Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 78.3 | 79.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 11 | Android 5.1 |
| 2021-09-30 | 2015-08-13 |
| 6.23 x 2.88 x 0.31 inches | 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches |
| 6.49 ounces | 6.03 ounces |
| Aurora Down and Cosmic black | Black, Gold, Gray and White |
| 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 | |
| MediaTek Dimensity 1200 MT6893 (6 nm) chipset | Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset |
| Cortex-A78, 64-bit (Octa-Core 3000 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Single-Core 2100 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G77 MC9 GPU | ARM Mali-T760 MP8 GPU |
| 9.81 | 8.46 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 13.3 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.90 aperture |
| 16.00mm focal length | 28.00mm focal length |
| 0.64 inches (1/1.56") sensor | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video |
| 12.1 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), HSPA, HSUPA, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.8 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4450mAh Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| -- | 336 hours standby time 22 hours talk time |
| 6.32 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.2 | 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 is just a bit better than vivo X70 Pro, with a score of 79.3 against 78.3. Despite of the fact that Galaxy Note 5 is notably older than vivo X70 Pro, it's body is just a bit lighter and just a little thinner. These phones come with Android OS (Operating System), but Galaxy Note 5 has the previous 5.1 version while vivo X70 Pro has Android 11 version.
Galaxy Note 5 counts with a sharper display than vivo X70 Pro, because although it has a little smaller display, it also counts with a greater screen pixel density and a higher resolution of 2560 x 1440 pixels. The vivo X70 Pro has a much bigger storage to store more apps and games than Galaxy Note 5, because it has 256 GB internal memory capacity.
Vivo X70 Pro counts with a better performing processor than Galaxy Note 5, because it has 7 more processing cores and a higher amount of RAM. Vivo X70 Pro captures way better photos and videos than Galaxy Note 5, and although they both have the same (4K) video resolution, the vivo X70 Pro also has faster video frame rates, a larger aperture to capture better photos and video in poorly lited environments, a much more megapixels back facing camera and a lot bigger sensor providing a way better image quality.
Vivo X70 Pro counts with a much longer battery performance than Galaxy Note 5, because it has a 4450mAh battery size against 3000mAh.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.