Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 72.2 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Kyocera | Vivo |
| Android 10 | Android 14 |
| 2021-01-20 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.50 x 2.95 x 0.63 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 9.81 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| -- | Black and White |
| Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 8 inches |
| 2160 x 1080 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| LCD | AMOLED |
| 439 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.3 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7150-AB chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor | processor |
| 6 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 620 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.36 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSD (up to 1 TB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 15.42 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 24.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 8.58 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 6.32 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0, EDR | 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
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro is slightly better than Kyocera DuraForce Ultra, having a 77.8 score against 72.2. These phones include Android operating system, but the vivo X Fold 3 Pro has the newer 14 version while Kyocera DuraForce Ultra has Android 10. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a noticeably newer cellphone, and it is also a lot thinner and noticeably lighter than Kyocera DuraForce Ultra.
The Kyocera DuraForce Ultra features a much more powerful processing unit than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have 8 cpu cores. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a much better screen than Kyocera DuraForce Ultra, because although it has a little bit worse quantity of pixels per inch of display, it also counts with a way larger display and a much higher resolution of 2200 x 2480px.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a lot better camera than Kyocera DuraForce Ultra, because it has a lot higher video definition, a bigger aperture and a back camera with a way better 50 MP resolution. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a better memory capacity to install games and applications than Kyocera DuraForce Ultra, because although it has no slot for external memory cards, it also counts with 384 GB more internal storage capacity.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features superior battery life than Kyocera DuraForce Ultra, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.