Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 83.3 | 81 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11, 10 |
| 2018-03-16 | 2020-01-31 |
| 5.81 x 2.70 x 0.33 inches | 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches |
| 5.75 ounces | 7.76 ounces |
| Burgundy red, Coral blue, Ice blue, Lilac purple, Midnight black, Sunrise gold and Titanium gray | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 158.00 | $ 421.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.8 inches | 6.3 inches |
| 2960 x 1440 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | IPS LCD |
| 568 pixels per inch | 409 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2800 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 630 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.54 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 400 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 11.34 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.25 inches (1/4") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 10.23 | 9.79 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4050mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 4.96 | 6 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Galaxy S9 has a general score of 83.3, which is a little bit better than Galaxy XCover Pro's 81 overall score. Even though Galaxy S9 is older than Galaxy XCover Pro, it's design is thinner and incredibly lighter. The Galaxy S9 has a little bit better screen than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a little bit smaller display, it also counts with a higher pixels density and a higher 1440 x 2960px resolution.
The Galaxy S9 features a little faster processing unit than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro. Both of them have the same RAM memory amount and the same number of cores. The Galaxy S9 features a little bit better camera than Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a camera in the back with a way lower resolution, it also counts with a larger camera aperture, a much better 3840x2160 (4K) video quality and a way larger back-facing camera sensor which gives a lot better photo and video quality.
Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro counts with a little bit more memory capacity to install applications and games than Samsung Galaxy S9, and although they both have equal 64 GB internal memory capacity, the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro also has a slot for SD memory cards that allows up to 512 GB. Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro counts with a really longer battery life than Galaxy S9, because it has a 35% greater battery size.
Despite of being the best phone of the ones we are comparing, the Galaxy S9 is also a lot cheaper, which makes buying this phone an easy decision.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.