Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.4 | 79.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 10 | Android 5.1 |
| 2020-07-24 | 2015-08-13 |
| 6.24 x 2.87 x 0.32 inches | 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches |
| 6.40 ounces | 6.03 ounces |
| Alpha grey | Black, Gold, Gray and White |
| Aluminum and Glass | Glass; metal |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 415.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.6 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 2376 x 1080 pixels | 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | Capacitive, Multi-touch |
| 8.1 | 9.4 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset | Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset |
| Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Single-Core 2100 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 620 GPU | ARM Mali-T760 MP8 GPU |
| 9.45 | 8.46 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 13.3 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.60 aperture | f/1.90 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 28.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video |
| 11.22 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), HSPA, HSUPA, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 6.8 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4315mAh Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| -- | 336 hours standby time 22 hours talk time |
| 6.16 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.1 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Galaxy Note 5 has a global score of 79.3, which is a bit better than vivo X50 Pro's general score of 75.4. Both of these devices come with Android OS, but Galaxy Note 5 has an older 5.1 version and vivo X50 Pro has Android 10. The Galaxy Note 5 body is a little lighter and a little thinner than the vivo X50 Pro, although it was released 5 years before.
The vivo X50 Pro features a better performing CPU than Samsung Galaxy Note 5, because it has a greater amount of RAM memory and a higher number of cores (and also faster). The Samsung Galaxy Note 5 counts with a more vivid screen than vivo X50 Pro, because although it has a little smaller screen, it also counts with more pixels per inch of screen and a higher 2560 x 1440 resolution.
The vivo X50 Pro has a much better storage for applications, games, photos and videos than Galaxy Note 5, because it has 256 GB internal storage capacity. Vivo X50 Pro features a much longer battery performance than Samsung Galaxy Note 5, because it has 4315mAh of battery capacity. The vivo X50 Pro counts with a superior camera than Samsung Galaxy Note 5, because although it has a smaller back camera sensor, and they both have the same video frame rate and the same 3840x2160 (4K) video definition, the vivo X50 Pro also counts with a much better 48 megapixels resolution back camera and a bigger camera aperture.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.