Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.4 | 81.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | LG |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 6.0 Marshmallow | -- |
| 2016-03-30 | 2018-06-08 |
| 6.37 x 3.19 x 0.31 inches | 5.97 x 2.97 x 0.29 inches |
| 7.41 ounces | 5.57 ounces |
| Black, Gold and White | Black and Gray |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 261.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 6 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2880 x 1440 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | P-OLED |
| 367 pixels per inch | 537 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.8 | 8.8 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 652 8976 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A72 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 28 nm (Octa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2800 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Adreno 510 GPU | Adreno 630 GPU |
| 8.91 | 9.63 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 8.88 | 14.66 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.90 aperture | f/1.60 aperture |
| -- | 30.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.32 inches (1/3.09") sensor |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 7.7 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G) and LTE (4G) | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 5.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.8 | 5.28 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The LG V35 ThinQ has an overall score of 81.3, which is a little bit better than Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016)'s 74.4 general score. LG V35 ThinQ's design is a lot newer, incredibly lighter and just a little bit thinner than the Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016). The LG V35 ThinQ has a more vivid display than Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), and although they both have a display of the same size, the LG V35 ThinQ also has a lot higher 1440 x 2880 resolution and a better screen density.
The LG V35 ThinQ has a superior memory capacity to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), because it has a SD memory card expansion slot that admits up to 1,95 TB and more internal memory capacity. The LG V35 ThinQ counts with a bit faster processing unit than Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), and although they both have a Octa-Core CPU, the LG V35 ThinQ also has a higher amount of RAM memory.
Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016) features a much better battery duration than LG V35 ThinQ, because it has a 52 percent greater battery capacity. LG V35 ThinQ has a lot better camera than Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), because although it has a smaller back-facing camera sensor, and they both have a back camera with a 16 mega-pixels resolution, the LG V35 ThinQ also counts with a bigger aperture to capture better low-light images and videos.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.