Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.8 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2016-06-10 | 2020-04-04 |
| 5.86 x 2.95 x 0.39 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 6.53 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Camo green, Sandy gold and Titanium gray | Black |
| Plastic | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 247.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | -- |
| 576 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| 500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 9.3 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit, 14 nm (Quad-Core 2150 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 8.91 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 200 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 8.56 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| -- | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 9.46 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| -- | Mobile Hotspot |
| HSPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 3 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.92 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | 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 XCover FieldPro has an overall score of 80.1, which is slightly better than the Galaxy S7 Active's 75.8 general score. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro construction is way newer, but a lot thicker and noticeably heavier than Galaxy S7 Active. Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a bit faster processing unit than Galaxy S7 Active, and although they both have a 4 GB RAM memory, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has more CPU cores.
The Galaxy S7 Active features a bit sharper screen than Galaxy XCover FieldPro. Both of them have a display with the same size, the same 1440 x 2560px resolution and a higher pixels number in each inch of screen. Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a way bigger storage for games and applications than Galaxy S7 Active, because it has 32 GB more internal storage capacity and a slot for external memory cards that holds up to 512 GB.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little longer battery lifetime than Samsung Galaxy S7 Active, because it has a 13% more battery size. Samsung Galaxy S7 Active features a much better camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller diafragm aperture which is worse for low light photography and video, and they both have a 12 mega pixels back-facing camera, the Samsung Galaxy S7 Active also counts with a way better 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution.
Although Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it is a lot more expensive than Samsung Galaxy S7 Active, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as the Samsung Galaxy S7 Active. So if you need that extra specs, you can buy the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, otherwise you can save some dollars and buy the Samsung Galaxy S7 Active, resigning a couple features and specs.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.