Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.7 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 11, 10, 9.0 Pie | Android 14 |
| 2019-04-10 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.24 x 2.94 x 0.31 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.96 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black,Deep blue and Red | Black and White |
| Plastic | -- |
| $ 166.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 8 inches |
| 1560 x 720 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 268 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.2 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 7884 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Mali-G71 MP2 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 8.91 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 9.84 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 13.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.90 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.32 inches (1/3.1") sensor | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 9.02 | 12.87 |
| 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 | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.92 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| -- | 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 |
Comparison review
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro is just a bit better than the Galaxy A20, having a overall score of 77.8 against 74.7. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a much newer and extremely thinner device than Galaxy A20, but it's heavier. Both phones we compare here include Android OS (Operating System), but vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a newer 14 version while Galaxy A20 has Android 11 version, so it provides some additional features and performance optimizations.
Samsung Galaxy A20 features a much better performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has lesser RAM, they both have 8 processing cores. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a much better looking screen than Galaxy A20, because it has a way better pixels density, a larger display and a much better resolution of 2200 x 2480.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a much better camera than Galaxy A20, because it has a lot bigger back camera sensor, a lot higher 7680x4320 video resolution, a much higher resolution back-facing camera and a larger aperture to capture better low-light photography and videos. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a superior storage to install games and applications than Galaxy A20, because although it has no slot for an SD memory card, it also counts with 512 GB internal memory capacity.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a superior battery life than Galaxy A20, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity instead of 4000mAh.
Although vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a better device, it is way more expensive than Galaxy A20, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as Galaxy A20. If you are trying to save a few dollars, you can get the Galaxy A20, giving up some specs and features, but you will get the most out of your savings.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.