Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 81.1 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| Android 5.1, 5.0 | Android 14 |
| 2014-10-15 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.27 x 3.27 x 0.40 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 6.49 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Blue and White | Black and White |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 1019.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 8 inches |
| 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 490 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| Capacitive, Multi-touch | No touch screen |
| 9 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 805 APQ8084 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Krait 450 (Quad-Core 2700 MHz) processor | processor |
| 3 GB (800 MHz) RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 420 (500 MHz) GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.54 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 7.7 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 13.00 MP + 2.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 23.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 9.46 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA, HSUPA, EDGE, GPRS and GSM | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 7.1 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3220mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 330 hours standby time 24 hours talk time | -- |
| 5.2 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| -- | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Google Nexus 6 is slightly better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, with an 81.1 score against 77.8. Even though the Google Nexus 6 is noticeably older and much thicker than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, it's construction is still lighter. These phones have Android OS (Operating System), but the Google Nexus 6 has an older 5.1 version and vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a much better looking display than Google Nexus 6, because although it has a little bit lower count of pixels per inch in the screen, it also counts with a better 2200 x 2480 resolution and a really bigger screen. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a very superior storage to install applications and games than Google Nexus 6, because it has 512 GB internal storage capacity.
Google Nexus 6 counts with an extremely better processing unit than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, because although it has a lower number of cores (although faster) and 13 GB lesser RAM, it also counts with a GPU. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a very superior battery performance than Google Nexus 6, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much better camera than Google Nexus 6, because it has a way higher video definition, a bigger diafragm aperture for better low-light captures and a way more mega pixels camera in the back.
Google Nexus 6 not only is the best devices in this comparison, but it's also very cheap compared to the other devices.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.