Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 81.2 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | LG |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | Android 10 |
| 2020-04-04 | 2018-10-18 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.25 x 2.98 x 0.30 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 5.96 ounces |
| Black | Aurora black and Moroccan blue |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 204.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.4 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 3120 x 1440 pixels |
| -- | P-OLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 537 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.8 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2800 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 630 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.63 |
| 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 | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| -- | 27.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 10.23 |
| 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
The LG V40 ThinQ is just a bit better than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, having a general score of 81.2 against 80.1. Both phones we compare here use Android OS, but LG V40 ThinQ has the older 10 version and Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo version. Despite of the fact that the LG V40 ThinQ is older than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, it's body is way lighter and extremely thinner.
The LG V40 ThinQ features a bit more powerful CPU than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have the same number of cores, the LG V40 ThinQ also has a larger amount of RAM memory. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a little more vivid display than LG V40 ThinQ, because although it has a lot smaller display and a bit lower resolution of 1440 x 2560px, it also counts with a quite higher display density.
LG V40 ThinQ has a way better camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller sensor capturing lower quality images, and they both have the same resolution back camera and a F1.5 camera aperture, the LG V40 ThinQ also counts with a way better (4K) video definition. The LG V40 ThinQ features a much better storage for applications, games, photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have the same internal storage capacity, the LG V40 ThinQ also has a SD memory card expansion slot that allows up to 1,95 TB.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features longer battery life than LG V40 ThinQ, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity against 3300mAh.
LG V40 ThinQ is not only the best devices between the ones we are comparing here, but it's also very cheap compared to the other devices.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.