Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 84.9 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2019-05-29 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.50 x 3.01 x 0.37 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 7.76 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Angel gold, Ghost white and Phantom black | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 6) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2400 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | -- |
| 393 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 730 SM7150-AA chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 470, 64-bit, 8 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 618 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.1 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 25.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.78 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3700mAh Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 5.68 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| 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
Galaxy A80 is a little bit better than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, getting a overall score of 84.9 against 80.1. Even though the Galaxy A80 is older than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, it's construction is lighter and notably thinner. Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little bit better hardware performance than Galaxy A80, although it has a smaller amount of RAM memory, they both have 8 cpu cores.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a brighter display than Samsung Galaxy A80, because although it has a much smaller display, it also counts with a better 1440 x 2560 resolution and a better display pixel density. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a better memory capacity for applications and games than Samsung Galaxy A80, because although it has 0 less internal memory, it also counts with a slot for external memory cards that holds a maximum of 512 GB.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with better battery life than Galaxy A80, because it has a 22% more battery capacity. Galaxy A80 shoots way better videos and photos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a much smaller diafragm aperture which is not nice for shooting photographs and video in poorly lited environments, it also counts with a much larger sensor providing a lot better image quality, a back camera with a lot higher 48 mega pixels resolution and a way higher video quality.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.