Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 98 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 13, 12, 11, 10 | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2020-03-06 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.57 x 2.99 x 0.35 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 7.83 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Cosmic black and Cosmic grey | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 6) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 1400.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.9 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 3200 x 1440 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Dynamic AMOLED | -- |
| 509 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.7 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 SM8250 (7 nm) chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 585, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 650 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.72 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 15.38 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 108.00 MP + 40.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (24 fps) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 13.42 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 6.8 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | 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 |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has a score of 98, which is way better than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro's global score of 80.1. Even when the Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G and the Galaxy XCover FieldPro were released only 1 months apart, the Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G is noticeably thinner and lighter. Both of these phones come with Android OS (Operating System), but the Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has the older 13 version while Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little more vivid display than Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G, because although it has a really smaller screen and a bit worse resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels, it also counts with a just a little better quantity of pixels per inch of display. Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G counts with a bit better performance than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have a Octa-Core processing unit, the Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G also has a higher amount of RAM.
Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has a lot bigger memory capacity for games and applications than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has a slot for an SD memory card that admits up to 1000 GB and 128 GB internal memory capacity. Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G shoots way better pictures and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier aperture which is not good for low-light captures and videos, it also counts with a lot larger back-facing camera sensor, a camera with much more mega-pixels and a much higher 7680x4320 video definition.
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has a bit superior battery performance than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has 5000mAh of battery capacity.
The Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G is more expensive than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but you can get a much better phone for that few more dollars.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.