Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2018-10-18 | 2020-04-04 |
| 5.73 x 2.69 x 0.31 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.22 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black, Pink and White | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 157.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2160 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| P-OLED | -- |
| 439 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.3 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2500 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 630 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.36 | 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 | |
| 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") 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 | |
| 2915mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 4.88 | 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
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a little bit better than Google Pixel 3, having an 80.1 score against 80. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a newer cellphone than Google Pixel 3, but it's much thicker and way heavier. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a bit sharper screen than Google Pixel 3, because although it has a little smaller display, it also counts with a greater display pixel density and a better resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a way bigger memory to install games and applications than Google Pixel 3, and although they both have exactly the same internal memory, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a SD card slot that admits up to 512 GB. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little better performance than Google Pixel 3. Both of them have 8 processing cores and the same RAM memory amount.
Google Pixel 3 takes a lot better photographs and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller diafragm aperture which is not nice for low light captures, and they both have a same size back-facing camera sensor, the Google Pixel 3 also counts with a better resolution back-facing camera and a much better (4K) video quality.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a very superior battery performance than Google Pixel 3, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity.
Although Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it is a lot more expensive than the Google Pixel 3, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as the Google Pixel 3. So if you need that extra specs, you can buy the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, otherwise you can save some money and buy the Google Pixel 3, resigning some specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.