Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 88.1 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Apple | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2017-11-03 | 2020-04-04 |
| 5.65 x 2.79 x 0.30 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 6.14 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Silver and Space gray | Black |
| Glass and Stainless steel | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 1149.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.8 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2436 x 1125 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| OLED | -- |
| 463 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| 625 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Apple A11 Bionic APL1W72 (10 nm) chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| 64-bit Monsoon and Mistral, 64-bit (Hexa-Core 2390 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Apple 3-core GPU GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 10.17 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 13.3 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 7.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.33 inches (1/3") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.12 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 2716mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 4.72 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The iPhone X has a general score of 88.1, which is much better than Galaxy XCover FieldPro's 80.1 overall score. Even though the iPhone X is noticeably older than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, it's construction is way thinner and lighter. The Apple iPhone X and the Galaxy XCover FieldPro count with really similar displays, because although the Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a little smaller display, it also counts with a little bit better screen density and a bit higher 1440 x 2560 resolution.
The iPhone X has a bit better processing unit than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has 2 less and slower CPU cores and a lower amount of RAM memory, it also counts with a 64-bit CPU. Apple iPhone X captures much better photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier aperture which is not recommended for low light photos and videos and a tinier sensor, and they both have a back-facing camera with a 12 MP resolution, the Apple iPhone X also counts with a lot higher (4K) video resolution.
The iPhone X has a quite bigger storage for applications and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has no SD card slot, it also counts with 256 GB internal storage capacity. Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a much better battery lifetime than Apple iPhone X, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity.
The Apple iPhone X costs a little more than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but it's still a great deal, because you can get a lot more features for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.