Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 82.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| Android 14 | Android 11, 10 |
| 2024-04-03 | 2020-08-20 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 5.67 x 2.73 x 0.32 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 5.04 ounces |
| Black and White | Just black |
| -- | Plastic and Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 349.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 5.8 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | OLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 444 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 730G SM7150-AA chipset |
| processor | Kryo 470, 64-bit, 8 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 618 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/1.70 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | 27.00mm 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, Dual SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3140mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 7.36 | 5.12 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.3 | Bluetooth 5.1 |
| 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 4a is a little bit better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, getting a overall score of 82.9 against 77.8. Although the Google Pixel 4a is notably older and notably thicker than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, it's body is still a lot lighter. These phones work with Android operating system, but Google Pixel 4a has an older 11 version while vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14 version.
Google Pixel 4a features a very superior processing power than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a lower amount of RAM, they both have the same number of cores. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a much better screen than Google Pixel 4a, because although it has a just a little worse pixel density, it also counts with a way bigger display and a lot higher 2200 x 2480 resolution.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro shoots way better videos and photos than Google Pixel 4a, and although they both have the same aperture, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a lot larger camera sensor taking more light and vivid colors, a camera in the back with a lot higher resolution and a much better 7680x4320 video resolution.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a superior memory capacity to install applications and games than Google Pixel 4a, because it has more internal storage capacity. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a superior battery performance than Google Pixel 4a, because it has a 5700mAh battery size.
Even being the best phone in our comparison, the Google Pixel 4a is also a bargain compared to the other devices.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.