Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 83.8 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| -- | Android 14 |
| 2019-03-15 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.24 x 2.93 x 0.30 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.86 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black, Blue, Coral and White | Black and White |
| Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 202.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 8 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 403 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 9610 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor | processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP3 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.27 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 14.14 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 25.00 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 |
| 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 10.12 | 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 | |
| 4000mAh Li - Ion 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 | 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 A50 is a little bit better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, having an 83.8 score against 77.8. The Galaxy A50 design is lighter than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but it is thicker and was released 5 years before. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much sharper screen than Galaxy A50, because it has a bit higher display density, a much higher 2200 x 2480px resolution and a bigger display.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a very superior memory to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Galaxy A50, because although it has no slot for SD memory cards, it also counts with 384 GB more internal memory capacity. The Samsung Galaxy A50 has a much better performing processor than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a smaller amount of RAM memory, they both have a Octa-Core processor.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a very superior battery duration than Galaxy A50, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro takes greater photographs and videos than Galaxy A50, and although they both have the same camera aperture, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a lot better 7680x4320 video resolution, a much more mega-pixels camera in the back and a way larger back-facing camera sensor.
Even being the best phone in our current comparison, Samsung Galaxy A50 is also very cheap compared to the other phones.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.