Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 85.6 | 87.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | LG |
| Android 11 | -- |
| 2021-08-11 | 2020-05-15 |
| 6.54 x 2.84 x 0.27 inches | 6.58 x 2.91 x 0.31 inches |
| 6.46 ounces | 6.35 ounces |
| Cream, Lavender and Phantom Black | Aurora gray, Aurora green, Aurora silver, Aurora white and Illusion sunset |
| Aluminum and Glass | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1000.00 | $ 264.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 6.8 inches |
| 2636 x 1080 pixels | 2460 x 1080 pixels |
| Dynamic AMOLED | P-OLED |
| 425 pixels per inch | 395 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.3 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 SM8350 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset |
| Kryo 680, 64-bit, 5 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Adreno 660 GPU | Adreno 620 GPU |
| 9.63 | 9.36 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 10.1 | 17.06 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 48.00 MP + 16.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 7.92 | 11.44 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 10.6 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3300mAh Nano SIM Battery | 4300mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 5.28 | 6.16 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.1 | 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 |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The LG Velvet has a general score of 87.1, which is a little bit better than the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3's 85.6 score. The LG Velvet body is a little bit lighter than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3, but it is somewhat thicker and was released just a bit more than a year before. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 has a little bit better processing power than LG Velvet, and although they both have 8 processing cores, the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 also has a larger amount of RAM memory.
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 counts with a bit sharper display than LG Velvet, because although it has a little bit smaller display, it also counts with a slightly better 1080 x 2636 resolution and a just a little greater pixel quantity per inch in the display. The LG Velvet takes much better photos and videos than Galaxy Z Flip 3, and although they both have a same size aperture, the LG Velvet also has a camera with a way better resolution.
LG Velvet features a very superior storage capacity to install games and applications than Galaxy Z Flip 3, and although they both have exactly the same internal storage capacity, the LG Velvet also has a slot for external memory cards that holds up to 1,95 TB. LG Velvet features greater battery performance than Galaxy Z Flip 3, because it has 4300mAh of battery capacity.
LG Velvet not only is the best phones between the ones we are comparing, but it's also very cheap compared to the other phones, which makes it an obvious call.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.