Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 77 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | LG |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2016-09-29 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.29 x 3.07 x 0.30 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 6.14 ounces |
| Black | 16 777 216 |
| Plastic | Aluminum |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 115.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| -- | IPS LCD |
| 576 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.5 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo, 64-bit, 14 nm (Quad-Core 2150 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 530 GPU |
| 9.45 | 8.91 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 14.66 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 29.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (120 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 9.9 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | -- |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.1 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 3200mAh Battery |
| Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 5.2 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a bit better than LG V20, with an 80.1 score against 77. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a much newer cellphone than LG V20, although it's a lot thicker and extremely heavier. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a slightly better display than LG V20, because although it has a little smaller screen, and they both have exactly the same resolution of 1440 x 2560, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also counts with a just a little more pixels per inch in the display.
LG V20 features a lot bigger storage capacity for apps and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have exactly the same internal storage, the LG V20 also has a SD extension slot that allows up to 1,95 TB. Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a little better performance than LG V20, and although they both have 4 GB of RAM memory, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a larger number of cores (and also faster).
The LG V20 counts with a much better camera than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier aperture which is not good for low light photography and videos and a tinier sensor capturing worse quality videos and images, it also counts with a lot higher (4K) video definition and a way more mega-pixels back facing camera.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a very superior battery duration than LG V20, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity against 3200mAh.
Although Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more than LG V20, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as the LG V20. If you are trying to save some dollars, you can get LG V20, and give up some specs and features, but you will get the most with your money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.