Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold vs Vivo X200 Pro
64.4Performance74.5
43.7Display73.2
55.7Camera72
60.8Battery79.9
60Features78.7
2 spec wins — Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold11 spec wins — Vivo X200 Pro
InnoReviews verdict
Vivo X200 Pro wins this phone face-off, 75.2 to 57.4, pulling ahead mainly in display (+30) and battery (+19). Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold still makes sense if its price or standout specs fit your needs better.
Which would you pick?
Key differences
Reasons to pick the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
- 300% higher Main camera: 200 MP vs 50 MP
- 47% higher Screen size: 10 ″ vs 6.78 ″
Reasons to pick the Vivo X200 Pro
- Stronger performance score: 75 vs 64
- Stronger display score: 73 vs 44
- Stronger camera score: 72 vs 56
- Stronger battery score: 80 vs 61
- Stronger features score: 79 vs 60
- Lower launch price: $1,099 vs $2,899
Display
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X200 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Screen size | 10 ″+47% | 6.78 ″ |
| Panel type | Foldable Dynamic AMOLED 2X | LTPO AMOLED |
| Resolution | 2160x1584 | 1260x2800 |
| Pixel density | 269 ppi | 452 ppi+68% |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 120 Hz |
| Peak brightness | 1,600 nits | 4,500 nits+181% |
| Screen-to-body | — | 90.3 % |
Performance
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X200 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Chipset | Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy | MediaTek Dimensity 9400 |
| AnTuTu | — | 2,550,000 |
| Geekbench 6 (single) | — | 2,800Top 19% |
| Geekbench 6 (multi) | — | 8,600Top 16% |
| RAM (max) | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| Storage options | 512GB/1TB | 256/512GB/1TB |
| Storage type | — | UFS 4.0 |
Camera
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X200 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Main camera | 200 MP+300% | 50 MP |
| Main aperture | f/1.7 | f/1.57 |
| Ultra-wide | 12 MP | 50 MP+317% |
| Telephoto | 10 MP | 200 MP+1900% |
| Optical zoom | 3 x | 3.7 x+23% |
| Max video | — | 8K@30fps |
| Front camera | 10 MP | 32 MP+220% |
| OIS | Yes | Yes |
Battery
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X200 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity | 5,600 mAh | 6,000 mAh+7% |
| Wired charging | 45 W | 90 W+100% |
| Wireless charging | 15 W | 30 W+100% |
| Active use endurance | — | 13 h |
Design
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X200 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | 309 g | 223 g+28% |
| Thickness | 12.9 mm | 8.5 mm+34% |
| IP rating | IP48 | IP68/IP69 |
| Frame material | Titanium Hinge Housing and Advanced Armor Aluminum Frame | Aluminum |
Connectivity
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X200 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| 5G | Yes | Yes |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi 7 | Wi-Fi 7 |
| Bluetooth | 5.4 | 5.4 |
| NFC | — | Yes |
| USB | USB-C | USB-C 3.2 |
| eSIM | Yes | Yes |
Software
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X200 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| OS at launch | Android 16 (One UI 8) | Android 15 (Funtouch OS 15) |
| OS update pledge | — | 4 years |
Audio
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X200 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Stereo speakers | — | Yes |
| 3.5mm jack | — | No |
Related comparisons
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFoldvs OnePlus Nord 6VSSamsung Galaxy Z TriFoldvs OPPO Reno13 ProVSSamsung Galaxy Z TriFoldvs iQOO Z10VSSamsung Galaxy Z TriFoldvs Nothing Phone (4a)VSVivo X200 Provs OPPO Find X10VSVivo X200 Provs Motorola Edge 70 MaxVSVivo X200 Provs OPPO Reno16 Pro 5GVSVivo X200 Provs Samsung Galaxy S25 UltraVS