Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 90.6 | 88.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Apple |
| Android 11 | -- |
| 2021-08-11 | 2017-11-03 |
| 6.23 x 5.04 x 0.25 inches | 5.65 x 2.79 x 0.30 inches |
| 9.56 ounces | 6.14 ounces |
| Phantom Black, Phantom Green and Phantom Silver | Silver and Space gray |
| Aluminum and Glass | Glass and Stainless steel |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 1149.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 7.6 inches | 5.8 inches |
| 2208 x 1768 pixels | 2436 x 1125 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | OLED |
| 372 pixels per inch | 463 pixels per inch |
| -- | 625 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 SM8350 chipset | Apple A11 Bionic APL1W72 (10 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 680 Prime, 64-bit, 5 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | 64-bit Monsoon and Mistral, 64-bit (Hexa-Core 2390 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 3 GB RAM |
| Adreno 660 GPU | Apple 3-core GPU GPU |
| 9.72 | 10.17 |
| 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 + 4.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 7.00 MP |
| f/2.20 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 28.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.33 inches (1/3") sensor |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 7.7 | 10.12 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4400mAh Battery | 2716mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | Wireless Charging |
| 6.24 | 4.72 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.2 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Galaxy Z Fold 3 is a little bit better than iPhone X, having a 90.6 score against 88.1. The Galaxy Z Fold 3 design is a lot newer and somewhat thinner than the iPhone X's, but it's noticeably heavier. The Apple iPhone X features a brighter screen than Galaxy Z Fold 3, because although it has a bit lower resolution of 1125 x 2436 pixels and a really smaller display, it also counts with a just a bit more pixels per inch of screen.
Apple iPhone X counts with as much storage to install applications and games or saving photos and videos as the Galaxy Z Fold 3 one, both have equal 256 GB internal memory capacity. Apple iPhone X counts with just a little better hardware performance than Galaxy Z Fold 3, because although it has a lower number of cores and they are also slower and 9 GB lesser RAM memory, it also counts with a 64-bits CPU.
Galaxy Z Fold 3 counts with a much longer battery lifetime than iPhone X, because it has a 4400mAh battery size instead of 2716mAh. IPhone X captures much better videos and photos than Galaxy Z Fold 3, and although they both have a same resolution back facing camera, the iPhone X also has a larger camera aperture to capture better captures in poorly lited situations.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.