Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 85.6 | 76.2 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 11 | Android 10 |
| 2021-08-11 | 2020-09-02 |
| 6.54 x 2.84 x 0.27 inches | 6.64 x 3.07 x 0.38 inches |
| 6.46 ounces | 7.76 ounces |
| Cream, Lavender and Phantom Black | Sonic silver |
| Aluminum and Glass | Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass) and Metal |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1000.00 | $ 579.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2636 x 1080 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| Dynamic AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 425 pixels per inch | 385 pixels per inch |
| -- | 600 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.3 | 8.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 SM8350 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 SM8250 chipset |
| Kryo 680, 64-bit, 5 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 660 GPU | Adreno 650 GPU |
| 9.63 | 9.63 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 10.1 | 10.1 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 64.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.59 inches (1/1.7") sensor |
| -- | 7680 x 4320 (15 fps) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 7.92 | 12.32 |
| 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 | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.28 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.1 | Bluetooth 5.1 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| 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 Z Flip 3 has an overall score of 85.6, which is better than nubia Red Magic 5S's general score of 76.2. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3's design is newer, a lot thinner and lighter than nubia Red Magic 5S. Both phones in this comparison use Android OS, but the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 has a newer 11 version while nubia Red Magic 5S has Android 10, so it provides the user some extra features.
The nubia Red Magic 5S's CPU is very similar to the processor in Galaxy Z Flip 3, both of them have 8 cores and the same RAM amount. The nubia Red Magic 5S features a bit sharper display than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3, although it has a quite lower display density and a quite lower 1080 x 2340 resolution, they both have a display with the same size.
Nubia Red Magic 5S's storage capacity for applications, games, photos and videos is just as good as Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3's one, both of them have equal 128 GB internal storage. The nubia Red Magic 5S captures way better pictures and videos than Galaxy Z Flip 3, and although they both have a F1.8 aperture, the nubia Red Magic 5S also has a camera with a much higher resolution.
Nubia Red Magic 5S counts with improved battery life than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3, because it has a 36% greater battery capacity.
The Galaxy Z Flip 3 is a lot more expensive than the nubia Red Magic 5S, but you can get a better phone for that few extra dollars.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.