Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 93.4 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 13, 12 | Android 14 |
| 2022-02-25 | 2024-04-03 |
| 5.75 x 2.78 x 0.30 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.89 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Green, Phantom Black, Pink Gold and White | Black and White |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass Victus) | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 799.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.1 inches | 8 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Dynamic AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 422 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| 1500 cd/m2 brightness | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| Multi-touch | No touch screen |
| 9.8 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 SM8450 (4 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Quad-Core 3000 MHz + Quad-Core 1800 MHz processor | processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 730 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.45 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 10.1 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.64 inches (1/1.56") 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 |
| 12.43 | 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 | |
| 3700mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.68 | 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
Samsung Galaxy S22 is a lot better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, with a general score of 93.4 against 77.8. Both devices in this comparison use Android OS, but the Samsung Galaxy S22 has an older 13 version while vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14. Although the Samsung Galaxy S22 is notably older and notably thicker than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, it's construction is still lighter.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a bit more vivid display than Samsung Galaxy S22, because although it has a quite worse pixel density, it also counts with a way better resolution of 2200 x 2480, way more brightness and a lot larger screen. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a superior storage for games and applications than Samsung Galaxy S22, because it has more internal storage capacity.
Galaxy S22 counts with a very superior processing unit than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has 8 GB less RAM memory, they both have the same number of cores. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a way better battery lifetime than Galaxy S22, because it has a 54 percent larger battery size. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro shoots clearer photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy S22, and although they both have the same video quality and a 50 mega pixels back-facing camera, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a bigger diafragm aperture, a bigger sensor which offers a higher photo and video quality and better video frame rate.
In addition to being the best phone in our comparison, Galaxy S22 is also very cheap compared to the other ones, which makes it a no doubt choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.