Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 72.8 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| -- | Android 14 |
| 2015-12-16 | 2024-04-03 |
| 5.96 x 2.92 x 0.29 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.96 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black, Gold, Pink and White | Black and White |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 8 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 401 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.9 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 615 8939 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 28 nm (Octa-Core 1600 MHz) processor | processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 405 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 8.73 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 16 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 6.72 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 13.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.90 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| -- | 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 |
| 8.91 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.1 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3300mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.28 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a bit better than the Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016), with a 77.8 score against 72.8. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro body is a lot newer and a lot thinner, but noticeably heavier than Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016). The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much more vibrant screen than Galaxy A7 (2016), because it has a way higher 2200 x 2480 resolution, a much bigger display and a just a bit greater number of pixels in each screen inch.
Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) features a much faster processor than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have 8 processing cores. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a lot bigger memory to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Galaxy A7 (2016), because although it has no SD memory slot, it also counts with 512 GB internal memory.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much longer battery life than Galaxy A7 (2016), because it has a 5700mAh battery capacity. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a way better camera than Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016), because it has a lot more mega pixels back facing camera, a bigger diafragm aperture for better captures and videos in low light situations and a much better video quality.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.