Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 88.5 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | Android 12, 11, 10 |
| 2020-04-04 | 2020-02-14 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.59 x 2.90 x 0.28 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Black | Mirror black and Mirror purple |
| Plastic | Aluminum |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 1380.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2636 x 1080 pixels |
| -- | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 425 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ SM8150-AC (7 nm) chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2960 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 640 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.72 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 11.74 | 13.3 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 27.00mm 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 | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.32 | 5.28 |
| 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, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip has a score of 88.5, which is much better than Galaxy XCover FieldPro's global score of 80.1. Even though Samsung Galaxy Z Flip and Galaxy XCover FieldPro were only released with a couple months difference, Samsung Galaxy Z Flip is much thinner and lighter. These phones come with Android OS (Operating System), but the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip has an older 12 version while Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little bit better looking screen than Galaxy Z Flip, because although it has a lot smaller display, it also counts with more pixels per inch in the display and a slightly higher 1440 x 2560 resolution. The Galaxy Z Flip has a bit better CPU than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have 8 cpu cores, the Galaxy Z Flip also has a larger amount of RAM.
Galaxy Z Flip has a better memory to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has no slot for external memory cards, it also counts with 256 GB internal memory capacity. The Galaxy Z Flip captures much better videos and photos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier aperture which is worse for shooting images and videos in low light situations, and they both have a 0.39 inches sensor and a same resolution back facing camera, the Galaxy Z Flip also counts with a lot higher 3840x2160 video definition.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro has better battery life than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip, because it has a 4500mAh battery size.
The Galaxy Z Flip costs more money than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but it's still a good choice, because you can get a lot more features for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.