Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 79.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | LG |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2017-09-21 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 5.97 x 2.97 x 0.29 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 5.57 ounces |
| Black | Black, Blue, Purple and Silver |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 307.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2880 x 1440 pixels |
| -- | P-OLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 537 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 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/1.60 aperture |
| -- | 30.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.32 inches (1/3.09") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 10.01 |
| 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 | 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.32 | 5.28 |
| 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
Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a little bit better than LG V30, having a overall score of 80.1 against 79.1. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a much newer phone than LG V30, but it is incredibly heavier and a lot thicker. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit superior CPU than LG V30. Both have 8 cores and 4 GB of RAM.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a bit more vivid display than LG V30, because although it has a bit worse resolution of 1440 x 2560px and a little bit smaller screen, it also counts with a little bit more pixels per inch in the display. The LG V30 shoots much better photos and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier aperture which is not favorable for low-light photos and videos and a tinier camera sensor offering a worse image quality, it also counts with a lot higher 3840x2160 video definition and a camera in the back with way more mega pixels.
LG V30 features a way bigger memory capacity to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have the same internal storage capacity, the LG V30 also has an external memory card slot that allows a maximum of 1,95 TB. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features improved battery performance than LG V30, because it has a 36 percent bigger battery size.
Although Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it is a lot more expensive than LG V30, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as the LG V30. If you want to save a few dollars, you can get the LG V30, letting go a few specs and features, but you will get the most out of your money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.