Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 95.4 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 13, 12 | Android 14 |
| 2022-02-25 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.43 x 3.07 x 0.35 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 8.08 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Burgundy, Green, Phantom Black and White | Black and White |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass Victus) | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 1200.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.8 inches | 8 inches |
| 3088 x 1440 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Dynamic AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 501 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| 1750 cd/m2 brightness | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 9.9 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 SM8450 (4 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Quad-Core 2800 MHz + Quad-Core 1800 MHz processor | processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 730 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.36 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 10.1 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 108.00 MP + 40.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.75 inches (1/1.33") 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 |
| 13.75 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 6.8 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.2 | 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 |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra has a score of 95.4, which is way better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro's 77.8 overall score. Both of these devices use Android OS (operating system), but Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra has the older 13 version while vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14 version. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra's body is notably older, just a little heavier and extremely thicker than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro.
The Galaxy S22 Ultra counts with a much faster CPU than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has 8 GB less RAM memory, they both have a Octa-Core CPU. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with just a bit better screen than Galaxy S22 Ultra, because although it has a bit worse quantity of pixels per screen inch, it also counts with a larger screen, a really brighter screen and a bit higher resolution of 2200 x 2480.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a superior memory to store more apps and games than Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra, because it has 512 GB internal storage. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra counts with a slightly better camera than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, because although it has a smaller diafragm aperture, a tinier sensor capturing less light and dull colors and slower 24 fps video frame rates, and they both have the same 7680x4320 video quality, the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra also counts with a back camera with lot more mega pixels.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a little longer battery performance than Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity against 5000mAh.
Despite of being the best phone of the ones in this comparison, Galaxy S22 Ultra is also a lot cheaper, which makes it an easy decision.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.