Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 72.6 | 79.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Samsung |
| Android 12 | Android 5.1 |
| 2022-05-18 | 2015-08-13 |
| 6.48 x 2.96 x 0.36 inches | 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches |
| 7.58 ounces | 6.03 ounces |
| Blue, Cosmic Black and Orange | Black, Gold, Gray and White |
| Aluminum and Glass | Glass; metal |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 415.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.8 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 3200 x 1440 pixels | 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 516 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| 1500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | Capacitive, Multi-touch |
| 9.7 | 9.4 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 SM8450 (4 nm) chipset | Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset |
| processor | ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Single-Core 2100 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 730 GPU | ARM Mali-T760 MP8 GPU |
| 6.21 | 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/1.60 aperture | f/1.90 aperture |
| 50.00mm focal length | 28.00mm focal length |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (60 fps) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video |
| 13.2 | 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 | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.8 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4700mAh Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | Wireless Charging |
| -- | 336 hours standby time 22 hours talk time |
| 6.56 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.2 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Infra-red port | -- |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 is a little bit better than vivo X80 Pro, getting a score of 79.3 against 72.6. Samsung Galaxy Note 5's construction is lighter and somewhat thinner than vivo X80 Pro, even though it was released 7 years before. Both phones we are comparing use Android operating system, but Samsung Galaxy Note 5 has an older 5.1 version and vivo X80 Pro has Android 12.
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 features an extremely better CPU than vivo X80 Pro, although it has 8 GB lesser RAM memory and a lower number of cores. The vivo X80 Pro features a bit sharper screen than Samsung Galaxy Note 5, because it has a larger display, a slightly higher 1440 x 3200 resolution and a quite greater pixels density.
The vivo X80 Pro shoots a lot better pictures and videos than Galaxy Note 5, because it has a much higher 7680x4320 video resolution, a bigger diafragm aperture to take better low light photography, a much larger back camera sensor shooting way better quality videos and photographs and a lot better resolution camera.
The vivo X80 Pro counts with a much bigger storage capacity to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Galaxy Note 5, because it has 256 GB internal storage. The vivo X80 Pro counts with a superior battery performance than Samsung Galaxy Note 5, because it has 4700mAh of battery capacity against 3000mAh.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.