Samsung's All-Time Lowest Radiation Cell Phones
Which Samsung smartphone had the lowest radiation for Body SAR testing across all years? According to FCC test reports, the Samsung phone with the lowest SAR rating was 0.25 W/kg, accounting for 15.63% of the 1.6 W/kg limit. In contrast, the highest SAR Samsung phone had a 1.36 W/kg rating, or 85% of the limit. This equates to a 444% difference between the two extremes.
Body SAR
| SAR Rank | Phone Model | Body SAR Value | % Legal Limit |
|---|---|---|---|
1st | Samsung Galaxy A70 | 0.25 W/kg | 15.63% |
2nd | Samsung Galaxy A50 | 0.45 W/kg | 28.13% |
3rd | Samsung Galaxy A24 4G | 0.49 W/kg | 30.63% |
Tied 3rd | SAMSUNG GALAXY A52 | 0.49 W/kg | 30.63% |
4th | Samsung Galaxy A14 | 0.52 W/kg | 32.5% |
Tied 4th | SAMSUNG GALAXY A73 | 0.52 W/kg | 32.5% |
5th | Samsung Galaxy A50S | 0.56 W/kg | 35% |
6th | Samsung Galaxy A23 5G | 0.57 W/kg | 35.63% |
7th | Samsung Galaxy A13 | 0.58 W/kg | 36.25% |
8th | Samsung Galaxy A33 5G | 0.62 W/kg | 38.75% |
| SAR Rank | Phone Model | Body SAR | % Legal Limit |
Tied 8th | Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra | 0.62 W/kg | 38.75% |
9th | Samsung Galaxy A54 5G | 0.67 W/kg | 41.88% |
10th | SAMSUNG GALAXY A72 | 0.68 W/kg | 42.5% |
11th | SAMSUNG GALAXY A22 | 0.70 W/kg | 43.75% |
Tied 11th | Samsung Galaxy S23 | 0.70 W/kg | 43.75% |
12th | Samsung Galaxy A34 | 0.76 W/kg | 47.5% |
13th | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4 | 0.77 W/kg | 48.13% |
Tied 13th | SAMSUNG GALAXY A22 5G | 0.77 W/kg | 48.13% |
14th | Samsung Galaxy A23 4G | 0.78 W/kg | 48.75% |
15th | Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus | 0.79 W/kg | 49.38% |
| SAR Rank | Phone Model | Body SAR | % Legal Limit |
16th | SAMSUNG GALAXY A53 5G | 0.80 W/kg | 50% |
Tied 16th | SAMSUNG GALAXY M52 5G | 0.80 W/kg | 50% |
17th | Samsung Galaxy S20 FE | 0.82 W/kg | 51.25% |
18th | Samsung Galaxy S21 FE | 0.90 W/kg | 56.25% |
19th | Samsung Galaxy S10e | 0.92 W/kg | 57.5% |
20th | Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite | 0.93 W/kg | 58.13% |
21st | Samsung Galaxy S20 Plus | 0.95 W/kg | 59.38% |
Tied 21st![samsung-galaxy-s21-plus-5g-[1]](https://www.rfsafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/samsung-galaxy-s21-plus-5g-1-66x66.jpg) | Samsung Galaxy S21 PLUS | 0.95 W/kg | 59.38% |
22nd | Samsung Galaxy S9 | 0.96 W/kg | 60% |
23rd | Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | 0.97 W/kg | 60.63% |
| SAR Rank | Phone Model | Body SAR | % Legal Limit |
24th | Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra | 0.98 W/kg | 61.25% |
25th | Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus | 1.01 W/kg | 63.13% |
26th | Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra | 1.02 W/kg | 63.75% |
27th | Samsung Galaxy S20 | 1.03 W/kg | 64.38% |
28th | SAMSUNG GALAXY A51 5G | 1.04 W/kg | 65% |
29th | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 | 1.08 W/kg | 67.5% |
Tied 29th | Samsung Galaxy S21 | 1.08 W/kg | 67.5% |
Tied 29th![samsung-galaxy-s22-plus-5g[1]](https://www.rfsafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/samsung-galaxy-s22-plus-5g1-66x66.jpg) | Samsung Galaxy S22 Plus | 1.08 W/kg | 67.5% |
30th | Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra | 1.10 W/kg | 68.75% |
31st | Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | 1.11 W/kg | 69.38% |
| SAR Rank | Phone Model | Body SAR | % Legal Limit |
32nd | Samsung Galaxy A03s | 1.13 W/kg | 70.63% |
33rd | Samsung Galaxy S24 | 1.14 W/kg | 71.25% |
Tied 33rd | Samsung Galaxy S24 Plus | 1.14 W/kg | 71.25% |
34th | Samsung Galaxy S22 | 1.15 W/kg | 71.88% |
35th | SAMSUNG GALAXY A32 5G | 1.17 W/kg | 73.13% |
36th | SAMSUNG GALAXY A42 5G | 1.25 W/kg | 78.13% |
37th | Samsung Galaxy A12 | 1.35 W/kg | 84.38% |
38th | SAMSUNG GALAXY A14 5G | 1.36 W/kg | 85% |
Lowest: Samsung Galaxy A70
Highest: Samsung Galaxy A14 5g
