Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 81.9 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| -- | Android 14 |
| 2019-10-24 | 2024-04-03 |
| 5.79 x 2.71 x 0.32 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.71 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Clearly white, Just black and Oh so orange | Black and White |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 339.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 8 inches |
| 2280 x 1080 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| OLED | AMOLED |
| 443 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.4 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 SM8150 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | processor |
| 6 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 640 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.63 | 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/1.70 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, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 2800mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 4.8 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| -- | 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 4 has a score of 81.9, which is a bit better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro's general score of 77.8. The Google Pixel 4 is an extremely older and incredibly thicker cellphone than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but Google was able to make it noticeably lighter anyway. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a lot better screen than Google Pixel 4, because although it has a just a little less pixels per screen inch, it also counts with a much bigger display and a lot higher 2200 x 2480 resolution.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much greater storage to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Google Pixel 4, because it has more internal storage. Google Pixel 4 features a much more powerful CPU than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has less RAM memory, they both have the same number of cores.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a really longer battery performance than Google Pixel 4, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro takes way better photographs and videos than Google Pixel 4, and although they both have a F1.7 diafragm aperture, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a lot bigger camera sensor taking more light and vivid colors, a lot higher video quality and a lot better resolution back-facing camera.
The Google Pixel 4 not only is the best phones between the ones we are comparing here, but it's also very cheap compared to the other phones, which makes this phone a no doubt choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.