Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 82.6 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 14 | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| -- | 2020-04-04 |
| -- | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| -- | 9.03 ounces |
| -- | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass Victus 2) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 800.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.2 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Dynamic AMOLED | -- |
| 416 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| 2600 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 9.7 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 4 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Yes GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 6.21 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.1 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 12.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 24.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.64 inches (1/1.56") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 12.54 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.92 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.3 | 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 |
Comparison review
Galaxy S25 has a general score of 82.6, which is slightly better than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro's overall score of 80.1. Both devices in this comparison use Android operating system, but the Galaxy S25 has the previous 14 version and Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo. The Galaxy S25 body is a lot thinner and noticeably lighter than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a very superior processing power than Samsung Galaxy S25, although it has a lower amount of RAM, they both have a Octa-Core processing unit. Galaxy S25 counts with a slightly better looking screen than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a bit worse 1080 x 2340px resolution and a way lower pixel density, it also counts with a larger screen.
The Samsung Galaxy S25 counts with a very superior camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller aperture, it also counts with a lot bigger sensor taking much higher quality videos and photographs, a much better video quality and a back camera with a way better resolution.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a better memory for applications, games, photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy S25, because although it has just 64 GB internal storage, it also counts with an external memory slot that supports a maximum of 512 GB. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little better battery life than Samsung Galaxy S25, because it has a 4500mAh battery capacity.
The Galaxy S25 is not only the best phones in our current comparison, but it's also very cheap compared to the other ones, which makes this phone an obvious call.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.