Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 82 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Apple | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2018-10-26 | 2020-04-04 |
| 5.94 x 2.98 x 0.33 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 6.84 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black, Blue, Red, Rose gold, White and Yellow | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 749.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.1 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 1792 x 828 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | -- |
| 324 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| 625 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.2 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Apple A12 Bionic APL1W81 (7 nm) chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| 64-bit Vortex and Tempest, 64-bit (Hexa-Core 2490 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Apple 4-core GPU GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 10.26 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 7.7 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 7.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") 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, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 2942mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 4.96 | 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 Apple iPhone XR has a general score of 82, which is a little bit better than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro's 80.1 score. The Apple iPhone XR construction is a lot lighter and thinner than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, even though it was released around 18 months before. IPhone XR features a bit more powerful processor than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller amount of RAM and an inferior number of cores and also slower, it also counts with a 64 bits processor.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a bit more vivid display than Apple iPhone XR, because although it has a quite smaller screen, it also counts with a way greater display density and a lot higher 1440 x 2560 resolution. Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with much more storage capacity to install applications and games than Apple iPhone XR, and although they both have equal internal memory, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a slot for external memory cards that supports a maximum of 512 GB.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a way better battery lifetime than Apple iPhone XR, because it has a 53 percent greater battery capacity. The iPhone XR captures way better photographs and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier aperture which is not so good for low light photos and videos, and they both have the same sensor size and the same resolution back facing camera, the iPhone XR also counts with a much higher 3840x2160 video resolution.
The Apple iPhone XR is not only the best phones in our comparison, but it's also a bargain compared to the other ones, making this phone a no doubt choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.