Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.2 | 78.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| -- | Android 11 |
| 2015-08-21 | 2021-09-30 |
| 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches | 6.23 x 2.88 x 0.31 inches |
| 6.03 ounces | 6.49 ounces |
| Black sapphire, Gold platinum, Silver titan and White pearl | Aurora Down and Cosmic black |
| Glass and Metal | Glass |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 6.6 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2376 x 1080 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 515 pixels per inch | 395 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.6 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset | MediaTek Dimensity 1200 MT6893 (6 nm) chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2100 MHz) processor | Cortex-A78, 64-bit (Octa-Core 3000 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 12 GB RAM |
| Mali-T760 MP8 GPU | Mali-G77 MC9 GPU |
| 9.18 | 9.81 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 7.7 | 13.3 |
| 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 | 16.00mm focal length |
| 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor | 0.64 inches (1/1.56") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.01 | 12.1 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.3 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4450mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 4.96 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Galaxy Note5 is just a bit better than the vivo X70 Pro, with a overall score of 80.2 against 78.3. Galaxy Note5's construction is just a little lighter and just a little thinner than vivo X70 Pro, despite of the fact that it was released many years before. The vivo X70 Pro has a bit better processing unit than Samsung Galaxy Note5, and although they both have a Octa-Core processing unit, the vivo X70 Pro also has a greater amount of RAM.
Galaxy Note5 counts with a little bit better looking display than vivo X70 Pro, because although it has a bit smaller display, it also counts with a higher resolution of 1440 x 2560 and more pixels per inch in the screen. The vivo X70 Pro features a lot bigger storage capacity to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Galaxy Note5, because it has 256 GB internal storage capacity.
The vivo X70 Pro counts with a very superior camera than Galaxy Note5, and although they both have the same (4K) video resolution, the vivo X70 Pro also has better video frame rates, a lot bigger back-facing camera sensor, a way better resolution back camera and a bigger aperture to capture better images in poorly lited environments.
The vivo X70 Pro has a really longer battery performance than Samsung Galaxy Note5, because it has 4450mAh of battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.