Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 73 | 92.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 10 | Android 10 |
| 2020-07-24 | 2020-07-16 |
| 6.28 x 2.97 x 0.30 inches | 6.41 x 2.98 x 0.33 inches |
| 6.16 ounces | 6.63 ounces |
| Frost blue and Glaze black | Prism bricks black |
| Aluminum and Glass | Aluminum and Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 650.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.6 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2376 x 1080 pixels | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED Plus |
| 395 pixels per inch | 393 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset |
| Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor | Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 620 GPU | Adreno 620 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.1 | 15.38 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 64.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.60 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.59 inches (1/1.7") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 11.22 | 12.21 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4200mAh Battery | 4500mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.08 | 6.32 |
| 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
Galaxy A71 5G UW has a general score of 92.9, which is way better than vivo X50's overall score of 73. Although Galaxy A71 5G UW is a better phone than the vivo X50, it must be noted that it is also a just a little heavier and a little thicker phone. Both phones in our current comparison work with the same Android 10 OS, so you shouldn't see any difference regarding OS features.
The Galaxy A71 5G UW and vivo X50 both count with similar processors, both of them have a 8 GB RAM and the same number of cores. Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW counts with a display that is just as good as vivo X50's display, because although the Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW has a bit worse pixel density, it also counts with a bit higher 1080 x 2400px resolution and a quite larger display.
The Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW shoots a little bit better photographs and videos than vivo X50, because although it has a tinier aperture, and they both have the same 30 frames per second video frame rates and the same video resolution, the Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW also counts with a much higher 64 mega pixels resolution camera in the back and a lot larger back camera sensor taking more light and vivid colors.
The Galaxy A71 5G UW has a very superior memory to install games and applications than vivo X50, and although they both have equal 128 GB internal memory capacity, the Galaxy A71 5G UW also has a slot for SD memory cards that supports a maximum of 1000 GB. The Galaxy A71 5G UW features a bit better battery duration than vivo X50, because it has a 4500mAh battery size.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.