Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 78.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | Android 11, 10, 9.0 Pie |
| 2020-04-04 | 2019-05-07 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 5.96 x 2.76 x 0.32 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 5.19 ounces |
| Black | Black, Purple and White |
| Plastic | Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 186.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 5.6 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2220 x 1080 pixels |
| -- | OLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 441 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.2 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 SDM670 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 360, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 615 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.09 |
| 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 |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 3000mAh Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 4.96 |
| 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 Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a little bit better than Google Pixel 3a, having an 80.1 score against 78.8. Both of these phones include Android OS, but the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a more recent 8.0 Oreo version and Google Pixel 3a has Android 11. Even though Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is newer than the Google Pixel 3a, it is much thicker and extremely heavier.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit better processing power than Google Pixel 3a. They have a Octa-Core CPU and the same RAM amount. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features just a bit better looking display than Google Pixel 3a, because although it has a little bit smaller screen, it also counts with a higher resolution of 1440 x 2560 and a better screen pixels density.
Google Pixel 3a features a much better camera than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller aperture which is not favorable for low-light captures, and they both have the same camera sensor size, the Google Pixel 3a also counts with a back facing camera with a higher 12.2 mega pixels resolution and a way better 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features much more storage capacity to install applications and games than Google Pixel 3a, and although they both have the same 64 GB internal memory, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has an external SD slot that supports a maximum of 512 GB. Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a really longer battery duration than Google Pixel 3a, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more money than Google Pixel 3a, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as Google Pixel 3a. So if you need that extra features, you can buy the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but if you don't you can save some money and get the Google Pixel 3a, resigning some features and specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.