Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 78.8 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 11, 10, 9.0 Pie | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2019-05-07 | 2020-04-04 |
| 5.96 x 2.76 x 0.32 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.19 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black, Purple and White | Black |
| Plastic | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 186.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.6 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2220 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| OLED | -- |
| 441 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.2 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 SDM670 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 360, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 615 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.09 | 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 | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 4.96 | 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
Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a little bit better than Google Pixel 3a, getting an 80.1 score against 78.8. Even though the Galaxy XCover FieldPro is newer than Google Pixel 3a, it's much heavier and much thicker. Both of these phones work with Android OS, but the Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a more recent 8.0 Oreo version and Google Pixel 3a has Android 11, providing you some extra features and performance improvements.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a bit more powerful CPU than Google Pixel 3a. They have a 4 GB RAM and the same number of cores. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little more vivid display than Google Pixel 3a, because although it has a little bit smaller display, it also counts with a better pixels number in each display inch and a better resolution of 1440 x 2560px.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a lot bigger memory capacity for games and applications than Google Pixel 3a, and although they both have the same 64 GB internal memory, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a slot for an external memory card that holds a maximum of 512 GB. The Google Pixel 3a features a much better camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller diafragm aperture which is not favorable for low light photography and video, and they both have a same size sensor, the Google Pixel 3a also counts with a lot better video definition and a camera in the back with more mega pixels.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a superior battery duration than Google Pixel 3a, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity.
Although Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it is way more expensive than Google Pixel 3a, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as Google Pixel 3a. So if you need that extra features, you can buy Galaxy XCover FieldPro, otherwise you can save a couple dollars and get the Google Pixel 3a, letting go some features and specs.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.