Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 76.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | Android 10, 9.0 Pie |
| 2020-04-04 | 2019-04-26 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.47 x 3.02 x 0.31 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Black | Black, Blue, Pink and White |
| Plastic | Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 299.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| -- | Super AMOLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 393 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 SM6150 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 460, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 612 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.18 |
| 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 | 32.00 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 | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 3.52 |
| 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 HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 6.32 |
| 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
Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a score of 80.1, which is a little bit better than Galaxy A70's global score of 76.9. These phones work with Android OS, but the Galaxy XCover FieldPro has the newer 8.0 Oreo version and Galaxy A70 has Android 10 version, so it gives lots of additional features. Even though Galaxy XCover FieldPro is newer than the Galaxy A70, it is noticeably heavier and much thicker.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a sharper display than Galaxy A70, because although it has a way smaller screen, it also counts with a higher 1440 x 2560 pixels resolution and a greater pixels amount in each inch in the display. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little faster processing unit than Galaxy A70, although it has less RAM, they both have 8 cpu cores.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro shoots greater photos and videos than Galaxy A70, and although they both have the same video frame rates and the same video resolution, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a larger aperture and a bigger camera sensor providing a better image quality. Samsung Galaxy A70 has a much better storage for games and applications than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have a SD card slot that admits up to 512 GB, the Samsung Galaxy A70 also has 128 GB internal memory capacity.
The Galaxy A70 and Galaxy XCover FieldPro both have really similar battery performance.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more money than Samsung Galaxy A70, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as Samsung Galaxy A70. So if you want that extra specs, you can buy Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, otherwise you can save some dollars and buy the Samsung Galaxy A70, giving up a couple specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.