Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 73.8 | 81 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 11 | Android 11, 10 |
| 2021-09-10 | 2020-01-31 |
| 6.30 x 2.97 x 0.30 inches | 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches |
| 6.38 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 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| Cortex-A78, 64-bit, 6 nm (Octa-Core 3000 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G77 MC9 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.72 | 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 | |
| 40.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP |
| f/1.90 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.34 inches (1/2.9") 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 |
| 11.33 | 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 | |
| 4400mAh Battery | 4050mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 6.24 | 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 has an overall score of 81, which is just a bit better than vivo X70's 73.8 general score. Despite being the best in this comparison, we must tell that it's also older, thicker and somewhat heavier. Both of these phones work with the same Android 11 OS (operating system). Vivo X70 features just a little better processing power than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, and although they both have 8 cores, the vivo X70 also has a larger amount of RAM memory.
Galaxy XCover Pro features a screen that's just as good as the vivo X70 one, because although the Galaxy XCover Pro has a little bit smaller screen and a little bit lower resolution of 1080 x 2340, it also counts with a little bit better display pixels density. Vivo X70 has a superior camera than Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a tinier aperture which is worse for capturing photographs in low-light environments, it also counts with a way higher 3840x2160 (4K) video definition, a way more mega-pixels camera in the back and a lot bigger camera sensor shooting way higher quality videos and photos.
Galaxy XCover Pro counts with more storage capacity for apps and games than vivo X70, because although it has just 64 GB internal memory capacity, it also counts with a slot for an external memory card that holds a maximum of 512 GB. Vivo X70 counts with a little longer battery life than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, because it has a 4400mAh battery capacity instead of 4050mAh.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.