | YES vs 85.6% YES | ||||
| Summary | |||||||
Performance
| Storage Memory | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 vs average Samsung Storate memory options comparison | Difference in units | Difference in % | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 | Difference in % | Difference in units | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 vs average smartphone Storage memory options comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal Storage Memory | 4 GB vs 41.5 GB | 37.48 GB less internal storage memory | -90.4% | 4 GB | -89.5% | 34.17 GB less internal storage memory | 4 GB vs 38.2 GB |
| SD Card Size | 32 GB vs 17 GB | 15 GB larger SD card size | +88.2% | 32 GB | +197% | 21.23 GB larger SD card size | 32 GB vs 10.8 GB |
| Summary | |||||||
Features
| Internet & Smart Features | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 vs average Samsung Internet & Smart features comparison | Difference in units | Difference in % | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 | Difference in % | Difference in units | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 vs average smartphone Internet & Smart features comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Search Browser | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 100% YES | ||||
| Free Navigation | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 100% YES | ||||
| Browser Supports Word Wrap Function | YES vs 97.6% YES | YES | YES vs 97.9% YES | ||||
| Browser Supports Copy & Paste Functions | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 100% YES | ||||
| Browser Supports Bookmarks Sync Across Devices | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 99.7% YES | ||||
| APP Sharing Capabilities | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 100% YES | ||||
| Current Position of a Smartphone Location Tracking | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 100% YES | ||||
| Supports Voice Commands | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 99.2% YES | ||||
| Offline Voice Commands Recognition | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 100% YES | ||||
| Summary | |||||||
Capacity
| Model Benchmarks | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 vs average Samsung Benchmarks performance comparison | Difference in units | Difference in % | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 | Difference in % | Difference in units | Samsung Galaxy Star S5280 vs average smartphone Benchmarks performance comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Head SAR (US) Radio Frequency Absorption Rate | 0.74 W/kg vs 0.6 W/kg | 0.12 W/kg higher Head radio frequency energy absorption rate (US) | +20.1% | 0.74 W/kg | -8.6% | 0.07 W/kg lower Head radio frequency energy absorption rate (US) | 0.74 W/kg vs 0.8 W/kg |
| Head SAR (EU) Radio Frequency Absorption Rate | 0.94 W/kg vs 0.5 W/kg | 0.49 W/kg higher Head radio frequency energy absorption rate (EU) | +108.8% | 0.94 W/kg | +36.9% | 0.25 W/kg higher Head radio frequency energy absorption rate (EU) | 0.74 W/kg vs 0.8 W/kg |
| Body SAR (US) Radio Frequency Absorption Rate | 0.49 W/kg vs 1 W/kg | 0.49 W/kg lower Body radio frequency energy absorption rate (US) | -50.2% | 0.49 W/kg | -47.6% | 0.45 W/kg lower Body radio frequency energy absorption rate (US) | 0.49 W/kg vs 0.9 W/kg |
| Summary | |||||||
Reviews
There are no reviews yet.