Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 85.2 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2018-11-15 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.40 x 3.03 x 0.31 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Black | Bubblegum pink, Caviar black and Lemonade blue |
| Plastic | Glass and Metal |
| $ 1105.00 | -- |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.3 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2220 x 1080 pixels |
| -- | Super AMOLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 392 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 SDM660 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 260, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 512 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 | 24.00 MP + 24.00 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 |
| 8.14 | 10.45 |
| 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 | 3800mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 5.76 |
| 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 A9 (2018) is a little bit better than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, with a overall score of 85.2 against 80.1. The Galaxy A9 (2018) construction is a lot lighter and extremely thinner than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, despite of the fact that it was released just a bit more than a year before. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a bit better performance than Galaxy A9 (2018), although it has a lower amount of RAM memory, they both have the same number of cores.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a sharper display than Galaxy A9 (2018), because although it has a quite smaller screen, it also counts with a greater pixels density and a better 1440 x 2560 resolution. The Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) has a much greater storage capacity to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have an external memory card slot that admits a maximum of 512 GB, the Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) also has 128 GB internal memory capacity.
The Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) shoots greater videos and photos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier back camera sensor and a smaller camera aperture which is not recommended for low light captures and video, it also counts with a much higher 3840x2160 (4K) video definition and a much more mega-pixels back facing camera.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little better battery life than Galaxy A9 (2018), because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.