Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 83.7 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | LG |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | Android 10, 9.0 Pie |
| 2020-04-04 | 2019-05-10 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.27 x 3.00 x 0.33 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Black | Aurora black |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 6) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 243.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.4 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 3120 x 1440 pixels |
| -- | 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 855 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 | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 17.06 |
| 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 | 4000mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.32 | 5.92 |
| 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 |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
LG V50 ThinQ is a bit better than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, with an 83.7 score against 80.1. The LG V50 ThinQ is an older device than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but LG managed to make it incredibly thinner and notably lighter anyway. Both of these devices include Android operating system, but LG V50 ThinQ has an older 10 version and Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo version.
The LG V50 ThinQ features a bit better CPU than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have 8 cpu cores, the LG V50 ThinQ also has a greater amount of RAM. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a little more vivid display than LG V50 ThinQ, because although it has a little worse resolution of 1440 x 2560px and a much smaller screen, it also counts with a bit greater pixels density.
LG V50 ThinQ shoots a lot better videos and photos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier back-facing camera sensor capturing less light and washed colors, and they both have a 12 megapixels resolution back-facing camera and a same size aperture, the LG V50 ThinQ also counts with a lot higher video resolution.
The LG V50 ThinQ has a much greater memory capacity to store more games and applications than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has 128 GB internal storage and a slot for external memory cards that allows a maximum of 1,95 TB. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit longer battery lifetime than LG V50 ThinQ, because it has a 4500mAh battery capacity instead of 4000mAh.
The LG V50 ThinQ not only is the best phones of the ones we are comparing, but it's also very cheap compared to the other phones.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.