Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 81 | 83.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 11, 10 | -- |
| 2020-01-31 | 2018-03-16 |
| 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches | 5.81 x 2.70 x 0.33 inches |
| 7.76 ounces | 5.75 ounces |
| Black | Burgundy red, Coral blue, Ice blue, Lilac purple, Midnight black, Sunrise gold and Titanium gray |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 421.00 | $ 158.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.3 inches | 5.8 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2960 x 1440 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 409 pixels per inch | 568 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor | Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2800 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP3 GPU | Adreno 630 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.54 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 400 GB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 11.34 |
| Camera | |
| 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.25 inches (1/4") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.79 | 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, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4050mAh Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Galaxy S9 is slightly better than the Galaxy XCover Pro, having a global score of 83.3 against 81. Galaxy S9's body is thinner and much lighter than Galaxy XCover Pro, even though it was released around a year before. The Galaxy S9 has just a bit better hardware performance than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro. They have a Octa-Core CPU and the same RAM amount.
Galaxy S9 counts with a bit sharper display than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a quite smaller screen, it also counts with more pixels per screen inch and a higher 1440 x 2960 resolution. The Galaxy XCover Pro counts with just a bit more storage for games and applications than Samsung Galaxy S9, and although they both have equal 64 GB internal memory capacity, the Galaxy XCover Pro also has a slot for an SD memory card that admits up to 512 GB.
Galaxy S9 shoots clearer photos and videos than Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a back camera with much less mega pixels, it also counts with a much higher (4K) video quality, a lot larger sensor taking much higher quality videos and photographs and a bigger aperture. The Galaxy XCover Pro counts with a superior battery life than Galaxy S9, because it has 4050mAh of battery capacity against 3000mAh.
Even being the best phone of the ones we compare here, Samsung Galaxy S9 is also very cheap compared to the other ones, making it an easy decision.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.