x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Xiaomi Mi 5 vs Samsung Galaxy S7

Xiaomi Mi 5 vs Samsung Galaxy S7


Xiaomi is big in China: the company started by making Apple clones and selling them for super affordable prices, but it has now largely moved past that stage. For quite some time, it’s been hard at work to bring a new flagship and recently, it’s finally released it: the Xiaomi Mi 5.

Xiaomi Mi 5 vs Samsung Galaxy S7
While the Mi 5 is not officially available in the United States or Europe, it could be tempting to get a Mi 5 on eBay shipped from China. But let’s get this straight right here: unlike other major phone brands like Apple or Samsung, you have no service for the Xiaomi Mi 5 in the US or Europe. If you shatter your screen or some other problems occur, you’d need to rely on third-party repair shops, pay for those repairs from your pocket and wait longer for repairs.

This is probably the biggest downside to owning a Xiaomi phone and it’s an important consideration. Now that you’ve been warned about all this, let’s keep it out of the way and focus on the performance of the Xiaomi Mi 5 as we pit it against one of the best Android phones available at the moment: the Samsung Galaxy S7.


Both have a stylish, beautiful design with a tapered back, metal frame and a solid feel, but both are fingerprint magnets.

Xiaomi Mi 5 vs Samsung Galaxy S7
Xiaomi Mi 5 vs Samsung Galaxy S7
Who came first: the hen or the egg? The same question can be asked about the design of the Xiaomi Mi 5 and Samsung Galaxy S7. Thing is that both look similar to a very large degree: comparable in size, with a tapered glass back and metal frame. And of course, you can already hear the angry crowds shouting about the Chinese copying again, but don’t be so fast in your judgment.

While the Galaxy S7 shares the Galaxy S6 looks, and you might think that Xiaomi copied from Samsung’s appearance, the truth is that before that new Samsung Galaxy design language made its debut in spring 2015, Xiaomi had already released its Mi Note (in January 2015), which is in fact the first Android phone to have that tapered glass back/metal frame accents.

With that settled, let’s focus on the specifics of each phone. The Xiaomi Mi 5 is the lighter and thinner of the two. It’s remarkable how light this phone is, and despite having only slightly slimmer body, that slimness is noticeable. The Galaxy S7 – in stark contrast – has a very noticeable heft in the hand, with a much more solid feel, it’s almost built like a tank (if tanks were made of glass). The tapered back does wonders to make both rest very comfortably in the hand. It is such small details that make a huge difference in daily use, and we’re glad that both Samsung and Xiaomi paid attention to those.

Alas, both phones are fingerprint magnets: with a glass back on both that’s no surprise. If we were very discerning, we’d say that the back seems to look a bit messier on the Galaxy S7, but the Mi 5 also catches a ton of fingerprints.

Xiaomi Mi 5 vs Samsung Galaxy S7

Little gets said about physical buttons, but we feel that’s an important topic: after all, you press them thousands of times. A hard-to-press button could not be a dealbreaker, but it’s a daily annoyance. The Xiaomi Mi 5 has its volume and power keys all on the right side, which subjectively feels like the right way to position them. The keys are light to press, but with sufficient travel and are very comfortable. The Galaxy S7 has its volume keys on the left and power key on the right, and all those buttons also have a remarkable, clicky feel, though they are not as light to the press.

Xiaomi Mi 5 vs Samsung Galaxy S7
Xiaomi Mi 5 vs Samsung Galaxy S7
Both phones also feature a fingerprint scanner right below the display. It’s a slimmer button on the Xiaomi Mi 5, while the S7 has the larger key, but both work extremely well. The Xiaomi Mi 5 is a bit faster: it’s almost a bit shocking to see the homescreen appear right after your register your fingerprint, while on the Galaxy S7 you first see the lock screen for a short while and then you are taken to the homescreen, and it’s a bit slower.

Yet, when it comes to the use and functionality of the fingerprint: Samsung is a step ahead with its international Samsung Pay system, while you simply cannot use your Xiaomi phone to pay for things, or at least not yet. We’re still far off from the times that we’d be all paying with our phones everywhere, but for many that’s a nice feature.

Then, there is waterproofing: the Galaxy S7 can take a short plunge in water and survive it, and that’s a great thing to have, while the Xiaomi Mi 5 lacks water protection.

Xiaomi Mi 5
5.69 x 2.72 x 0.29 inches
144.55 x 69.2 x 7.25 mm
4.90 oz (139 g)

Xiaomi Mi 5

Samsung Galaxy S7
5.61 x 2.74 x 0.31 inches
142.4 x 69.6 x 7.9 mm
5.36 oz (152 g)

Samsung Galaxy S7

To see the phones in real size or compare them with other models, visit our Visual Phone Size Comparison page.


Two gorgeous displays: the Galaxy S7 has very accurate colors, while the Mi 5 has amazing high brightness that animates everything.

Xiaomi Mi 5 vs Samsung Galaxy S7

We’re dealing with two absolutely gorgeous screens here: the Galaxy S7 uses Samsung’s latest and best Super AMOLED technology in a 5.1” Quad HD (1440 x 2560 pixel) display, while Xiaomi Mi 5 has a very beautiful and vivid 5.15” Full HD (1080 x 1920 pixel) LCD display. While the Galaxy S7 is sharper on paper, it’s hard to notice much of a difference in detail or sharpness in real-life usage. To the regular viewer looking at his phone from a hand’s distance, both will likely appear equally sharp.

Resolution, however, is not the only thing that you should look for in a display. What’s much harder to measure, yet is of paramount importance, is the color representation. Colors on both look very, very good. We do some complex measurements to see whether the colors on smartphone screens fit the sRGB industry standard. When you put the Galaxy S7 in Basic screen mode (go into Settings > Display > Display Mode, and change it there), it fits those color targets nearly perfectly, resulting in a nearly perfectly balanced screen. The Mi 5 also gets close, but not as close in terms of accurate colors as the S7, but the difference is really minimal. Let’s emphasize that at the end of the day both screens have very, very good color representation.

It’s also astonishing how bright the screen on the Mi 5 gets: with a peak brightness of 638 nits, it blows the Galaxy S7 and its meager 484 nits of brightness right out of the water. Higher brightness results in a subjective perception of more vivid colors and that’s why everything on the Mi 5 appears very lively. Outdoors, the Galaxy S7 boosts its brightness to higher-than-usual levels, so it ends up as easy to read its display outdoors as on the Mi 5. Both phones are also capable of reaching a minimum brightness of just 1 nit on the Mi 5 and 2 nits on the S7, and those low level are particularly useful when you read on your phone at night and don’t want a way too bright display burning your eyes.

Display measurements and quality

Maximum brightness (nits)Higher is better Minimum brightness (nits)Lower is better Contrast Higher is better Color temperature (Kelvins) Gamma Delta E rgbcmy Lower is better Delta E grayscale Lower is better
Xiaomi Mi 5 638
Samsung Galaxy S7 484
View all

  • Options

posted on 13 May 2016, 09:59 3

1. KONICHIWA-ANNYONG (unregistered)

Seriously?? Slow news day?

Basically, the Xiaomi is another knockoff, but this time of Samsung. The only thing that it has over the Samsung, is its cheap price!

posted on 13 May 2016, 10:07 10

2. ruby1303 (Posts: 4; Member since: 20 Jan 2015)

are you dumbb??
samsung copy xiaomi not the other way
only people who dont know say that, the first phone to have curved back was a xiaomi with the mi note not the note 5

posted on 13 May 2016, 10:12 3

6. KONICHIWA-ANNYONG (unregistered)

Right, because Samsung needed to copy a Xiaomi (a what?) to succeed...

posted on 13 May 2016, 11:20 4

16. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 4319; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)

To say Samsung copied Xiaomi would definitely be wrong.
But also, to say Xiaomi copied Samsung is not right either.

posted on 13 May 2016, 10:33

10. hohoho (Posts: 65; Member since: 12 Dec 2014)


posted on 13 May 2016, 11:06 1

13. TerryTerius (unregistered)

If you genuinely believe that was the first phone in the world to have a curved back, I'm not sure what to tell you
.. well, other than the fact that it wasn't.

posted on 13 May 2016, 10:10 7

4. marorun (Posts: 5029; Member since: 30 Mar 2015)

I would say Samsung is a knockoff Xiaomi.
Xiaomi used this design way before samsung did.

This also show how much we get ripped of with samsung as its only slightly better but cost twice lol..

posted on 13 May 2016, 10:13 2

7. KONICHIWA-ANNYONG (unregistered)

Xiaomi... is like the king of kockoffs lmao. Iphone, ipod, ipad etc. Just look at their marketting, their website etc.

posted on 13 May 2016, 12:19 2

24. cherry.dev (Posts: 107; Member since: 15 Apr 2016)

and Samsung isn't? lol.

posted on 13 May 2016, 16:26

38. JunitoNH (Posts: 1934; Member since: 15 Feb 2012)

No, Samsung was first with the 64 bit processor and Samsung pay

posted on 14 May 2016, 11:37 1

61. JadiGaming (Posts: 1; Member since: 14 May 2016)

Iphone 5s Was actually the first to incorporate a 64bit Arm V7 Processor also dont get me wrong I absolutely hate apple but they were the first and then HTC was the first Android with a 64bit processor Samsung came way after. Also Samsung pay yes they were first because other companies arent gonna call their payment software samsung pay. But contactless NFC payment was nothing new when samsung came up with their's actually the Nexus S was first to include full scale NFC and NFC payment With the google Wallet And Xiaomi and also samsung weren't the first with a glass curved back. Come on guys before commenting actually include some facts instead of your useless opinions do your research please. Anyway Yeah Samsung copied Xiaomi they werent the first with 64bit android processors it was HTC and they were the first with "Samsung" Pay but not a wireless payment system and no body else can use Samsung Pay because it is copyrighted.

posted on 14 May 2016, 04:29

57. NicAngel (unregistered)

Kockoffs!? Ha! Ha! Ha! Check your spelling before talking sh*t!

posted on 14 May 2016, 04:29

58. NicAngel (unregistered)

Kockoffs!? Ha! Ha! Ha! Check your spelling before talking sh*t!

posted on 13 May 2016, 10:20 1

8. KONICHIWA-ANNYONG (unregistered)

...but yeah, my point is that xiaomi's got the price advantage by a huge margin.

...but if it were equal, why get a xiaomi when you can get a s7 lol. Camera, display, more original design (ok, maybe not to xiaomi fans), branding.

posted on 13 May 2016, 11:07 1

14. refillable (Posts: 1070; Member since: 10 Mar 2014)

You're a funny hater, go on.

posted on 13 May 2016, 10:33

9. hohoho (Posts: 65; Member since: 12 Dec 2014)


posted on 13 May 2016, 12:06 1

22. siddharthayadav202 (Posts: 286; Member since: 23 Apr 2016)

Hahaha.. You are funny and stupid. Even my old galaxy star has curved backs.. Anything new???
And slightly better?? Mi5 has very weak and cheap body.
Camera is nowhere near as fast. Also quality is not as good.
Display quality is actually much better. More than what PA is telling. AOD is a great feature that adds to it.

and 2 times price? Mi5 4 GB costs over $400. Though you get 128 GB, it ain't as fast as S7's UFS 2.0 and do not give you SD card option.

Also you get much better customed service (I do not know about how it is in china).

posted on 13 May 2016, 13:17 2

30. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 4319; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)

Name your old galaxy phone with a curved back...
PS, Don't call anyone stupid...your comment speaks a lot about you already.

posted on 13 May 2016, 19:01

41. KONICHIWA-ANNYONG (unregistered)

Xperia X8 had a curved back...

Anyhow, what about the front. TYpical Samsung home button (very s3 like), now suddenly on a Xiaomi. They've always used to have capacitive buttons.


posted on 14 May 2016, 01:15 1

52. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 4319; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)

So that's Galaxy Xperia X8 for you??
Okay, a typical home button like S3...if that's the case, you would agree if i say HTC 10 copied Samsung because of the home button?
If it works that way, i usually don't say this but for you i'll make an exception, Samsung copied Apple!!! There it is!

posted on 20 May 2016, 20:55

70. KONICHIWA-ANNYONG (unregistered)

Sony Ericsson Xperia X8, genius...

posted on 14 May 2016, 13:39

63. siddharthayadav202 (Posts: 286; Member since: 23 Apr 2016)

Really? Your comment proves you do not know to read properly.
Also My Old galaxy "Star" as I mentioned above (improve your reading skills" would look limilar if it was big and a bit more square. Mine was a bit too round. But back was curved.

posted on 13 May 2016, 13:56 1

31. siddharthayadav202 (Posts: 286; Member since: 23 Apr 2016)

correction- both have ufs 2.0

posted on 13 May 2016, 10:09 1

3. ruby1303 (Posts: 4; Member since: 20 Jan 2015)

you should consider the price more, in this case xiaomi would dominate, better design, better interface, which you dont know what are you talking about, for example saying that to have nigh shift only with an app which is a lie you have that option way before iphone on the notification bar

posted on 13 May 2016, 10:34 1

11. hohoho (Posts: 65; Member since: 12 Dec 2014)

spotted the xiaomi shill

posted on 13 May 2016, 12:09

23. siddharthayadav202 (Posts: 286; Member since: 23 Apr 2016)

Better UI?
App laucherless UI are copied from apple and look s**t.
Also Samsung's current UI is better as it gives you faster acess like the notification panel offer instant options better than any UI (though some copied this function too)

posted on 13 May 2016, 10:11 1

5. newtonguimaraes (Posts: 1; Member since: 13 May 2016)

Where i can find the galaxy s7 without frontal logo in usa? :/

posted on 13 May 2016, 11:07

15. TerryTerius (unregistered)


posted on 13 May 2016, 11:23 3

17. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 4319; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)

I quote from GSMarena, "The Xiaomi Mi 5 delivered great audio output when hooked up to an active external amplifier. The flagship was not only able to match the best for clarity, it also delivered splendidly high volume for arguably the best performance among the 2016 flagships so far.

Stereo crosstalk was the only reading to be affected when headphones came into play and the increase was rather well contained. The rest of the readings remained unchanged and so did loudness for a truly impressive showing."

Why is there so much difference with their audio test and yours???

posted on 13 May 2016, 11:48 2

19. FlySheikh (Posts: 421; Member since: 02 Oct 2015)

I'll have to agree with you for raising this important question.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories