Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 78.3 | 75.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 11 | -- |
| 2021-09-30 | 2016-06-10 |
| 6.23 x 2.88 x 0.31 inches | 5.86 x 2.95 x 0.39 inches |
| 6.49 ounces | 6.53 ounces |
| Aurora Down and Cosmic black | Camo green, Sandy gold and Titanium gray |
| Glass | Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 247.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.6 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2376 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| -- | 500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 9.3 |
| Performance | |
| MediaTek Dimensity 1200 MT6893 (6 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset |
| Cortex-A78, 64-bit (Octa-Core 3000 MHz) processor | Kryo, 64-bit, 14 nm (Quad-Core 2150 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G77 MC9 GPU | Adreno 530 GPU |
| 9.81 | 8.91 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 32 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 200 GB) external memory slot |
| 13.3 | 8.56 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 16.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.64 inches (1/1.56") sensor | -- |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 12.1 | 9.46 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | -- |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | HSPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 3 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4450mAh Battery | 4000mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.32 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.2 | 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 vivo X70 Pro has a score of 78.3, which is just a bit better than Samsung Galaxy S7 Active's global score of 75.8. Vivo X70 Pro's construction is newer, a bit lighter and way thinner than Samsung Galaxy S7 Active. The vivo X70 Pro has a quite superior processing power than Galaxy S7 Active, because it has 8 GB more RAM memory and a higher number of cores.
The Galaxy S7 Active has a better looking display than vivo X70 Pro, because although it has a lot smaller display, it also counts with more pixels per inch in the display and a higher resolution of 1440 x 2560px. Vivo X70 Pro features a lot bigger memory capacity to store more games and applications than Samsung Galaxy S7 Active, because although it has no external memory slot, it also counts with 256 GB internal memory capacity.
Vivo X70 Pro has just a bit better battery life than Samsung Galaxy S7 Active, because it has 4450mAh of battery capacity against 4000mAh. The vivo X70 Pro counts with a lot better camera than Galaxy S7 Active, and although they both have the same 3840x2160 video definition and a F1.7 camera aperture, the vivo X70 Pro also has a way more mega-pixels back camera and faster video frame rate.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.