Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 78.3 | 81 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 11 | Android 11, 10 |
| 2021-09-30 | 2020-01-31 |
| 6.23 x 2.88 x 0.31 inches | 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches |
| 6.49 ounces | 7.76 ounces |
| Aurora Down and Cosmic black | Black |
| 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 | |
| MediaTek Dimensity 1200 MT6893 (6 nm) chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| Cortex-A78, 64-bit (Octa-Core 3000 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G77 MC9 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.81 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 13.3 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 16.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.64 inches (1/1.56") sensor | 0.25 inches (1/4") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 12.1 | 9.79 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4450mAh Battery | 4050mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 6 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.2 | 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 is just a bit better than the vivo X70 Pro, getting an 81 score against 78.3. Even being the best in our current comparison, the Galaxy XCover Pro body is older, incredibly thicker and heavier than vivo X70 Pro. These phones come with the same Android 11 OS, so both of them should provide you the same operating system features.
Vivo X70 Pro features a bit better CPU than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, and although they both have a Octa-Core processing unit, the vivo X70 Pro also has 8 GB more RAM memory. Galaxy XCover Pro has a screen that is very similar to the display in vivo X70 Pro, because although the Galaxy XCover Pro has a bit smaller screen and a little bit lower resolution of 1080 x 2340px, it also counts with a just a bit more pixels per inch in the display.
The vivo X70 Pro features more storage capacity to install applications and games than Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has no SD memory slot, it also counts with more internal storage. The vivo X70 Pro features just a bit longer battery duration than Galaxy XCover Pro, because it has 4450mAh of battery capacity.
Vivo X70 Pro has a way better camera than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, and although they both have the same diafragm aperture, the vivo X70 Pro also has a lot better resolution back camera, a way higher (4K) video definition and a lot larger sensor.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.