Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| LG | Samsung |
| Android 8.1 Oreo | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2018-11-09 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.03 x 2.83 x 0.31 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.50 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black and Gray | Black |
| Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.1 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 3120 x 1440 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | -- |
| 563 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| 1000 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 9.7 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro-AB chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit, 14 nm (Quad-Core 2150 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 8.91 | 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 + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/2.20 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.32 inches (1/3.1") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 9.79 | 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 | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 4.96 | 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 |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a little bit better than LG G7 Fit, having a general score of 80.1 against 77. Although the Galaxy XCover FieldPro is newer than the LG G7 Fit, it is heavier and extremely thicker. Both devices we are comparing here include Android OS, but the Galaxy XCover FieldPro has 8.0 Oreo version while LG G7 Fit has Android 8.1 Oreo.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little bit better performance than LG G7 Fit, and although they both have 4 GB of RAM memory, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has 4 more CPU cores. LG G7 Fit features a slightly better display than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a quite worse screen density, it also counts with a larger display and a little higher resolution of 1440 x 3120px.
The LG G7 Fit shoots much better videos and photos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller back-facing camera sensor and a lot tinier diafragm aperture which is not recommended for low light photos and videos, it also counts with a camera with a much better 16 MP resolution and a way better video quality.
The LG G7 Fit has a slightly better memory capacity for applications and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has less internal storage capacity, it also counts with a slot for an SD memory card that admits up to 1,95 TB. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a way better battery duration than LG G7 Fit, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.