Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.4 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2017-07-07 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.04 x 2.91 x 0.31 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.89 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black, Blue, Gold and Silver | Black |
| -- | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 611.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | -- |
| 515 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.6 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Exynos M1and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-T880 MP12 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.78 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.4 inches (1/2.5") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 9.57 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.1 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3200mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.2 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Galaxy Note Fan Edition has a general score of 80.4, which is slightly better than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro's overall score of 80.1. Galaxy Note Fan Edition is an incredibly older phone than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but Samsung was able to make it extremely lighter and thinner anyway. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has just a little better performance than Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition. They have a Octa-Core processing unit and 4 GB of RAM.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit sharper display than Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has a little smaller screen, and they both have an equal 1440 x 2560 resolution, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also counts with a quite better display pixels density. Galaxy Note Fan Edition takes much better videos and photos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller aperture which is not recommended for shooting photos in low-light situations, and they both have a 12 megapixels resolution back facing camera, the Galaxy Note Fan Edition also counts with a lot better video resolution and a bigger back camera sensor providing a better image quality.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a slightly bigger memory to store more games and applications than Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition, and although they both have the same 64 GB internal storage, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has an external SD slot that allows a maximum of 512 GB.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a way better battery lifetime than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity against 3200mAh.
Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition not only is the best phones of the ones we are comparing, but it's also a bargain compared to the other phones.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.