Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 94.6 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 14 |
| 2020-09-18 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.27 x 5.05 x 0.27 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 9.95 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Mystic black and Mystic bronze | Black and White |
| Aluminum and Glass | -- |
| $ 1930.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 7.6 inches | 8 inches |
| 2208 x 1768 pixels | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Dynamic AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 372 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 865+ SM8250-AB chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 3100 MHz) processor | processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 650 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.81 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 13.3 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.57 inches (1/1.76") sensor | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 10.45 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 6.32 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| 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
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 has an overall score of 94.6, which is much better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro's score of 77.8. Despite being the best we compare here, we must tell that it is also noticeably older, much heavier and way thicker. These devices work with Android OS, but Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 has older 11 version while vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a lot better display than Galaxy Z Fold 2, because it has a quite better resolution of 2200 x 2480px, a just a bit greater number of pixels per inch of screen and a bit larger display. The Galaxy Z Fold 2 counts with a way better processing power than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a smaller amount of RAM memory, they both have a Octa-Core CPU.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro shoots much clearer photos and videos than Galaxy Z Fold 2, because it has a way larger back-facing camera sensor which provides a much better image and video quality, a bigger aperture, a lot higher video quality and a camera in the back with much more mega pixels. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a way bigger memory capacity to install applications and games than Galaxy Z Fold 2, because it has 256 GB more internal storage capacity.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features better battery duration than Galaxy Z Fold 2, because it has a 5700mAh battery size.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 costs a bit more money than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but it's still a great choice, as you can get a lot more features for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.