Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.4 | 83.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 10 | -- |
| 2020-07-24 | 2019-03-15 |
| 6.24 x 2.87 x 0.32 inches | 6.24 x 2.93 x 0.30 inches |
| 6.40 ounces | 5.86 ounces |
| Alpha grey | Black, Blue, Coral and White |
| Aluminum and Glass | Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 202.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.6 inches | 6.4 inches |
| 2376 x 1080 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 403 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset | Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 9610 chipset |
| Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 620 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 13.3 | 14.14 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 25.00 MP |
| f/1.60 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 27.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 11.22 | 10.12 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 10.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4315mAh Battery | 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.16 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.1 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The Galaxy A50 is better than the vivo X50 Pro, with a overall score of 83.8 against 75.4. Galaxy A50's body is a little bit lighter and just a little thinner than vivo X50 Pro, even though it was released about 17 months before. The vivo X50 Pro features a bit better hardware performance than Samsung Galaxy A50, and although they both have a Octa-Core processor, the vivo X50 Pro also has 4 GB more RAM.
Galaxy A50 counts with a display that is just as good as the display in vivo X50 Pro, because although the Galaxy A50 has a bit smaller screen and a bit lower 1080 x 2340 resolution, it also counts with a little bit higher pixel density. The vivo X50 Pro captures better photographs and videos than Galaxy A50, and although they both have the same back camera sensor size, the vivo X50 Pro also has a bigger aperture for better photos and videos in poorly lited situations, a way more mega-pixels back camera and a lot better 3840x2160 video quality.
The Samsung Galaxy A50 features a bit more storage for applications, games, photos and videos than vivo X50 Pro, because although it has less internal memory, it also counts with a slot for an external memory card that admits a maximum of 512 GB. Vivo X50 Pro counts with a bit better battery performance than Galaxy A50, because it has a 4315mAh battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.