Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 92.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 14 | Android 10 |
| 2024-04-03 | 2020-07-16 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 6.41 x 2.98 x 0.33 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 6.63 ounces |
| Black and White | Prism bricks black |
| -- | Aluminum and Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 650.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED Plus |
| 414 pixels per inch | 393 pixels per inch |
| 4500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.5 | 8.1 |
| 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 | microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot |
| 17.6 | 15.38 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 64.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | 0.59 inches (1/1.7") 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 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 12.87 | 12.21 |
| 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 |
| 10.6 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Li - Polymer 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
Galaxy A71 5G UW has an overall score of 92.9, which is better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro's score of 77.8. Although Galaxy A71 5G UW is extremely older and noticeably thicker than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, it's design is still lighter. Both devices in our current comparison have Android OS (operating system), but the Galaxy A71 5G UW has the older 10 version and vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much better looking display than Galaxy A71 5G UW, because it has a bigger display, a quite greater display density and a much better resolution of 2200 x 2480px. The Galaxy A71 5G UW has a very superior performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have a Octa-Core processing unit.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a greater memory capacity to install applications and games than Galaxy A71 5G UW, because although it has no SD extension slot, it also counts with 512 GB internal memory. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features superior battery duration than Galaxy A71 5G UW, because it has a 27% greater battery size.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a slightly better camera than Galaxy A71 5G UW, because although it has a way less MP camera in the back, it also counts with a bigger aperture to capture better photography in poorly lited situations, a much bigger back camera sensor and a lot better video quality.
Even being the best phone between the ones we are comparing, Galaxy A71 5G UW is also by far the cheapest, making it a no doubt choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.