Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 89 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| Android 14 | -- |
| 2024-04-03 | 2020-10-15 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 5.70 x 2.77 x 0.31 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 5.33 ounces |
| Black and White | Just black and Sorta sage |
| -- | Aluminum and Aluminum |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 548.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 6 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | OLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 430 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 765G SM7250-AB chipset |
| processor | Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 620 GPU |
| 6.3 | 9.45 |
| 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 | 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 (60 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 | 10.23 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 10.6 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4080mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 7.36 | 6 |
| 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 5 has a global score of 89, which is much better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro's 77.8 overall score. Google Pixel 5's design is noticeably lighter than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but it's notably thicker and was released many years before. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a much more vibrant display than Google Pixel 5, because although it has a quite lower count of pixels per screen inch, it also counts with a way larger display and a much higher resolution of 2200 x 2480 pixels.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a way bigger memory capacity to install games and applications than Google Pixel 5, because it has 384 GB more internal memory capacity. Google Pixel 5 features a much powerful processor than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has lesser RAM memory, they both have a Octa-Core CPU.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a much better camera than Google Pixel 5, and although they both have the same aperture, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a lot higher 7680x4320 video quality, a way bigger back camera sensor shooting much higher quality photographs and a lot more mega-pixels back-facing camera.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much longer battery duration than Google Pixel 5, because it has a 5700mAh battery capacity against 4080mAh.
In addition to being the best phone in our comparison, the Google Pixel 5 is also very cheap compared to the other devices.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.