Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 14 | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2024-04-03 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black and White | Black |
| -- | Plastic |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| AMOLED | -- |
| 414 pixels per inch | 576 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 | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 6.3 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 512 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 17.6 | 11.74 |
| 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 | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video | -- |
| 12.87 | 8.14 |
| 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 | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | 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, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is slightly better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, getting a general score of 80.1 against 77.8. These phones include Android OS (Operating System), but Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has 8.0 Oreo version and vivo X Fold 3 Pro has Android 14 version, so it offers a couple nice extra features. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is better than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, we must tell that it's also much older, somewhat heavier and extremely thicker.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much better looking screen than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a lot worse quantity of pixels in each inch in the display, it also counts with a better 2200 x 2480 resolution and a lot larger display. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a really superior hardware performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a lower amount of RAM, they both have a Octa-Core CPU.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a much greater storage for games and applications than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has no slot for external memory cards, it also counts with 512 GB internal memory capacity. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has greater battery duration than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has 5700mAh of battery capacity against 4500mAh.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a lot better camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier aperture, it also counts with a much larger camera sensor, a back facing camera with way more mega-pixels and a way higher 7680x4320 video definition.
In addition to being the best phone of the ones we compare here, Galaxy XCover FieldPro is also a bargain compared to the other devices.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.