Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.4 | 83.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 10 | -- |
| 2020-07-24 | 2018-03-16 |
| 6.24 x 2.87 x 0.32 inches | 5.81 x 2.70 x 0.33 inches |
| 6.40 ounces | 5.75 ounces |
| Alpha grey | Burgundy red, Coral blue, Ice blue, Lilac purple, Midnight black, Sunrise gold and Titanium gray |
| Aluminum and Glass | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 158.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.6 inches | 5.8 inches |
| 2376 x 1080 pixels | 2960 x 1440 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 568 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset |
| Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor | Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2800 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 620 GPU | Adreno 630 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.54 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 400 GB) external memory slot |
| 13.3 | 11.34 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.60 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 11.22 | 10.23 |
| 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 |
| 10.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4315mAh Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.16 | 4.96 |
| 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, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy S9 is much better than the vivo X50 Pro, getting a global score of 83.3 against 75.4. Samsung Galaxy S9 is a incredibly older and just a little bit thicker phone than the vivo X50 Pro, but Samsung managed to build it lighter anyway. Galaxy S9 has a little faster processor than vivo X50 Pro, although it has 4 GB lesser RAM memory, they both have the same number of cores.
Galaxy S9 features a little sharper display than vivo X50 Pro, because although it has a little bit smaller display, it also counts with a better 1440 x 2960 pixels resolution and more pixels per inch in the screen. Vivo X50 Pro features a slightly better camera than Galaxy S9, because although it has worse 30 frames per second video frame rates, a tinier aperture which is not so good for low light photography and videos and a smaller back-facing camera sensor which provides a worse photo and video quality, and they both have the same 3840x2160 (4K) video definition, the vivo X50 Pro also counts with a camera with lot more mega-pixels.
The vivo X50 Pro features a bigger memory for games and applications than Galaxy S9, because although it has no SD memory card expansion slot, it also counts with 256 GB internal memory. Vivo X50 Pro counts with a very superior battery duration than Samsung Galaxy S9, because it has a 44 percent greater battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.