Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 76.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 14 | Android 10, 9.0 Pie |
| 2024-04-03 | 2019-04-26 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 6.47 x 3.02 x 0.31 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Black and White | Black, Blue, Pink and White |
| -- | Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 299.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 393 pixels per inch |
| 4500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.5 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 SM6150 chipset |
| processor | Kryo 460, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 612 GPU |
| 6.3 | 9.18 |
| Storage | |
| 512 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 17.6 | 14.14 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 32.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | 27.00mm focal length |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | 0.36 inches (1/2.8") 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 | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 12.87 | 3.52 |
| 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 HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 7.36 | 6.32 |
| 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 has a general score of 77.8, which is just a bit better than Galaxy A70's overall score of 76.9. Both of these phones have Android OS, but the vivo X Fold 3 Pro has 14 version and Galaxy A70 has Android 10 version, giving lots of additional features and enhanced performance. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a a lot newer and a lot thinner cellphone than the Galaxy A70, although it is heavier.
Samsung Galaxy A70 counts with a much powerful CPU than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has lesser RAM, they both have the same number of cores. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with an incredibly better looking display than Galaxy A70, because it has a just a bit higher pixel count per inch in the screen, a much higher resolution of 2200 x 2480 pixels and a bigger screen.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a way bigger storage to store more apps and games than Samsung Galaxy A70, because although it has no external SD slot, it also counts with 384 GB more internal memory. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has improved battery duration than Samsung Galaxy A70, because it has a 27 percent bigger battery size.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much better camera than Samsung Galaxy A70, and although they both have the same diafragm aperture, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a way bigger back-facing camera sensor capturing more light and vivid colors and a much higher video quality.
Although vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a better device, it is way more expensive than Galaxy A70, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as Galaxy A70. If you want to save some money, you can buy the Galaxy A70, letting go a few features and specs, but you will get the most out of your savings.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.