Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 81.9 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2017-08-11 | 2020-04-04 |
| 5.99 x 2.95 x 0.39 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 7.34 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Gold and Gray | Black |
| -- | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 245.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.8 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2960 x 1440 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | -- |
| 568 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 MSM8998 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 280, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2350 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 540 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.78 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 9.79 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.92 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.1, EDR | 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
The Galaxy S8 Active has a score of 81.9, which is a little bit better than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro's 80.1 general score. Galaxy S8 Active's body is somewhat lighter and thinner than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, even though it was released 3 years before. Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit better hardware performance than Samsung Galaxy S8 Active. They have the same RAM memory amount and a Octa-Core CPU.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a screen that is just as good as the screen in Galaxy S8 Active, because although the Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a quite smaller display and a little worse resolution of 1440 x 2560, it also counts with a bit greater display pixels density. Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little bit more storage capacity for applications, games, photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy S8 Active, and although they both have exactly the same internal storage, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has an external memory card slot that supports a maximum of 512 GB.
Galaxy S8 Active takes a lot better videos and photos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier camera aperture which is not good for low-light captures and videos, and they both have the same resolution camera in the back and a same size back-facing camera sensor, the Galaxy S8 Active also counts with a way higher (4K) video definition.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a bit longer battery lifetime than Galaxy S8 Active, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity.
The Galaxy S8 Active not only is the best devices between the ones we are comparing, but it's also by far the cheapest, which makes it a great choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.