Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 73.7 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| -- | Android 14 |
| 2015-10-20 | 2024-04-03 |
| 5.79 x 2.86 x 0.31 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 4.80 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black, Blue and White | Black and White |
| Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 429.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.2 inches | 8 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| IPS LCD | AMOLED |
| 424 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 808 MSM8992 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Hexa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | processor |
| 2 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 418 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 8.73 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 5.8 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 12.30 MP + 5.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.43 inches (1/2.3") sensor | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (120 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 9.79 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.3 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 2700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 4.64 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a bit better than the Google Nexus 5X, with a 77.8 score against 73.7. Although the vivo X Fold 3 Pro is extremely heavier than Google Nexus 5X, it's a lot thinner and also noticeably newer. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much sharper screen than Google Nexus 5X, because although it has a bit less pixels per inch of display, it also counts with a really larger display and a way higher resolution of 2200 x 2480 pixels.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a superior storage capacity to install applications and games than Google Nexus 5X, because it has 512 GB internal storage. Google Nexus 5X features a very superior hardware performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has less RAM and lesser cpu cores. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a greater camera than Google Nexus 5X, because it has a lot better 7680x4320 video definition, a much larger sensor which gives a way better image and video quality, a bigger aperture for better photography and video in low-light environments and a much more MP back facing camera.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a much better battery performance than Google Nexus 5X, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity instead of 2700mAh.
Although vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a better device, it costs a lot more money than Google Nexus 5X, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as the Google Nexus 5X. So if you need that extra specs and features, you can buy vivo X Fold 3 Pro, otherwise you can save a couple dollars and get the Google Nexus 5X, resigning a couple specs and features.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.