Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 78.8 | 81 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 11, 10, 9.0 Pie | Android 11, 10 |
| 2019-05-07 | 2020-01-31 |
| 5.96 x 2.76 x 0.32 inches | 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches |
| 5.19 ounces | 7.76 ounces |
| Black, Purple and White | Black |
| Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 186.00 | $ 421.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.6 inches | 6.3 inches |
| 2220 x 1080 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| OLED | IPS LCD |
| 441 pixels per inch | 409 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.2 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 SDM670 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| Kryo 360, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 615 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.27 |
| 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 | 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.25 inches (1/4") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.79 | 9.79 |
| 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, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Battery | 4050mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 4.96 | 6 |
| 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, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Galaxy XCover Pro is slightly better than Google Pixel 3a, having a general score of 81 against 78.8. Both phones in this comparison review include the same Android 11 OS, so you shouldn't notice any difference regarding operating system features. The Galaxy XCover Pro is a way heavier and somewhat thicker device than Google Pixel 3a.
Google Pixel 3a counts with a slightly better looking display than Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a bit smaller display and a bit worse resolution of 1080 x 2220px, it also counts with a little bit better pixel density. The Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro features much more storage for games and applications than Google Pixel 3a, and although they both have equal 64 GB internal storage capacity, the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro also has a SD extension slot that admits up to 512 GB.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro counts with a little better performance than Google Pixel 3a. They have the same RAM amount and the same number of cores. Galaxy XCover Pro's camera is very similar to the camera in Google Pixel 3a, because although the Galaxy XCover Pro has a much tinier sensor taking less light and washed colors, and they both have the same (Full HD) video definition and the same 30 frames per second video frame rates, it also counts with a much more MP back facing camera and a larger aperture for better low light photos.
Galaxy XCover Pro counts with a much better battery lifetime than Google Pixel 3a, because it has a 35% larger battery size.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro is a better device, it is a lot more expensive than Google Pixel 3a, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as the Google Pixel 3a. If you are trying to save a few dollars, you can buy Google Pixel 3a, and give up a few features and specs, but you will get the most out of your budget.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.