Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 72.6 | 91.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 10 | Android 14 |
| 2020-06-02 | -- |
| 6.45 x 2.98 x 0.35 inches | 6.04 x 5.22 x 0.22 inches |
| 7.13 ounces | 8.32 ounces |
| Arctic white and Glacier blue | Black Shadow |
| Glass and Plastic | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass Victus 2) |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 380.00 | $ 2020.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.6 inches | 8 inches |
| 2400 x 1080 pixels | 2184 x 1968 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 399 pixels per inch | 367 pixels per inch |
| -- | 2600 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.2 | 9.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ SM8150-AC chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 for Galaxy SM8650-AC (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2960 MHz) processor | processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 640 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.72 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 10.1 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 64.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 200.00 MP + 4.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.59 inches (1/1.7") sensor | -- |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | -- |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 12.54 | 11.11 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4200mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4400mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.08 | 6.24 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| 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
Galaxy Z Fold Special Edition has a general score of 91.1, which is much better than realme X3 SuperZoom's global score of 72.6. Both devices in this comparison work with Android operating system, but the Galaxy Z Fold Special Edition has a more recent 14 version while realme X3 SuperZoom has Android 10 version. The Galaxy Z Fold Special Edition construction is heavier but a lot thinner than the realme X3 SuperZoom.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special Edition has a brighter screen than realme X3 SuperZoom, because although it has a quite inferior amount of pixels per inch of screen, it also counts with a better resolution of 1968 x 2184 and a larger screen. Realme X3 SuperZoom has a much better performance than Galaxy Z Fold Special Edition, although it has a smaller amount of RAM memory, they both have a Octa-Core CPU.
Realme X3 SuperZoom shoots much clearer videos and photos than Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special Edition, although it has a lot worse resolution back-facing camera, they both have a same size aperture. The Galaxy Z Fold Special Edition has a lot bigger memory capacity for applications, games, photos and videos than realme X3 SuperZoom, because it has 384 GB more internal memory.
Galaxy Z Fold Special Edition counts with just a little bit longer battery lifetime than realme X3 SuperZoom, because it has a 4400mAh battery capacity instead of 4200mAh.
Although Galaxy Z Fold Special Edition is a better device, it costs a lot more than realme X3 SuperZoom, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as realme X3 SuperZoom. If you want to save a few dollars, you can get realme X3 SuperZoom, letting go some specs and features, but you will get the most with your savings.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.