Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 98 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 13, 12, 11, 10 | Android 14 |
| 2020-03-06 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.57 x 2.99 x 0.35 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 7.83 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Cosmic black and Cosmic grey | Black and White |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 6) | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 1400.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.9 inches | 8 inches |
| 3200 x 1440 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Dynamic AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 509 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.7 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 SM8250 (7 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 585, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 650 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.72 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 15.38 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 108.00 MP + 40.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (24 fps) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 13.42 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 6.8 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| 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
Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has a general score of 98, which is way better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro's general score of 77.8. Both of these devices work with Android OS (operating system), but Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has the older 13 version and vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14. Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G's construction is extremely older, a little heavier and a lot thicker than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro.
The Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G counts with a really superior performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has less RAM, they both have a Octa-Core processing unit. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a way better display than Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G, because although it has a quite worse count of pixels per inch in the display, it also counts with a slightly higher 2200 x 2480 resolution and a larger screen.
The Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G captures slightly better photos and videos than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, because although it has a way smaller camera sensor offering a much lower image quality, a smaller camera aperture which is worse for capturing pictures and videos in poorly lited environments and worse video frame rate, and they both have the same 7680x4320 video definition, the Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G also counts with a much higher 108 mega pixels resolution back-facing camera.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a greater storage for applications, games, photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G, because although it has no slot for external memory cards, it also counts with 512 GB internal storage. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features just a little bit longer battery lifetime than Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G, because it has a 5700mAh battery capacity instead of 5000mAh.
Even being the best phone between the ones we are comparing, the Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G is also very cheap compared to the other ones.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.