Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.6 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| HTC | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2017-05-18 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.06 x 2.99 x 0.31 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.96 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black, Blue, Silver and White | Black |
| Glass and Metal | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 275.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| S-LCD 5 | -- |
| 534 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.7 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 MSM8998 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 280, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2450 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 540 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.36 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.02 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 16.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (120 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 9.9 | 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, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 4.96 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | 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
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a global score of 80.1, which is slightly better than HTC U11's general score of 77.6. Galaxy XCover FieldPro's design is extremely newer, but extremely heavier and way thicker than HTC U11. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with just a bit better display than HTC U11, because although it has a little bit smaller screen, and they both have the same 1440 x 2560 pixels resolution, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also counts with a just a little more pixels per display inch.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a quite bigger storage for applications and games than HTC U11, and although they both have exactly the same 64 GB internal storage capacity, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a SD memory slot that supports up to 512 GB. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit superior processing unit than HTC U11. They have 8 cores and the same RAM amount.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a very superior battery performance than HTC U11, because it has a 4500mAh battery capacity. HTC U11 captures much better photos and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier diafragm aperture which is not good for low-light captures, and they both have the same camera sensor size and a same resolution back facing camera, the HTC U11 also counts with a lot higher video definition.
Although Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more than HTC U11, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as the HTC U11. If you are trying to save a few dollars, you can buy the HTC U11, and give up a few features and specs, but you'll get the most with your budget.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.