Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 95.4 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 14 | Android 13, 12 |
| 2024-04-03 | 2022-02-25 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 6.43 x 3.07 x 0.35 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 8.08 ounces |
| Black and White | Burgundy, Green, Phantom Black and White |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass Victus) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 1200.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 6.8 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 3088 x 1440 pixels |
| AMOLED | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 501 pixels per inch |
| 4500 cd/m2 brightness | 1750 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.5 | 9.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 SM8450 (4 nm) chipset |
| processor | Quad-Core 2800 MHz + Quad-Core 1800 MHz processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 730 GPU |
| 6.3 | 9.36 |
| 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 | 108.00 MP + 40.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | 23.00mm focal length |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | 0.75 inches (1/1.33") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (24 fps) video resolution |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 12.87 | 13.75 |
| 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) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 5000mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 7.36 | 6.8 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.3 | Bluetooth 5.2 |
| 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 Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra is a lot better than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, getting a 95.4 score against 77.8. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra is a much older, notably thicker and just a little bit heavier phone than vivo X Fold 3 Pro. Both phones we compare here work with Android operating system, but Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra has older 13 version and vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14 version.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a slightly better display than Galaxy S22 Ultra, because although it has a just a bit worse pixels density, it also counts with way more brightness, a bit higher 2200 x 2480 resolution and a bigger display. Galaxy S22 Ultra has a very superior processing unit than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have a Octa-Core CPU.
Galaxy S22 Ultra shoots clearer pictures and videos than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, because although it has a smaller sensor providing a lower image quality, a smaller diafragm aperture which is not good for shooting images and/or video in low-light situations and lower 24 frames per second video frame rates, and they both have the same 7680x4320 video quality, the Galaxy S22 Ultra also counts with a camera in the back with a way better resolution.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a way bigger memory to store more games and applications than Galaxy S22 Ultra, because it has 512 GB internal memory capacity. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features just a bit longer battery lifetime than Galaxy S22 Ultra, because it has a 14 percent more battery size.
The Galaxy S22 Ultra is not only the best devices of the ones we are comparing, but it's also by far the cheapest one, which makes this phone a no doubt choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.