Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 90.7 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| -- | Android 14 |
| 2021-03-17 | 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 | -- |
| -- | $ 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 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
The Galaxy A52 has a global score of 90.7, which is better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro's score of 77.8. Despite of the fact Galaxy A52 is extremely older and way thicker than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, it's body is still somewhat lighter. Samsung Galaxy A52 counts with a much more powerful CPU than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have 8 cpu cores.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with an incredibly better display than Samsung Galaxy A52, because it has a bigger screen, a much higher resolution of 2200 x 2480px and a little better pixel number in each screen inch. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro takes clearer photos and videos than Galaxy A52, because although it has a back facing camera with much less mega pixels resolution, it also counts with a lot better 7680x4320 video resolution, a bigger aperture for better captures and videos in low-light environments and a much larger sensor shooting much higher quality videos and photos.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a quite bigger storage for games and applications than Galaxy A52, because although it has no slot for SD memory cards, it also counts with 384 GB more internal memory. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features longer battery duration than Galaxy A52, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity against 4500mAh.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.