Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 77.5 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Xiaomi |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2017-06-01 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.85 x 3.49 x 0.30 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 7.44 ounces |
| Black | Black and Gold |
| Plastic | Metal |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 295.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.4 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) |
| -- | IPS LCD |
| 576 pixels per inch | 344 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 7.7 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 625 8953 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 2000 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 506 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.09 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 12.42 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/2.20 aperture |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.34 inches (1/2.9") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (120 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 9.57 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE (4G) and HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Micro SIM |
| 6.7 | 6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 5300mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 7.04 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | -- |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a little bit better than the Xiaomi Mi Max 2, with an 80.1 score against 77.5. Even though the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is way newer than Xiaomi Mi Max 2, it is somewhat heavier and thicker. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with just a little better processing power than Xiaomi Mi Max 2. Both of them have the same number of cores and 4 GB of RAM memory.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a much better display than Xiaomi Mi Max 2, because although it has a way smaller screen, it also counts with a much greater display density and a better resolution of 1440 x 2560. Xiaomi Mi Max 2 takes much clearer photographs and videos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a lot tinier diafragm aperture which is not favorable for low-light photography and a smaller sensor capturing worse quality videos and photographs, and they both have a 12 megapixels resolution back-facing camera, the Xiaomi Mi Max 2 also counts with a lot better (4K) video quality.
Xiaomi Mi Max 2 has a little bit better memory capacity for apps and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a slot for an SD memory card that allows a maximum of 128 GB against 512 GB, it also counts with 64 GB more internal storage capacity. The Xiaomi Mi Max 2 counts with superior battery life than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has a 5300mAh battery capacity instead of 4500mAh.
Although Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more money than Xiaomi Mi Max 2, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as the Xiaomi Mi Max 2. So if you want that extra specs and features, you can buy the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, otherwise you can save some dollars and buy the Xiaomi Mi Max 2, resigning a couple specs and features.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.