Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 87.6 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| LG | Samsung |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2020-03-20 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.67 x 3.06 x 0.35 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 7.72 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Blue and White | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 6) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 333.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.8 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2460 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| OLED | -- |
| 395 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 SM8250 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 650 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 | |
| 64.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 0.59 inches (1/1.7") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 10.34 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 6.8 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.1 | 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 V60 ThinQ has a score of 87.6, which is just a bit better than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro's score of 80.1. Even when LG V60 ThinQ and Galaxy XCover FieldPro were only released with a couple of months difference, LG V60 ThinQ is notably thinner and somewhat lighter. Both of these phones come with Android operating system, but the LG V60 ThinQ has the older 11 version and Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo.
LG V60 ThinQ counts with just a little better processing power than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have 8 cpu cores, the LG V60 ThinQ also has a greater amount of RAM. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit sharper screen than LG V60 ThinQ, because although it has a lot smaller screen, it also counts with a higher display pixel density and a quite better resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels.
LG V60 ThinQ takes greater videos and photos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller aperture, it also counts with a way more mega pixels camera in the back, a lot better video quality and a lot bigger camera sensor taking way better quality videos and pictures. LG V60 ThinQ counts with much more memory to store more games and applications than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has a slot for an external memory card that holds up to 1,95 TB and more internal memory.
The LG V60 ThinQ features just a bit better battery lifetime than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has an 11 percent greater battery size.
Despite of being the best phone in our comparison, LG V60 ThinQ is also a bargain compared to the other ones, which makes this phone an obvious call.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.