Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 87.7 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 10 | Android 14 |
| 2020-09-11 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.45 x 3.00 x 0.37 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 7.51 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black and White | Black and White |
| Plastic and Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 8 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED Plus | AMOLED |
| 385 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 730 SM7150-AA chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 470, 64-bit, 8 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor | processor |
| 6 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 618 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.27 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 14.14 | 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 |
| 0.57 inches (1/1.76") sensor | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 11.88 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 7000mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 8.32 | 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
The Samsung Galaxy M51 is much better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, with an 87.7 score against 77.8. The Samsung Galaxy M51 is a notably older and a lot thicker cellphone than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but Samsung was able to build it a bit lighter anyway. Both devices in this comparison review use Android operating system, but the Samsung Galaxy M51 has the older 10 version and vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14 version.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a way better screen than Galaxy M51, because it has a way higher 2200 x 2480 resolution, a larger screen and a bit higher display density. Samsung Galaxy M51 has a very superior performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has lesser RAM memory, they both have 8 cpu cores.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with much more storage capacity to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy M51, because although it has no slot for an external memory card, it also counts with 512 GB internal storage capacity. Galaxy M51 counts with better battery performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, because it has a 7000mAh battery capacity.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has just a bit better camera than Galaxy M51, because although it has a camera in the back with a much worse 50 MP resolution, it also counts with a much better 7680x4320 video resolution, a bigger camera aperture to capture better low light captures and video and a way bigger back camera sensor which gives a lot higher image and video quality.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.