Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 83.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2019-03-15 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.24 x 2.93 x 0.30 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 5.86 ounces |
| Black | Black, Blue, Coral and White |
| Plastic | Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 202.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.4 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| -- | Super AMOLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 403 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 9610 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 14.14 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 25.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 27.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 10.12 |
| 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 | 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 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
The Galaxy A50 is slightly better than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, with a global score of 83.8 against 80.1. Galaxy A50's design is extremely thinner and much lighter than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, although it was released about a year before. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little bit better processing power than Samsung Galaxy A50. They have a 4 GB RAM memory and the same number of cores.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit more vivid display than Galaxy A50, because although it has a really smaller screen, it also counts with a greater screen density and a higher 1440 x 2560 pixels resolution. The Galaxy A50 counts with a greater camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller back camera sensor which provides a worse image and video quality and a smaller diafragm aperture which is not so good for shooting photos and video in low-light situations, and they both have the same video frame rates and the same video definition, the Galaxy A50 also counts with a much higher 25 MP resolution back facing camera.
Samsung Galaxy A50 counts with a much bigger memory capacity to install games and applications than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have an external memory card slot that holds a maximum of 512 GB, the Samsung Galaxy A50 also has 64 GB more internal storage. Galaxy XCover FieldPro has just a bit better battery lifetime than Samsung Galaxy A50, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity.
Samsung Galaxy A50 not only is the best devices in our comparison, but it's also very cheap compared to the other devices.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.