Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 88.5 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 12, 11, 10 | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2020-02-14 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.59 x 2.90 x 0.28 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 6.46 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Mirror black and Mirror purple | Black |
| Aluminum | Plastic |
| $ 1380.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2636 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Dynamic AMOLED | -- |
| 425 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.3 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ SM8150-AC (7 nm) chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2960 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 640 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.72 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 13.3 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.23 | 8.14 |
| 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 | |
| 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.28 | 6.32 |
| 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
Galaxy Z Flip has a global score of 88.5, which is better than Galaxy XCover FieldPro's general score of 80.1. Galaxy Z Flip is a notably thinner and notably lighter phone than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, even though both were released with only 2 months difference. Both of these phones come with Android OS (operating system), but the Galaxy Z Flip has the previous 12 version while Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit sharper screen than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip, because although it has a lot smaller display, it also counts with a higher pixel density and a slightly better 1440 x 2560 resolution. The Galaxy Z Flip features a bit superior processing unit than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have the same number of cores, the Galaxy Z Flip also has a greater amount of RAM memory.
Galaxy Z Flip has a greater storage capacity to install applications and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has no external SD slot, it also counts with 256 GB internal storage capacity. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with longer battery performance than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip, because it has a 36 percent larger battery size.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip captures much better photos and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller diafragm aperture which is worse for taking photographs or video in low light environments, and they both have a 12 megapixels back camera and a same size sensor, the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip also counts with a way better 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip is more expensive than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but it's still a convenient choice, because you can get a lot more features for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.