Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 73.5 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| HTC | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2017-03-01 | 2020-04-04 |
| 5.75 x 2.87 x 0.31 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.11 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black, Blue, Pink and White | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 440.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.2 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| S-LCD | -- |
| 424 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| MediaTek Helio P10 MT6755 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-T860 MP2 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 12.76 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 16.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | -- |
| -- | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 9.13 | 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 | |
| 2500mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 4.48 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, 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 the HTC U Play, with an 80.1 score against 73.5. Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a a lot newer phone than HTC U Play, but it is notably heavier and notably thicker. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a bit superior processing unit than HTC U Play, and although they both have the same number of cores, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a larger amount of RAM.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little more vivid display than HTC U Play, because although it has a bit smaller screen, it also counts with a better amount of pixels per display inch and a better 1440 x 2560 resolution. The HTC U Play takes much better photographs and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a lot smaller aperture which is not favorable for shooting images and/or video in low-light environments, and they both have the same video frame rates and the same (Full HD) video quality, the HTC U Play also counts with a back camera with a much better resolution.
The HTC U Play has just a bit more storage for apps and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has only 32 GB internal storage, it also counts with a slot for SD memory cards that holds a maximum of 1,95 TB. Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a very superior battery life than HTC U Play, because it has an 80% more battery size.
Although Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it is way more expensive than HTC U Play, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as the HTC U Play. If you are trying to save a few dollars, you can get HTC U Play, letting go a couple features, but you will get the most with your money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.