Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 88.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Apple |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2017-11-03 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 5.65 x 2.79 x 0.30 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 6.14 ounces |
| Black | Silver and Space gray |
| Plastic | Glass and Stainless steel |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 1149.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 5.8 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2436 x 1125 pixels |
| -- | OLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 463 pixels per inch |
| -- | 625 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Apple A11 Bionic APL1W72 (10 nm) chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | 64-bit Monsoon and Mistral, 64-bit (Hexa-Core 2390 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 3 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Apple 3-core GPU GPU |
| 9.45 | 10.17 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 11.74 | 13.3 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 7.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 28.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.33 inches (1/3") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 10.12 |
| 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 |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 2716mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.32 | 4.72 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Apple iPhone X has an overall score of 88.1, which is much better than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro's overall score of 80.1. Even though the Apple iPhone X is incredibly older than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, it's design is extremely thinner and much lighter. Apple iPhone X counts with a screen that's very similar to Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro's screen, because although the Apple iPhone X has a little lower resolution of 1125 x 2436px and a quite inferior pixels amount in each inch of screen, it also counts with a quite bigger screen.
IPhone X counts with a bit better processing power than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a lower number of slower cores and less RAM memory, it also counts with a 64 bits processing unit. The iPhone X takes a lot better videos and photos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller sensor providing a lower image quality and a tinier diafragm aperture, and they both have the same resolution camera, the iPhone X also counts with a way higher video definition.
The Apple iPhone X has a better memory for apps and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has no SD memory card expansion slot, it also counts with 256 GB internal storage. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a way better battery lifetime than iPhone X, because it has a 4500mAh battery size against 2716mAh.
The Apple iPhone X is a bit more expensive than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but you can get a better phone for that few extra dollars.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.