Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.4 | 80.4 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 10 | -- |
| 2020-07-24 | 2017-07-07 |
| 6.24 x 2.87 x 0.32 inches | 6.04 x 2.91 x 0.31 inches |
| 6.40 ounces | 5.89 ounces |
| Alpha grey | Black, Blue, Gold and Silver |
| Aluminum and Glass | -- |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 611.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.6 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 2376 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset | Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890 chipset |
| Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor | Exynos M1and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 620 GPU | Mali-T880 MP12 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot |
| 13.3 | 10.78 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.60 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.4 inches (1/2.5") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 11.22 | 9.57 |
| 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) and HSPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 6.1 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4315mAh Battery | 3200mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.16 | 5.2 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.1 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition has a general score of 80.4, which is a bit better than vivo X50 Pro's 75.4 score. Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition's design is a little lighter and a bit thinner than vivo X50 Pro, although it was released many years before. Vivo X50 Pro has just a little better processing power than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, and although they both have 8 processing cores, the vivo X50 Pro also has a greater amount of RAM memory.
Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition features a bit more vivid screen than vivo X50 Pro, because although it has a little bit smaller screen, it also counts with a higher resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels and a higher amount of pixels per inch in the screen. The vivo X50 Pro counts with a much bigger storage for applications and games than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has no slot for an external memory card, it also counts with more internal memory capacity.
Vivo X50 Pro counts with improved battery performance than Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because it has a 4315mAh battery capacity. The vivo X50 Pro has a much better camera than Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has a tinier sensor capturing worse quality photographs, and they both have the same 3840x2160 video quality and the same 30 frames per second video frame rates, the vivo X50 Pro also counts with a bigger aperture to take better captures in poorly lited environments and a lot more mega-pixels back camera.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.