A decent and affordable Android option

Buying a good budget phone can be a challenge. High-end mobile phones continue to get more and more features, but on the other side of the spectrum, there are only so many things you can avoid before the device becomes too vulnerable. With the Galaxy A17, Samsung is trying to balance both sides of that equation with something that sports a solid design, bright screen, decent cameras and decent battery life for just $200. And without some flaws, the company has succeeded in making a capable phone that fits into almost every budget.

Design and display

The Galaxy A17 does a great job of showing how all plastics are different. Despite having a polycarbonate frame and back, the phone doesn’t feel cheap. Everything from its buttons to its camera module feels nice and solid. The optical focus system used for its rear shooters does whine, though that’s something even a $1,000 flagship suffers from, so it’s not a big deal. Some minor cost-saving concessions include a teardrop cutout for its front selfie camera and a small chin under its display, but considering its price, they’re more than justified. There’s also only one mono speaker and instead of an in-screen fingerprint sensor, Samsung built one into the power button on its side. Although for some, the latter may be a bonus.

Meanwhile, one thing the A17 has that you don’t find on high-end handsets anymore is a microSD card slot (shared with its SIM tray) for expandable storage. This gives you a cheap way to expand the phone’s base 128GB of space and considering how rare this is these days, it’s another win for people looking for a really affordable device.

The Galaxy A17’s screen is also surprisingly good for its price, as it sports a 6.7-inch OLED display with a brightness of up to 800 nits. Granted, its refresh rate is up to 90Hz instead of the 120Hz you get with more expensive fare. But again, considering how much it costs, I’m not complaining. Especially when you remember that basic iPhones were still tied to 60Hz panels as recently as 2024.

Working

One area where budget phones often struggle is performance because skipping RAM or processor can save manufacturers a lot of money. And while the Galaxy A17 is generally good considering its price bracket, I really wish Samsung had opted for a new chip. The phone comes with only 4GB of RAM (although there are versions with lower prices and more), 128GB of internal storage and an Exynos 1330 SoC, the latter of which is almost three years old.

At first, I was really worried because during the first setup, the phone had errors, it had languages. Thankfully, after signing in, giving the phone some time to download updates in the background and making sure all its apps are up to date, performance improved dramatically. To be clear, this thing is still no speed demon and if you multitask or switch quickly between heavy apps, you may notice some slowdown. I also wish the touch input felt more responsive because sometimes when you tap an icon, there’s a slight delay before anything happens. But thankfully, it’s small, and in most cases, the phone is fast enough.

Cameras

The A17 comes with a 13-megapixel selfie camera and three rear shooters, although in practice it’s really like two because one of those is the main 2MP camera, which doesn’t get much use unless you take a lot of close-up photos. That said, the phone takes better photos than you’d expect given its price. In well-lit situations, both its 50MP main and 5MP ultrawide cameras don’t give you much to complain about. Images look sharp and sport bright colors.

However, in low-light situations, there is a clear difference in quality between the A17 and more expensive midrange phones like the Pixel 9a. In a photo of fruit in my dimly lit kitchen, the A17’s image looks softer and shows washed-out colors compared to what the Google phone produces. When I went outside to take a picture of a car buried in the back of a recent snow storm, the graffiti on the road surfaces, and the highlights and shadows looked terrible on the A17 photos. So while the phone can hold its own, camera quality is still one of the biggest reasons you might want to consider upgrading to a more expensive handset.

Battery life

For a phone with a 5,000mAh battery and a low power chip, the Galaxy A17 didn’t last as long as I expected. In our local video test, it lasted just over 23 hours (23:08), which is respectable, but also five hours less than the Pixel 9a (28:04). On the other hand, its wired charging speed of 25 watts is more than enough. Don’t be surprised if you plug it into a wireless charging pad and nothing happens because the phone doesn’t support it.

Finish it

If you’re strapped hard for $200, the Samsung Galaxy A17 is a surprisingly impressive device. It has a solid build, decent cameras with a few different lenses, decent battery life and a built-in microSD card slot for extra storage. You even get six years of OS and security updates, the longest of almost all its similarly priced competitors. And while its performance may be smooth, it’s not flimsy enough to really worry about a phone this affordable.

For those with wiggle room in their gadget allowance, I would seriously consider looking at the version with 8GB of RAM, which is only $30 more. Otherwise, the Pixel 9a remains my favorite Android phone when it comes to value for money and costs $399 (down from its $499 introductory price). But if money is tight, the Galaxy A17 delivers everything you need without blowing your budget.