Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 83.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 14 | -- |
| 2024-04-03 | 2018-03-16 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 5.81 x 2.70 x 0.33 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 5.75 ounces |
| Black and White | Burgundy red, Coral blue, Ice blue, Lilac purple, Midnight black, Sunrise gold and Titanium gray |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 158.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 5.8 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 2960 x 1440 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 568 pixels per inch |
| 4500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.5 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset |
| processor | Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2800 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 630 GPU |
| 6.3 | 9.54 |
| Storage | |
| 512 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 400 GB) external memory slot |
| 17.6 | 11.34 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 12.87 | 10.23 |
| 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 |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 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, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The Galaxy S9 has a general score of 83.3, which is a little bit better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro's 77.8 score. Galaxy S9's body is noticeably lighter than the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, but it's notably thicker and was released many years before. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a more vivid display than Samsung Galaxy S9, because although it has a way lower number of pixels in each display inch, it also counts with a bit higher 2200 x 2480 resolution and a way bigger display.
Galaxy S9 has a much powerful processor than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has lesser RAM, they both have a Octa-Core CPU. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much better memory capacity for games and applications than Samsung Galaxy S9, because although it has no SD memory slot, it also counts with 448 GB more internal storage.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro takes much better videos and photos than Galaxy S9, because although it has a smaller camera aperture, it also counts with a way better resolution camera in the back, a way higher video definition and a way larger back camera sensor taking much better quality photos and videos.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a very superior battery duration than Samsung Galaxy S9, because it has a 5700mAh battery capacity instead of 3000mAh.
In addition to being the best phone in our comparison, the Samsung Galaxy S9 is also by far the cheapest.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.