Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 82.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2019-10-24 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.31 x 2.96 x 0.32 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 6.81 ounces |
| Black | Clearly white, Just black and Oh so orange |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 487.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.3 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 3040 x 1440 pixels |
| -- | OLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 534 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.8 |
| 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 | 3700mAh Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.32 | 5.68 |
| 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 Google Pixel 4 XL is a bit better than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, having an 82.9 score against 80.1. Google Pixel 4 XL's body is notably lighter and notably thinner than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, even though both of them were released only 5 months apart. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a bit more vivid screen than Google Pixel 4 XL, because although it has a bit smaller display and a bit worse resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels, it also counts with a just a bit higher screen density.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a much greater memory capacity to store more apps and games than Google Pixel 4 XL, and although they both have equal internal memory, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a SD memory slot that holds a maximum of 512 GB. Google Pixel 4 XL counts with a bit better processor than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have 8 CPU cores, the Google Pixel 4 XL also has more RAM memory.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features better battery performance than Google Pixel 4 XL, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity. Google Pixel 4 XL captures greater videos and photos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller aperture, and they both have the same camera sensor size, the Google Pixel 4 XL also counts with a back camera with a higher 12.2 megapixels resolution and a much better video definition.
Google Pixel 4 XL is not only 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.