Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 91.3 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 12, 11 | Android 14 |
| 2021-03-19 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.30 x 2.96 x 0.33 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 6.67 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| -- | Black and White |
| Plastic and Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.5 inches | 8 inches |
| 2400 x 1080 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 405 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G SM7225 (8 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 570, 64-bit, 8 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor | processor |
| 6 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 619 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.27 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1 TB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 15.42 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 64.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.59 inches (1/1.7") sensor | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 12.1 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, 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 |
| 10.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 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 |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G has a general score of 91.3, which is much better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro's score of 77.8. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G is a older and way thicker device than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but Samsung managed to make it somewhat lighter anyway. Both of these phones include Android operating system, but the Samsung Galaxy A52 5G has older 12 version while vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14 version.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a much sharper screen than Galaxy A52 5G, because it has a bigger display, a lot better resolution of 2200 x 2480 pixels and a little bit more pixels per inch in the screen. The Galaxy A52 5G has a much more powerful processor than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has less RAM memory, they both have 8 processing cores.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with just a bit better camera than Samsung Galaxy A52 5G, because although it has a way lower resolution camera, it also counts with a much larger back camera sensor providing a way higher image quality, a bigger aperture to take better captures and video in low light situations and a lot better 7680x4320 video resolution.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a better memory capacity for apps and games than Galaxy A52 5G, because although it has no SD memory slot, it also counts with 384 GB more internal storage. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with better battery duration than Samsung Galaxy A52 5G, because it has a 27 percent greater battery size.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.