Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 73 | 81 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 10 | Android 11, 10 |
| 2020-07-24 | 2020-01-31 |
| 6.28 x 2.97 x 0.30 inches | 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches |
| 6.16 ounces | 7.76 ounces |
| Frost blue and Glaze black | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass | -- |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 421.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.6 inches | 6.3 inches |
| 2376 x 1080 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | IPS LCD |
| 395 pixels per inch | 409 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 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 | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.1 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP |
| f/1.60 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.25 inches (1/4") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 11.22 | 9.79 |
| 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 | |
| 4200mAh Battery | 4050mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 6.08 | 6 |
| 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 XCover Pro has a score of 81, which is better than the vivo X50's overall score of 73. Although it's the best cellphone we compare here, we must note that it is also extremely heavier and notably thicker. Both of these phones work with Android OS (operating system), but Galaxy XCover Pro has newer 11 version while vivo X50 has Android 10 version.
The vivo X50 features a bit better hardware performance than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, and although they both have the same number of cores, the vivo X50 also has a higher amount of RAM. The vivo X50 and the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro count with extremely similar screens, because although the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro has a little bit smaller screen and a bit worse resolution of 1080 x 2340px, it also counts with a little greater pixels count in each inch of screen.
Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro counts with a greater memory for games and applications than vivo X50, because although it has just 64 GB internal storage capacity, it also counts with an external memory card slot that admits up to 512 GB. The vivo X50 counts with a better camera than Galaxy XCover Pro, because it has a way higher resolution back facing camera, a much bigger back camera sensor which gives a way higher photo and video quality, a larger aperture to capture better photos in low-light environments and a lot better video definition.
Vivo X50 features just a little better battery performance than Galaxy XCover Pro, because it has a 4200mAh battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.