Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 81.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2019-10-24 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 5.79 x 2.71 x 0.32 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 5.71 ounces |
| Black | Clearly white, Just black and Oh so orange |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 339.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2280 x 1080 pixels |
| -- | OLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 443 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.4 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 SM8150 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 640 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.63 |
| 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/1.70 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 | 2800mAh Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.32 | 4.8 |
| 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
Google Pixel 4 is a bit better than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, having an 81.9 score against 80.1. Google Pixel 4 is a lighter and incredibly thinner cellphone than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, even when they were only released 5 months apart. Google Pixel 4 has a little bit better hardware performance than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have the same number of cores, the Google Pixel 4 also has a larger amount of RAM.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a little more vivid display than Google Pixel 4, because although it has a quite smaller display, it also counts with a higher 1440 x 2560 resolution and more pixels per inch in the display. Google Pixel 4 takes much clearer pictures and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller aperture which is not good for low-light photos, and they both have a same size back camera sensor, the Google Pixel 4 also counts with a more MP back camera and a way higher (4K) video quality.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a lot bigger memory for games and applications than Google Pixel 4, and although they both have equal internal storage capacity, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a slot for external memory cards that allows a maximum of 512 GB. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a much longer battery lifetime than Google Pixel 4, because it has a 4500mAh battery capacity against 2800mAh.
Google Pixel 4 not only is the best phones between the ones we are comparing here, but it's also a bargain compared to the other ones.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.