Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| LG | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2016-09-29 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.29 x 3.07 x 0.30 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 6.14 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| 16 777 216 | Black |
| Aluminum | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 115.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | -- |
| 515 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.5 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 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 | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 14.66 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 29.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") 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 (120 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 9.9 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| -- | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.1 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3200mAh Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 5.2 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Infra-red port | -- |
| 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
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro has an overall score of 80.1, which is a little bit better than the LG V20's overall score of 77. Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a way newer cellphone than the LG V20, but it is noticeably thicker and noticeably heavier. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has just a little better hardware performance than LG V20, and although they both have the same RAM amount, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a larger number of cores (and faster).
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little sharper display than LG V20, because although it has a bit smaller display, and they both have the same exact 1440 x 2560 resolution, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also counts with a just a bit more pixels per screen inch. LG V20 captures greater photographs and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller aperture which is not nice for low-light photos and video and a smaller sensor which offers a lower photo and video quality, it also counts with a much better 3840x2160 video resolution and a way higher resolution back camera.
The LG V20 counts with a lot bigger memory to store more apps and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have equal internal memory, the LG V20 also has an external SD slot that holds up to 1,95 TB. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a superior battery lifetime than LG V20, because it has a 4500mAh battery capacity.
Although Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more money than LG V20, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as the LG V20. So if you want that extra features, you can buy Galaxy XCover FieldPro, else you can save some money and get the LG V20, resigning some features and specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.