Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 80.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| Android 14 | -- |
| 2024-04-03 | 2015-11-02 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 6.27 x 3.06 x 0.29 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 6.28 ounces |
| Black and White | Black, Gold, Silver and White |
| -- | Aluminum |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 649.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| 4500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.5 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 MSM8994 chipset |
| processor | ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 3 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 430 GPU |
| 6.3 | 9.09 |
| Storage | |
| 512 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 17.6 | 10.1 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 12.30 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/2.00 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | 0.43 inches (1/2.3") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 12.87 | 9.9 |
| 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) and HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.1 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3450mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 7.36 | 5.44 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.3 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| 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
The Google Nexus 6P is slightly better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, having an 80.3 score against 77.8. The Google Nexus 6P is a noticeably older and noticeably thicker cellphone than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but Google managed to make it lighter anyway. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a much better looking screen than Google Nexus 6P, because although it has a little worse display pixels density, it also counts with a better 2200 x 2480px resolution and a way bigger display.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a superior storage capacity to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Google Nexus 6P, because it has 512 GB internal memory. Google Nexus 6P has a really superior processing power than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has 13 GB lesser RAM, they both have a Octa-Core processing unit.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro shoots much clearer pictures and videos than Google Nexus 6P, because it has a back facing camera with lot more mega pixels, a larger aperture, a lot better video quality and a much bigger sensor which gives a much better photo and video quality. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a very superior battery performance than Google Nexus 6P, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity.
Despite of being the best phone of the ones we are comparing here, the Google Nexus 6P is also a bargain compared to the other devices, making buying this phone an easy decision.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.