Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 92.9 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 10 | Android 14 |
| 2020-07-16 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.41 x 2.98 x 0.33 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 6.63 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Prism bricks black | Black and White |
| Aluminum and Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 650.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 8 inches |
| 2400 x 1080 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED Plus | AMOLED |
| 393 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor | processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 620 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.45 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 15.38 | 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 |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 12.21 | 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 Li - Polymer 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 |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
Galaxy A71 5G UW is much better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, having a 92.9 score against 77.8. Even though Galaxy A71 5G UW is notably older and way thicker than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, it's body is still somewhat lighter. These devices include Android OS (Operating System), but the Galaxy A71 5G UW has an older 10 version and vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14 version.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features an incredibly better screen than Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW, because it has a lot higher 2200 x 2480px resolution, a bigger display and a just a bit more pixels per inch of screen. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a better storage for applications, games, photos and videos than Galaxy A71 5G UW, because although it has no SD card slot, it also counts with 384 GB more internal memory.
The Galaxy A71 5G UW has a much more powerful processing unit than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has lesser RAM memory, they both have the same number of cores. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with greater battery performance than Galaxy A71 5G UW, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity against 4500mAh.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a slightly better camera than Galaxy A71 5G UW, because although it has a back-facing camera with a way lower 50 mega-pixels resolution, it also counts with a larger aperture for better images and videos in low-light situations, a lot larger back camera sensor providing a way higher image quality and a much higher 7680x4320 video definition.
Even being the best phone between the ones we are comparing, Galaxy A71 5G UW is also by far the cheapest one, which makes it a no doubt choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.