Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 77.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | HTC |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2017-05-18 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.06 x 2.99 x 0.31 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 5.96 ounces |
| Black | Black, Blue, Silver and White |
| Plastic | Glass and Metal |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 275.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| -- | S-LCD 5 |
| 576 pixels per inch | 534 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.7 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 MSM8998 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 280, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2450 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 540 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.36 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 10.02 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 16.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm 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 |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (120 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 9.9 |
| 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 | 3000mAh Li - Ion 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, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro is just a bit better than HTC U11, getting an 80.1 score against 77.6. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a notably newer phone than HTC U11, although it's notably heavier and a lot thicker. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little more vivid screen than HTC U11, because although it has a little smaller display, and they both have the same resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also counts with a little bit better pixels density.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a better storage capacity for apps and games than HTC U11, and although they both have equal internal storage, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has an external memory slot that allows up to 512 GB. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little bit better processing power than HTC U11. Both have a 4 GB RAM and 8 processing cores.
HTC U11 has a greater camera than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller diafragm aperture, and they both have a same size camera sensor and a 12 megapixels back-facing camera, the HTC U11 also counts with a much higher 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution. Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a superior battery life than HTC U11, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity against 3000mAh.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more money than HTC U11, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as HTC U11. So if you want that extra features, you can buy Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but if you don't you can save some dollars and get the HTC U11, letting go a couple specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.