Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 82.5 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| LG | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2018-03-09 | 2020-04-04 |
| 5.97 x 2.97 x 0.29 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.57 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| 16 777 216 | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 930.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2880 x 1440 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| P-OLED | -- |
| 537 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 |
| 6 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 540 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 17.06 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.60 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 0.32 inches (1/3.09") 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 | -- |
| 9.9 | 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 | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.28 | 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 LG V30S ThinQ is slightly better than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, having an 82.5 score against 80.1. Both of these phones work with the same Android 8.0 Oreo OS (operating system), so you shouldn't notice any difference in that aspect. Although the LG V30S ThinQ is much older than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, it's body is a lot thinner and extremely lighter.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little sharper display than LG V30S ThinQ, because although it has a bit smaller screen and a quite lower resolution of 1440 x 2560px, it also counts with a little better pixel quantity in each screen inch. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a processing unit that is very similar to LG V30S ThinQ's processing unit, and although the Galaxy XCover FieldPro has 2 GB less RAM, they both have 8 CPU cores.
The LG V30S ThinQ has a very superior storage for games and applications than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has 128 GB internal storage capacity and an external memory card slot that allows a maximum of 1,95 TB. Galaxy XCover FieldPro has longer battery performance than LG V30S ThinQ, because it has a 4500mAh battery capacity instead of 3300mAh.
The LG V30S ThinQ takes much clearer photos and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier back camera sensor and a tinier camera aperture which is not nice for taking photos and video in low light environments, it also counts with a much more mega pixels camera and a way better 3840x2160 (4K) video quality.
LG V30S ThinQ is not only the best phones of the ones in this comparison, but it's also by far the cheapest.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.