Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 79.5 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| -- | Android 14 |
| 2016-03-11 | 2024-04-03 |
| 5.61 x 2.74 x 0.31 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.36 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black, Gold, Pink, Pink gold, Silver and White | Black and White |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 4) | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 124.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 8 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| 855 cd/m2 brightness | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 9.6 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit, 14 nm (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor | processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 200 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 8.56 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.4 inches (1/2.5") sensor | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 9.79 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 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 |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 4.96 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | 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
Galaxy S7 is slightly better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, getting a score of 79.5 against 77.8. Galaxy S7's construction is lighter than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but it's noticeably thicker and was released 8 years before. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a bit more vivid display than Galaxy S7, because although it has a much lower screen density, it also counts with a way brighter screen, a better resolution of 2200 x 2480 pixels and a lot larger screen.
Galaxy S7 has a very superior performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has lesser RAM and an inferior number of cores. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro captures much clearer pictures and videos than Samsung Galaxy S7, and although they both have a F1.7 aperture, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a much higher video quality, a much larger camera sensor providing a lot better image quality and a way higher 50 megapixels resolution camera in the back.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a way bigger storage capacity for apps and games than Galaxy S7, because although it has no SD memory card expansion slot, it also counts with 512 GB internal storage. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much longer battery duration than Galaxy S7, because it has a 90% greater battery capacity.
Even being the best phone of the ones we are comparing here, Galaxy S7 is also a bargain compared to the other phones.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.