Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.6 | 85.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Sony | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11 |
| 2017-10-01 | 2021-08-11 |
| 5.08 x 2.56 x 0.37 inches | 6.54 x 2.84 x 0.27 inches |
| 5.04 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Black, Blue, Pink and Silver | Cream, Lavender and Phantom Black |
| Aluminum | Aluminum and Glass |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 600.00 | $ 1000.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 4.6 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 1280 x 720 pixels (HD) | 2636 x 1080 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 319 pixels per inch | 425 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.6 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 MSM8998 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 SM8350 chipset |
| Kryo 280, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2450 MHz) processor | Kryo 680, 64-bit, 5 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 540 GPU | Adreno 660 GPU |
| 9.36 | 9.63 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 8.88 | 10.1 |
| Camera | |
| 19.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 25.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.43 inches (1/2.3") sensor | -- |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | -- |
| 1920 x 1080 (960 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.34 | 7.92 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 2700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3300mAh Nano SIM Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 4.64 | 5.28 |
| 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, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 has an overall score of 85.6, which is much better than the Xperia XZ1 Compact's global score of 74.6. Although Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 is notably heavier than Xperia XZ1 Compact, it's extremely thinner and also notably newer. The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 has just a bit better looking display than Xperia XZ1 Compact, because it has a way better 1080 x 2636 resolution, a higher screen pixels density and a way larger display.
The Galaxy Z Flip 3 has a greater memory capacity to install games and applications than Xperia XZ1 Compact, because although it has no SD memory card expansion slot, it also counts with 128 GB internal memory capacity. The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 features a bit better processing power than Xperia XZ1 Compact, and although they both have 8 processing cores, the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 also has more RAM memory.
Galaxy Z Flip 3 has better battery lifetime than Xperia XZ1 Compact, because it has 3300mAh of battery capacity. The Xperia XZ1 Compact captures way better pictures and videos than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3, because although it has a tinier camera aperture which is worse for low-light images and videos, it also counts with a much higher resolution back facing camera.
Galaxy Z Flip 3 costs a lot more money than Xperia XZ1 Compact, but it's still a great deal, as you can get a lot more for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.