Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 80 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2018-10-18 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 5.73 x 2.69 x 0.31 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 5.22 ounces |
| Black | Black, Pink and White |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 157.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2160 x 1080 pixels |
| -- | P-OLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 439 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2500 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 630 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.36 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 11.74 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 28.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 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 | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 2915mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.32 | 4.88 |
| 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, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro is just a bit better than Google Pixel 3, having an 80.1 score against 80. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro design is newer than Google Pixel 3's, but it is heavier and noticeably thicker. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a bit better screen than Google Pixel 3, because although it has a little bit smaller display, it also counts with a better 1440 x 2560px resolution and a better amount of pixels per inch in the screen.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a lot bigger memory capacity to install games and applications than Google Pixel 3, and although they both have the same 64 GB internal storage capacity, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has an external memory card slot that admits a maximum of 512 GB. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a bit superior processing unit than Google Pixel 3. Both have 4 GB of RAM and the same number of cores.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a superior battery life than Google Pixel 3, because it has a 4500mAh battery capacity. Google Pixel 3 has a much better camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller aperture which is not recommended for low-light photos and videos, and they both have the same back camera sensor size, the Google Pixel 3 also counts with a camera in the back with more MP and a lot better (4K) video quality.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more money than the Google Pixel 3, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as the Google Pixel 3. So if you need that extra features, you can buy Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but if you don't you can save some dollars and get the Google Pixel 3, giving up some specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.