Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 78.9 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| Android 11, 10, 9.0 Pie | Android 14 |
| 2019-05-07 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.30 x 3.00 x 0.32 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.89 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black, Purple and White | Black and White |
| Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 167.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 8 inches |
| 2160 x 1080 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| OLED | AMOLED |
| 402 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 SDM670 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 360, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 615 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.09 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 7.7 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (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+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3700mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.68 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | 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 Google Pixel 3a XL has a score of 78.9, which is a bit better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro's 77.8 general score. Both phones in this review work with Android OS, but the Google Pixel 3a XL has the older 11 version while vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14. Google Pixel 3a XL's construction is notably lighter than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it's way thicker and was released many years before.
The Google Pixel 3a XL counts with a much better performing CPU than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a lower amount of RAM, they both have a Octa-Core processor. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a much better display than Google Pixel 3a XL, because it has a way better 2200 x 2480px resolution, a lot bigger display and a quite higher pixels density.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features much more memory to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Google Pixel 3a XL, because it has 448 GB more internal storage. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a much better battery performance than Google Pixel 3a XL, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity instead of 3700mAh.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a lot better camera than Google Pixel 3a XL, because it has a way higher 50 megapixels resolution back facing camera, a larger camera aperture for better photos in poorly lited environments, a way better video definition and a much bigger back camera sensor.
Despite of being the best phone of the ones we are comparing, the Google Pixel 3a XL is also a bargain compared to the other ones, which makes it a great choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.