Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold vs Vivo X300 Ultra
64.4Performance93.3
43.7Display82.3
55.7Camera84.6
60.8Battery91.5
60Features84
1 spec wins — Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold12 spec wins — Vivo X300 Ultra
InnoReviews verdict
Vivo X300 Ultra wins this phone face-off, 88.1 to 57.4, pulling ahead mainly in display (+39) and battery (+31). 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
- 47% higher Screen size: 10 ″ vs 6.82 ″
Reasons to pick the Vivo X300 Ultra
- Stronger performance score: 93 vs 64
- Stronger display score: 82 vs 44
- Stronger camera score: 85 vs 56
- Stronger battery score: 92 vs 61
- Stronger features score: 84 vs 60
Display
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X300 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| Screen size | 10 ″+47% | 6.82 ″ |
| Panel type | Foldable Dynamic AMOLED 2X | LTPO AMOLED |
| Resolution | 2160x1584 | 1440x3168 |
| Pixel density | 269 ppi | 510 ppi+90% |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 144 Hz+20% |
| Peak brightness | 1,600 nits | 4,500 nits+181% |
| Screen-to-body | — | 90.3 % |
Performance
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X300 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| Chipset | Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 |
| AnTuTu | — | 4,085,695 |
| Geekbench 6 (single) | — | 3,730Top 3% |
| Geekbench 6 (multi) | — | 11,494Top 3% |
| RAM (max) | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| Storage options | 512GB/1TB | 256/512GB/1TB |
| Storage type | — | UFS 4.1 |
Camera
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X300 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| Main camera | 200 MP | 200 MP |
| Main aperture | f/1.7 | f/1.9 |
| 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 | 50 MP+400% |
| OIS | Yes | Yes |
Battery
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X300 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity | 5,600 mAh | 6,600 mAh+18% |
| Wired charging | 45 W | 100 W+122% |
| Wireless charging | 15 W | 40 W+167% |
| Active use endurance | — | 16 h |
Design
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X300 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | 309 g | 232 g+25% |
| Thickness | 12.9 mm | 8.2 mm+37% |
| IP rating | IP48 | IP68/IP69 |
| Frame material | Titanium Hinge Housing and Advanced Armor Aluminum Frame | Aluminum |
Connectivity
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X300 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| 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 X300 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| OS at launch | Android 16 (One UI 8) | Android 16 (OriginOS 6) |
| OS update pledge | — | 5 years |
Audio
| Spec | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X300 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| 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 X300 Ultravs iQOO 15 UltraVSVivo X300 Ultravs OPPO Find X9 UltraVSVivo X300 Ultravs Honor Magic8 ProVSVivo X300 Ultravs realme GT 8 ProVS