Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 75.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 14 | -- |
| 2024-04-03 | 2018-05-22 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 5.90 x 2.79 x 0.30 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 5.71 ounces |
| Black and White | Black, Blue, Gold and Lavender |
| -- | Metal |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 109.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 5.6 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 1480 x 720 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 294 pixels per inch |
| 4500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.5 | 7.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset | Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7884 chipset |
| processor | ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 1600 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 3 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Mali-T830 MP1 GPU |
| 6.3 | 8.73 |
| Storage | |
| 512 GB internal memory | 32 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 400 GB) external memory slot |
| 17.6 | 9.44 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 16.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video | -- |
| 12.87 | 9.46 |
| 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 Li - Ion 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, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro is just a bit better than the Samsung Galaxy A6, getting a overall score of 77.8 against 75.8. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro's design is much newer and notably thinner than the Samsung Galaxy A6's, although it's noticeably heavier. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a much better looking display than Galaxy A6, because it has a much larger screen, a higher pixel density and a way better 2200 x 2480 resolution.
The Galaxy A6 features a much powerful processor than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a lower amount of RAM, they both have a Octa-Core processing unit. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a lot better camera than Galaxy A6, and although they both have the same camera aperture, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a lot higher 7680x4320 video resolution, a much more mega pixels back facing camera and a much bigger back camera sensor taking more light and vivid colors.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a very superior storage to install games and applications than Galaxy A6, because although it has no SD card slot, it also counts with more internal memory. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a really longer battery lifetime than Galaxy A6, because it has a 90% more battery size.
Although vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a better device, it costs a lot more than the Samsung Galaxy A6, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as Samsung Galaxy A6. If you are trying to save a few dollars, you can buy the Samsung Galaxy A6, and give up a few features and specifications, but you will get the most out of your budget.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.