Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 83.8 | 85.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11 |
| 2019-03-15 | 2021-08-11 |
| 6.24 x 2.93 x 0.30 inches | 6.54 x 2.84 x 0.27 inches |
| 5.86 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Black, Blue, Coral and White | Cream, Lavender and Phantom Black |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Glass |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 202.00 | $ 1000.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2636 x 1080 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 403 pixels per inch | 425 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 9610 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 SM8350 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor | Kryo 680, 64-bit, 5 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP3 GPU | Adreno 660 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.63 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 14.14 | 10.1 |
| Camera | |
| 25.00 MP + 25.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | -- |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | -- |
| 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.12 | 7.92 |
| 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, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3300mAh Nano SIM Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.92 | 5.28 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.1 |
| 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 Galaxy Z Flip 3 is a bit better than the Galaxy A50, having a global score of 85.6 against 83.8. The Galaxy Z Flip 3 body is a lot newer and a little thinner than Galaxy A50's, although it's a little heavier. The Galaxy Z Flip 3 counts with a little better processing power than Galaxy A50, and although they both have a Octa-Core processor, the Galaxy Z Flip 3 also has a larger amount of RAM memory.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 has a little bit better screen than Samsung Galaxy A50, because it has a just a bit better display density, a little bit larger display and a slightly higher 1080 x 2636 resolution. The Galaxy A50 shoots way better photographs and videos than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3, because it has a much more MP back facing camera and a bigger camera aperture to capture better low light photos and video.
The Galaxy A50 counts with a lot bigger memory for games and applications than Galaxy Z Flip 3, and although they both have the same 128 GB internal memory, the Galaxy A50 also has a SD card slot that holds up to 512 GB. Samsung Galaxy A50 counts with superior battery duration than Galaxy Z Flip 3, because it has a 4000mAh battery capacity against 3300mAh.
Although Galaxy Z Flip 3 is a better device, it is a lot more expensive than Samsung Galaxy A50, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as the Samsung Galaxy A50. So if you want that extra features and specs, you can buy the Galaxy Z Flip 3, otherwise you can save a couple dollars and get the Samsung Galaxy A50, resigning some features and specs.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.