Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 75.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2018-05-22 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 5.90 x 2.79 x 0.30 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 5.71 ounces |
| Black | Black, Blue, Gold and Lavender |
| Plastic | Metal |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 109.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 5.6 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 1480 x 720 pixels |
| -- | Super AMOLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 294 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 7.3 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7884 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 1600 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 3 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Mali-T830 MP1 GPU |
| 9.45 | 8.73 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 32 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 400 GB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 9.44 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 16.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm 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 |
| 8.14 | 9.46 |
| 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 | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 4.96 |
| 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 Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is slightly better than the Samsung Galaxy A6, getting a general score of 80.1 against 75.8. Even though the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is newer than Samsung Galaxy A6, it's heavier and much thicker. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a bit better hardware performance than Galaxy A6, and although they both have 8 processing cores, the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a greater amount of RAM memory.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a much more vibrant screen than Galaxy A6, because although it has a little bit smaller display, it also counts with a way higher pixels count per inch in the screen and a much better resolution of 1440 x 2560px. Galaxy A6 captures much better pictures and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier aperture which is not favorable for shooting photos or videos in low light situations and a smaller sensor which offers a worse image and video quality, and they both have the same video frame rate and the same 1920x1080 video resolution, the Galaxy A6 also counts with a back facing camera with a way better 16 MP resolution.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a much greater storage for applications and games than Galaxy A6, because it has more internal storage capacity and an external SD slot that holds a maximum of 512 GB. Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a much better battery life than Galaxy A6, because it has a 50% larger battery capacity.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more than the Galaxy A6, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as Galaxy A6. If you want to save a few dollars, you can get the Galaxy A6, and give up a couple features, but you'll get the most with your savings.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.