Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 87.5 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 11 | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2020-11-19 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.06 x 2.91 x 0.32 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.93 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Clearly white and Just black | Black |
| Plastic | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 500.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.2 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| OLED | -- |
| 416 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.2 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 6 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 620 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.36 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.1 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 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 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.23 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, 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 |
| 10.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3885mAh Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 5.84 | 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
Google Pixel 4a 5G has a general score of 87.5, which is slightly better than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro's score of 80.1. Both of these phones include Android OS, but Google Pixel 4a 5G has the previous 11 version and Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo. Google Pixel 4a 5G's design is way lighter and notably thinner than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, although both were released with only 8 months difference.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little bit better hardware performance than Google Pixel 4a 5G, although it has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have 8 cpu cores. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a slightly better screen than Google Pixel 4a 5G, because although it has a little smaller screen, it also counts with a better resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels and a greater pixel quantity per inch in the screen.
The Google Pixel 4a 5G captures much clearer photos and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller diafragm aperture, and they both have a same size back camera sensor, the Google Pixel 4a 5G also counts with a way better 3840x2160 video quality and a camera in the back with a higher 12.2 mega pixels resolution.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a bigger storage capacity to install games and applications than Google Pixel 4a 5G, because although it has less internal storage, it also counts with a slot for an SD memory card that admits up to 512 GB. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features just a little better battery life than Google Pixel 4a 5G, because it has a 4500mAh battery capacity instead of 3885mAh.
Even being the best phone of the ones we compare here, Google Pixel 4a 5G is also by far the cheapest.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.