Samsung Galaxy A17 5G vs Vivo X300 Ultra

The Samsung Galaxy A17 5G (2025) runs on the Samsung Exynos 1330, while the Vivo X300 Ultra (2026) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5; estimated prices are $166 and $10498. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo X300 Ultra leads — 91/100 vs 48/100 (a 43-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo X300 Ultra has the bigger battery (7000 mAh vs 5000); the main camera is 50 MP vs 200 MP; the Vivo X300 Ultra is faster in AnTuTu (4,247,433 vs 602,971); the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G is noticeably lighter (192g vs 230g).

The Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G by 43 points (91/100 vs 48/100).
Profile comparison
Category scores
Samsung Galaxy A17 5G
Performance 47
Display 67
Camera 33
Battery 52
Portability 68
Value for money
Vivo X300 Ultra
Performance 99
Display 89
Camera 96
Battery 85
Portability 39
Value for money 86
What makes Samsung Galaxy A17 5G better?
  • Lighter: 192g vs 230g
  • Cheaper: $166 vs $10498

  • Better portability (68/100 vs 39/100)
What makes Vivo X300 Ultra better?
  • Higher AnTuTu: 4247433 vs 602971
  • Better Geekbench Single: 3640 vs 952
  • Better Geekbench Multi: 11033 vs 1963
  • Bigger battery: 7000 vs 5000 mAh
  • Faster charging: 100W vs 25W
  • Better main camera: 200MP vs 50MP
  • Higher refresh rate: 120Hz vs 90Hz

  • Higher performance (99/100 vs 47/100)
  • Better camera (96/100 vs 33/100)
  • Longer battery life (85/100 vs 52/100)
  • Better display (89/100 vs 67/100)
Comparison verdict

Comparing the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G vs the Vivo X300 Ultra, the Vivo X300 Ultra scores 43 points higher (91/100 vs 48/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra leads (99/100 vs 47/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra leads (96/100 vs 33/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra leads (85/100 vs 52/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G (99/100 vs 47/100). In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G (89/100 vs 67/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G (96/100 vs 33/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G (85/100 vs 52/100). In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G notably outperforms the Vivo X300 Ultra (68/100 vs 39/100).

Samsung Galaxy A17 5G: The Samsung Galaxy A17 5G is a better fit for everyday use.
Vivo X300 Ultra: The Vivo X300 Ultra is a better fit for gamers and power users, mobile photography enthusiasts, those who care about battery life, budget-conscious buyers.
Specs comparison
Specification Samsung Galaxy A17 5G Vivo X300 Ultra
Processor Samsung Exynos 1330 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5
AnTuTu 602971 4247433
Geekbench Single 952 3640
Geekbench Multi 1963 11033
Display 6.7" Super AMOLED 6.8" LTPO OLED
Resolution 1080x2340 3168x1440
Refresh rate 90 Hz 120 Hz
Battery 5000 mAh 7000 mAh
Charging 25W 100W
Wireless charging 40W
DXOMark (camera) 170
Main camera 50 MP 200 MP
Ultrawide 5 MP 50 MP
Telephoto 0 MP 200 MP
Front camera 13 MP 32 MP
RAM 4GB / 6GB / 8GB 12GB / 16GB
Storage 128GB / 256GB 256GB / 512GB / 1TB
OS Android 15 / One UI 7 Android 16
NFC yes
Protection IP69
Dimensions 163.0×76.8×8.2 mm
Weight 192 g 230 g
Price $166 $10498
Camera comparison
Samsung Galaxy A17 5G
  • Main: 50MP f/f/1.8
  • Ultrawide: 5MP
  • Front: 13MP
33
camera
Vivo X300 Ultra
  • Main: 200MP f/f/1.6
  • Ultrawide: 50MP
  • Telephoto: 200MP
  • Front: 32MP
96
camera
Display comparison
Samsung Galaxy A17 5G
  • 6.7" Super AMOLED
  • Resolution: 1080x2340
  • Refresh rate: 90 Hz
67
display
Vivo X300 Ultra
  • 6.8" LTPO OLED
  • Resolution: 3168x1440
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz
89
display
Battery and charging
Samsung Galaxy A17 5G
  • 5000 mAh
  • Wired: 25W
  • Wireless charging: no data
52
battery
Vivo X300 Ultra
  • 7000 mAh
  • NanoReview test: web browsing 10:18 hrs, total 29:11 hrs
  • Wired: 100W
  • Wireless: 40W
85
battery
Overall performance score

We compared Samsung Galaxy A17 5G and Vivo X300 Ultra, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Samsung Galaxy A17 5G Samsung Exynos 1330
48/100
602971 AnTuTu
Vivo X300 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5
91/100 +85.8%
4247433 AnTuTu

Vivo X300 Ultra leads Samsung Galaxy A17 5G by 85.8% in our overall performance rating.

Benchmarks
Price and availability
Samsung Galaxy A17 5G
$166
Vivo X300 Ultra
$10498

Price difference: $10332. Samsung Galaxy A17 5G is cheaper by $10332.

Detailed category analysis
performance

In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G (99/100 vs 47/100).

display

In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G (89/100 vs 67/100).

camera

In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G (96/100 vs 33/100).

battery

In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G (85/100 vs 52/100).

portability

In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G notably outperforms the Vivo X300 Ultra (68/100 vs 39/100).

Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G or the Vivo X300 Ultra?

The Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G by 43 points (91/100 vs 48/100).

What is the rating of the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G and the Vivo X300 Ultra?

The Samsung Galaxy A17 5G has a MobileRank rating of 48/100, the Vivo X300 Ultra — 91/100.

Which has the better camera: the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G or the Vivo X300 Ultra?

The Vivo X300 Ultra leads on camera score (96/100 vs 33/100).

Which is more powerful: the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G or the Vivo X300 Ultra?

The Vivo X300 Ultra leads on performance (99/100 vs 47/100).

Should you choose the Samsung Galaxy A17 5G over the Vivo X300 Ultra?

The Samsung Galaxy A17 5G is a better fit for everyday use. The Vivo X300 Ultra is a better fit for gamers and power users, mobile photography enthusiasts, those who care about battery life, budget-conscious buyers.