Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 81.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| Android 14 | -- |
| 2024-04-03 | 2017-10-19 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 5.74 x 2.74 x 0.31 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 5.04 ounces |
| Black and White | Black, Blue and White |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 129.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 5 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) |
| AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 441 pixels per inch |
| 4500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.5 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 MSM8998 chipset |
| processor | Kryo 280, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2350 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 540 GPU |
| 6.3 | 9.27 |
| 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 | 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | 27.00mm focal length |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") 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 | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 12.87 | 9.79 |
| 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 | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 2700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 7.36 | 4.64 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.3 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| 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
Google Pixel 2 has a global score of 81.6, which is just a bit better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro's general score of 77.8. Google Pixel 2's body is extremely lighter than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it is thicker and was released many years before. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a lot better display than Google Pixel 2, because although it has a little inferior number of pixels per inch of display, it also counts with a much larger screen and a lot better resolution of 2200 x 2480 pixels.
Google Pixel 2 features a lot better hardware performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have 8 cpu cores. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a very superior storage for apps and games than Google Pixel 2, because it has 512 GB internal storage capacity. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro takes much clearer photographs and videos than Google Pixel 2, because it has a lot more megapixels back camera, a way larger sensor capturing much better quality photos and videos, a larger aperture to capture better photography in low light environments and a way better 7680x4320 video quality.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a way better battery duration than Google Pixel 2, because it has a 5700mAh battery capacity.
The Google Pixel 2 not only is the best phones in our comparison, but it's also very cheap compared to the other phones.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.