Apple iPhone 16 vs Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
The Apple iPhone 16 (2024) runs on the Apple A18, while the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (2025) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite; launch prices were $799 and $2899. By overall MobileRank rating, the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold leads — 69/100 vs 68/100 (a 1-point difference). Key differences: the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold has the bigger battery (5600 mAh vs 3561); the main camera is 48 MP vs 200 MP; the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold is faster in AnTuTu (2,926,532 vs 1,972,476); the Apple iPhone 16 is noticeably lighter (170g vs 309g).
Profile comparison
Category scores
Apple iPhone 16
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
What makes Apple iPhone 16 better?
- Better Geekbench Single: 3100 vs 3013
- Faster wireless charging: 25W vs 15W
- Lighter: 170g vs 309g
- Cheaper at launch: $799 vs $2899
- Better camera (78/100 vs 52/100)
- Better portability (79/100 vs 20/100)
What makes Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold better?
- Higher AnTuTu: 2926532 vs 1972476
- Better Geekbench Multi: 9287 vs 7700
- Bigger battery: 5600 vs 3561 mAh
- Faster charging: 45W vs 27W
- Better main camera: 200MP vs 48MP
- Higher refresh rate: 120Hz vs 60Hz
- Higher performance (90/100 vs 84/100)
- Longer battery life (63/100 vs 24/100)
- Better display (70/100 vs 61/100)
Comparison verdict
Comparing the Apple iPhone 16 vs the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold, the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold scores 1 points higher (69/100 vs 68/100). In the "camera" category, the Apple iPhone 16 leads (78/100 vs 52/100). In the "battery" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold leads (63/100 vs 24/100). Value score: Apple iPhone 16 — 50/100, Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold — 46/100; it shows how far a model sits above or below the usual level for its price, and is not part of the overall rating. In the "performance" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold is a bit better (90/100 vs 84/100). In the "display" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold is a bit better (70/100 vs 61/100). In the "camera" category, the Apple iPhone 16 notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (78/100 vs 52/100). In the "battery" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold significantly outperforms the Apple iPhone 16 (63/100 vs 24/100). In the "portability" category, the Apple iPhone 16 significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (79/100 vs 20/100).
Specs comparison
| Specification | Apple iPhone 16 | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Processor | Apple A18 | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite | |
| AnTuTu | 1972476 | 2926532 | |
| Geekbench Single | 3100 | 3013 | |
| Geekbench Multi | 7700 | 9287 | |
| Display | 6.1" Super Retina XDR OLED | 10.0" Dynamic AMOLED 2X | |
| Resolution | 2556x1179 | 2160x1584 | |
| Refresh rate | 60 Hz | 120 Hz | |
| Battery | 3561 mAh | 5600 mAh | |
| Charging | 27W | 45W | |
| Wireless charging | 25W | 15W | |
| DXOMark (camera) | 147 | — | |
| Main camera | 48 MP | 200 MP | |
| Ultrawide | 12 MP | 12 MP | |
| Telephoto | 0 MP | 10 MP | |
| Front camera | 12 MP | 10 MP | |
| RAM | 8GB | 16GB | |
| Storage | 128GB / 256GB / 512GB | 512GB | |
| OS | iOS 18 | Android 16 / One UI 8 | |
| Brightness (peak) | 2000 nits | 2600 nits | |
| NFC | yes | yes | |
| Protection | IP68 | IP48 | |
| Dimensions | 147.6×71.6×7.8 mm | 159.2×75.0×12.9 mm | |
| Weight | 170 g | 309 g | |
| Launch price | $799 | $2899 |
Camera comparison
Apple iPhone 16
- Main: 48MP f/1.6
- Ultrawide: 12MP
- Front: 12MP
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
- Main: 200MP f/1.7
- Ultrawide: 12MP
- Telephoto: 10MP
- Front: 10MP
Display comparison
Apple iPhone 16
- 6.1" Super Retina XDR OLED
- Resolution: 2556x1179
- Refresh rate: 60 Hz
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
- 10.0" Dynamic AMOLED 2X
- Resolution: 2160x1584
- Refresh rate: 120 Hz
Battery and charging
Apple iPhone 16
- 3561 mAh
- Wired: 27W
- Wireless: 25W
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
- 5600 mAh
- Wired: 45W
- Wireless: 15W
Overall performance score
We compared Apple iPhone 16 and Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold leads Apple iPhone 16 by 32.6% in our overall performance rating.
Benchmarks
Launch prices and where to check today's
Launch price difference: $2100. Apple iPhone 16 was $2100 cheaper at launch.
Detailed category analysis
performance
In the "performance" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold is a bit better (90/100 vs 84/100).
display
In the "display" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold is a bit better (70/100 vs 61/100).
camera
In the "camera" category, the Apple iPhone 16 notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (78/100 vs 52/100).
battery
In the "battery" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold significantly outperforms the Apple iPhone 16 (63/100 vs 24/100).
portability
In the "portability" category, the Apple iPhone 16 significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (79/100 vs 20/100).
Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Apple iPhone 16 or the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold?
The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold edges out the Apple iPhone 16 by just 1 points — the two devices are very close in overall level.
What is the rating of the Apple iPhone 16 and the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold?
The Apple iPhone 16 has a MobileRank rating of 68/100, the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold — 69/100.
Which has the better camera: the Apple iPhone 16 or the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold?
The Apple iPhone 16 leads on camera score (78/100 vs 52/100).
Which is more powerful: the Apple iPhone 16 or the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold?
The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold leads on performance (90/100 vs 84/100).
Should you choose the Apple iPhone 16 over the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold?
The Apple iPhone 16 is a better fit for gamers and power users. The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold is a better fit for gamers and power users.