Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 79.3 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 5.1 | Android 14 |
| 2015-08-13 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 6.03 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black, Gold, Gray and White | Black and White |
| Glass; metal | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 415.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 8 inches |
| 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 515 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| Capacitive, Multi-touch | No touch screen |
| 9.4 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Single-Core 2100 MHz) processor | processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| ARM Mali-T760 MP8 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 8.46 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 7.7 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.90 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 10.01 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), HSPA, HSUPA, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.8 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 336 hours standby time 22 hours talk time | -- |
| 4.96 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| -- | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy Note 5 is a little bit better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, having a 79.3 score against 77.8. The Samsung Galaxy Note 5 is an a lot older and thicker cellphone than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but Samsung was able to make it extremely lighter anyway. Both of these devices include Android OS, but Samsung Galaxy Note 5 has the older 5.1 version and vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14.
The Galaxy Note 5 has a very superior processing power than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has less RAM memory and an inferior number of cores (although faster). Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a better looking screen than Samsung Galaxy Note 5, because although it has a bit worse pixel amount in each screen inch, it also counts with a really larger screen and a better resolution of 2200 x 2480 pixels.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a lot better camera than Galaxy Note 5, because it has a way more MP back facing camera, a larger aperture, a much better video quality and a much bigger sensor providing a much higher image quality. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a much greater storage capacity to install applications and games than Samsung Galaxy Note 5, because it has 512 GB internal storage.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a very superior battery duration than Galaxy Note 5, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity against 3000mAh.
The Galaxy Note 5 is not only the best phones in our comparison, but it's also a lot cheaper, making it an obvious call.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.