Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 83.7 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| LG | Samsung |
| Android 10, 9.0 Pie | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2019-05-10 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.27 x 3.00 x 0.33 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 6.46 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Aurora black | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 6) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 243.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 3120 x 1440 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| OLED | -- |
| 537 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.8 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 6 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 640 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.63 | 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 | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.23 | 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 | |
| 4000mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.92 | 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 |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The LG V50 ThinQ is just a bit better than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, with a overall score of 83.7 against 80.1. Despite of the fact that the LG V50 ThinQ is older than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, it's body is incredibly lighter and incredibly thinner. Both of these devices use Android OS, but the LG V50 ThinQ has the older 10 version while Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo.
The LG V50 ThinQ features a little faster processor than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have the same number of cores, the LG V50 ThinQ also has 2 GB more RAM. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features just a bit better looking screen than LG V50 ThinQ, because although it has a lot smaller screen and a bit lower 1440 x 2560px resolution, it also counts with a little greater pixel quantity per display inch.
LG V50 ThinQ counts with a much greater storage for applications and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has 128 GB internal storage capacity and a slot for an external memory card that admits up to 1,95 TB. LG V50 ThinQ has a way better camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller camera sensor capturing lower quality videos and photos, and they both have a 12 mega-pixels resolution back facing camera and a same size aperture, the LG V50 ThinQ also counts with a way better 3840x2160 video quality.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with just a bit longer battery duration than LG V50 ThinQ, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity.
LG V50 ThinQ not only is the best phones between the ones we are comparing, but it's also a lot cheaper.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.