Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 82.9 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 14 |
| 2020-08-20 | 2024-04-03 |
| 5.67 x 2.73 x 0.32 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.04 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Just black | Black and White |
| Plastic and Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 349.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.8 inches | 8 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| OLED | AMOLED |
| 444 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.3 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G SM7150-AA chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 470, 64-bit, 8 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor | processor |
| 6 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 618 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.27 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 10.1 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 27.00mm 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 | |
| 3140mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.12 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.1 | 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
Google Pixel 4a has a general score of 82.9, which is slightly better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro's general score of 77.8. The Google Pixel 4a is a incredibly older and notably thicker device than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but Google was able to build it much lighter anyway. These phones have Android OS, but the Google Pixel 4a has an older 11 version while vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14.
The Google Pixel 4a counts with a really superior processing power than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has 10 GB lesser RAM memory, they both have a Octa-Core CPU. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a way better looking display than Google Pixel 4a, because although it has a just a little lower screen density, it also counts with a lot larger screen and a way better resolution of 2200 x 2480 pixels.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro captures greater photographs and videos than Google Pixel 4a, and although they both have a F1.7 aperture, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a way larger back camera sensor, a way higher 7680x4320 video definition and a back facing camera with a much higher 50 mega-pixels resolution.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features much more storage capacity to store more apps and games than Google Pixel 4a, because it has 384 GB more internal storage. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a way better battery duration than Google Pixel 4a, because it has an 82% larger battery capacity.
Google Pixel 4a is not only the best phones between the ones we are comparing here, but it's also by far the cheapest.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.