Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.4 | 98 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 13, 12, 11, 10 |
| 2016-03-30 | 2020-03-06 |
| 6.37 x 3.19 x 0.31 inches | 6.57 x 2.99 x 0.35 inches |
| 7.41 ounces | 7.83 ounces |
| Black, Gold and White | Cosmic black and Cosmic grey |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 6) |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 1400.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 6.9 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 3200 x 1440 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 367 pixels per inch | 509 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.8 | 8.7 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 652 8976 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 SM8250 (7 nm) chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A72 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 28 nm (Octa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | Kryo 585, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 12 GB RAM |
| Adreno 510 GPU | Adreno 650 GPU |
| 8.91 | 9.72 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot |
| 8.88 | 15.38 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP | 108.00 MP + 40.00 MP |
| f/1.90 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor |
| -- | 7680 x 4320 (24 fps) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 7.7 | 13.42 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G) and LTE (4G) | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 5.6 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.8 | 6.8 |
| 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 Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G is a lot better than Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), having a 98 score against 74.4. The Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G design is incredibly newer than Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016)'s, although it's just a little bit heavier and somewhat thicker. Both devices we are comparing include Android OS (Operating System), but Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has the previous 13 version and Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016) has Android 8.0 Oreo.
The Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G features a little better processing power than Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), and although they both have the same number of cores, the Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G also has more RAM memory. The Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G features a sharper display than Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), because it has a way better 1440 x 3200 resolution, a bigger screen and a higher screen density.
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G takes a lot better pictures and videos than Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), because it has a bigger aperture, a lot better 108 megapixels resolution back facing camera and a lot larger sensor which provides a much better image and video quality. Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G features a very superior memory for apps and games than Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), because it has 128 GB internal memory and an external SD slot that allows up to 1000 GB.
The Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G features a battery life that is just as good as Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016)'s battery life.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.