Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 79.6 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 11, 10, 9.0 Pie | Android 14 |
| 2019-04-10 | 2024-04-03 |
| 5.69 x 2.72 x 0.31 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 4.94 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black, Blue, Coral and White | Black and White |
| Plastic and Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.9 inches | 8 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 437 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.2 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Exynos 7904 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 |
| 4 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Mali-G71 MP2 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 8.91 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 11.74 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 25.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") 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 |
| 9.46 | 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, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3100mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.12 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | 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 |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
Galaxy A40 has a global score of 79.6, which is slightly better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro's 77.8 overall score. The Galaxy A40 body is much lighter than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it is extremely thicker and was released 5 years before. Both phones we compare here have Android OS (operating system), but Galaxy A40 has 11 version and vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with an incredibly better display than Galaxy A40, because although it has a just a little worse quantity of pixels per inch of display, it also counts with a really bigger screen and a way better 2200 x 2480 pixels resolution. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has much more storage to install games and applications than Samsung Galaxy A40, because although it has no SD memory card expansion slot, it also counts with 512 GB internal memory.
The Galaxy A40 counts with a much better processing power than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has 12 GB lesser RAM memory, they both have the same number of cores. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro takes way better photographs and videos than Galaxy A40, and although they both have the same diafragm aperture, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a back-facing camera with a lot higher resolution, a lot bigger back-facing camera sensor providing a much better image quality and a much higher video resolution.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a really longer battery life than Galaxy A40, because it has a 5700mAh battery size against 3100mAh.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.