Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 81.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | |
| Android 14 | -- |
| 2024-04-03 | 2016-10-20 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 6.09 x 2.98 x 0.34 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 5.93 ounces |
| Black and White | Black, Blue and Gray |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 869.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 534 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 821 MSM8996 Pro chipset |
| processor | Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2150 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 530 GPU |
| 6.3 | 8.91 |
| 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 | 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 | 3450mAh Li - Ion 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 Pixel XL is a bit better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, having a score of 81.3 against 77.8. Google Pixel XL is an extremely older and a lot thicker cellphone than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but Google managed to build it lighter anyway. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a lot better looking screen than Google Pixel XL, because although it has a just a bit lower display density, it also counts with a better resolution of 2200 x 2480px and a lot larger screen.
Google Pixel XL has a much better performing processing unit than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has 12 GB lesser RAM memory and an inferior number of cores. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro captures way better photos and videos than Google Pixel XL, because it has a way better video definition, a larger diafragm aperture, a way bigger camera sensor capturing more light and vivid colors and a back facing camera with a much better 50 mega pixels resolution.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a way bigger storage for applications and games than Google Pixel XL, because it has 384 GB more internal storage capacity. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a very superior battery life than Google Pixel XL, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity.
Despite of being the best phone in our current comparison, the Google Pixel XL is also a lot cheaper, which makes buying this phone an easy decision.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.