Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 94.6 | 78.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Vivo |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 11 |
| 2020-09-18 | 2021-04-02 |
| 6.27 x 5.05 x 0.27 inches | 6.24 x 2.88 x 0.30 inches |
| 9.95 ounces | 6.31 ounces |
| Mystic black and Mystic bronze | Midnight Black and Shimmer Blue |
| Aluminum and Glass | Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 6) and Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1930.00 | -- |
| Display / Screen | |
| 7.6 inches | 6.6 inches |
| 2208 x 1768 pixels | 2376 x 1080 pixels |
| Dynamic AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 372 pixels per inch | 395 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.2 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 865+ SM8250-AB chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 SM8250-AC (7 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 3100 MHz) processor | Kryo 585, 64-bit (Octa-Core 3200 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 12 GB RAM |
| Adreno 650 GPU | Adreno 650 GPU |
| 9.81 | 9.9 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 13.3 | 13.3 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.57 inches (1/1.76") sensor | 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.45 | 11.77 |
| 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, Dual SIM |
| 10.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 4200mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 6.32 | 6.08 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | 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
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 has an overall score of 94.6, which is much better than vivo X60 Pro's general score of 78.8. Both devices in our current comparison work with the same Android 11 OS, so you shouldn't perceive any differences regarding that. The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 construction is extremely heavier but just a little bit thinner than vivo X60 Pro, and both were released only a couple months apart.
Vivo X60 Pro has a bit better looking screen than Galaxy Z Fold 2, because although it has a quite lower resolution of 1080 x 2376 pixels and a bit smaller display, it also counts with a little better pixel density. Vivo X60 Pro features a bit better processing unit than Galaxy Z Fold 2. Both have the same RAM memory amount and the same number of cores.
Vivo X60 Pro features as much storage capacity for applications, games, photos and videos as Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2, both have equal 256 GB internal storage. Vivo X60 Pro counts with a better camera than Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2, because although it has a smaller back camera sensor which provides a lower image and video quality, and they both have the same video frame rate, the same aperture and the same 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution, the vivo X60 Pro also counts with a way more mega-pixels back-facing camera.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 has just a little better battery life than vivo X60 Pro, because it has a 4500mAh battery size against 4200mAh.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.