Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 83.3 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| -- | Android 14 |
| 2018-03-16 | 2024-04-03 |
| 5.81 x 2.70 x 0.33 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.75 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Burgundy red, Coral blue, Ice blue, Lilac purple, Midnight black, Sunrise gold and Titanium gray | Black and White |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 158.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.8 inches | 8 inches |
| 2960 x 1440 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 568 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2800 MHz) processor | processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 630 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.54 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 400 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 11.34 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 10.23 | 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 5.0 | 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 |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
Galaxy S9 is a little bit better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, with a score of 83.3 against 77.8. Galaxy S9 is a much older and way thicker device than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but Samsung was able to make it notably lighter anyway. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a brighter screen than Galaxy S9, because although it has a lot lower screen density, it also counts with a quite better 2200 x 2480 resolution and a lot larger screen.
The Samsung Galaxy S9 has a much better performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a lower amount of RAM, they both have 8 cpu cores. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has much more memory to store more games and applications than Galaxy S9, because although it has no SD memory slot, it also counts with 512 GB internal storage capacity.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro captures much clearer photographs and videos than Galaxy S9, because although it has a smaller aperture which is not favorable for low light images, it also counts with a lot higher 7680x4320 video definition, a way larger back-facing camera sensor capturing lot better quality videos and pictures and a much more mega pixels camera in the back.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a way better battery life than Samsung Galaxy S9, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity instead of 3000mAh.
Even being the best phone in our current comparison, the Galaxy S9 is also very cheap compared to the other devices, which makes it an obvious call.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.