Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 82.4 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 9.0 Pie, 8.1 Oreo | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2019-03-07 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.26 x 2.96 x 0.33 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 6.14 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black and Blue | Black |
| Plastic | Plastic |
| -- | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2280 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | -- |
| 394 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7904 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 6 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G71 MP2 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 14.14 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 13.00 MP + 16.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.90 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.32 inches (1/3.1") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 9.13 | 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 | |
| 5000mAh Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 6.8 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| -- | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Galaxy M30 is slightly better than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, having a overall score of 82.4 against 80.1. The Galaxy M30 design is extremely lighter and notably thinner than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, even though it was released just 13 months before. Both phones we compare here have Android OS, but the Galaxy M30 has a more recent 9.0 Pie version and Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo, so it provides some nice extra features and improved performance.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a much better screen than Samsung Galaxy M30, because although it has a really smaller display, it also counts with a greater pixels density and a better resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little bit better hardware performance than Galaxy M30, although it has 2 GB less RAM, they both have the same number of cores.
Samsung Galaxy M30 has a better camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a much tinier aperture which is not nice for shooting photographs or video in low-light situations and a smaller back camera sensor shooting lower quality videos and images, and they both have the same video quality and the same video frame rate, the Samsung Galaxy M30 also counts with a camera in the back with a better resolution.
The Samsung Galaxy M30 counts with a superior storage for games and applications than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have a SD memory card expansion slot that admits a maximum of 512 GB, the Samsung Galaxy M30 also has 128 GB internal storage. Galaxy M30 has a little better battery life than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has 5000mAh of battery capacity against 4500mAh.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.