Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 97.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | Android 9.0 Pie |
| 2020-04-04 | 2019-09-27 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.33 x 4.64 x 0.27 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 9.74 ounces |
| Black | Cosmos black and Space silver |
| Plastic | -- |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 1980.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 7.3 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2152 x 1536 pixels |
| -- | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 362 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 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 | 12 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 640 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.72 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 11.74 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (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 | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 4380mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.32 | 6.24 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0, EDR |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Galaxy Fold has an overall score of 97.6, which is much better than Galaxy XCover FieldPro's 80.1 general score. Both phones we compare here include Android OS, but the Galaxy Fold has the newer 9.0 Pie version while Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo version. Even though the Galaxy Fold and the Galaxy XCover FieldPro were only released 6 months apart, the Galaxy Fold construction is a bit heavier but also notably thinner.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a sharper screen than Galaxy Fold, because although it has a way smaller display, it also counts with a lot better display pixels density and a little higher 1440 x 2560 pixels resolution. Galaxy Fold counts with a much better storage for applications, games, photos and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has no external memory card slot, it also counts with 448 GB more internal storage.
The Galaxy Fold features a bit more powerful CPU than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have a Octa-Core processor, the Galaxy Fold also has more RAM memory. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features just a bit better battery lifetime than Galaxy Fold, because it has a 3 percent bigger battery capacity.
The Galaxy Fold captures much better pictures and videos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have the same resolution camera, the same back-facing camera sensor size and a same size camera aperture, the Galaxy Fold also has a lot higher (4K) video definition.
The Galaxy Fold is way more expensive than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but you can get a much better phone for that extra dollars.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.