Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 81.6 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2017-10-19 | 2020-04-04 |
| 5.74 x 2.74 x 0.31 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.04 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black, Blue and White | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 129.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| AMOLED | -- |
| 441 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.3 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 MSM8998 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 280, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2350 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 540 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.1 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 9.79 | 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 | |
| 2700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 4.64 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| 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
Google Pixel 2 has a score of 81.6, which is slightly better than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro's 80.1 overall score. Google Pixel 2's design is thinner and lighter than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, even though it was released many years before. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a bit better display than Google Pixel 2, because it has a better resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels, a bit bigger display and more pixels per inch in the screen.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a better storage capacity for games and applications than Google Pixel 2, because although it has 0 less internal memory, it also counts with a SD memory slot that holds up to 512 GB. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit faster processor than Google Pixel 2. They have the same RAM memory amount and 8 processing cores.
Google Pixel 2 has a much better camera than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier diafragm aperture and a tinier sensor, it also counts with a better resolution back-facing camera and a way better 3840x2160 video definition. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a really longer battery performance than Google Pixel 2, because it has a 4500mAh battery size.
Google Pixel 2 is not only the best phones of the ones in this comparison, but it's also a bargain compared to others.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.