Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 78.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| Android 14 | Android 11, 10, 9.0 Pie |
| 2024-04-03 | 2019-05-07 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 5.96 x 2.76 x 0.32 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 5.19 ounces |
| Black and White | Black, Purple and White |
| -- | Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 186.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 5.6 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 2220 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | OLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 441 pixels per inch |
| 4500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.5 | 8.2 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 SDM670 chipset |
| processor | Kryo 360, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 615 GPU |
| 6.3 | 9.09 |
| Storage | |
| 512 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 17.6 | 7.7 |
| 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 | 28.00mm focal length |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") 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 |
| 10.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3000mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 7.36 | 4.96 |
| 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 3a is a little bit better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, with a 78.8 score against 77.8. Google Pixel 3a's body is noticeably lighter than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it is extremely thicker and was released 5 years before. Both devices in this review come with Android OS (Operating System), but Google Pixel 3a has the previous 11 version and vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a much more vibrant display than Google Pixel 3a, because although it has a just a little lower display pixel density, it also counts with a much better resolution of 2200 x 2480 pixels and a way larger screen. The Google Pixel 3a counts with a way better performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has 12 GB less RAM memory, they both have 8 cpu cores.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a much bigger storage for games and applications than Google Pixel 3a, because it has 512 GB internal storage capacity. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a very superior battery duration than Google Pixel 3a, because it has a 5700mAh battery capacity. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a lot better camera than Google Pixel 3a, because it has a way better video quality, a much bigger back-facing camera sensor taking way higher quality pictures, a bigger aperture to capture better images and video in low-light environments and a back camera with a much better 50 megapixels resolution.
Google Pixel 3a not only is the best phones in our current comparison, but it's also very cheap compared to the other ones, which makes it a no doubt choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.