Samsung Galaxy A36 vs Vivo X300 Pro

The Samsung Galaxy A36 (2025) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 3, while the Vivo X300 Pro (2025) runs on the Dimensity 9500; launch prices were $330 and $899. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo X300 Pro leads — 87/100 vs 52/100 (a 35-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo X300 Pro has the bigger battery (6510 mAh vs 5000); the main camera is 50 MP vs 200 MP; the Vivo X300 Pro is faster in AnTuTu (3,269,794 vs 826,996); the Samsung Galaxy A36 is noticeably lighter (195g vs 226g).

The Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A36 by 35 points (87/100 vs 52/100).
Profile comparison
Category scores
Samsung Galaxy A36
Performance 55
Display 79
Camera 34
Battery 48
Portability 68
Value for money 46
Vivo X300 Pro
Performance 93
Display 84
Camera 96
Battery 81
Portability 43
Value for money 86
What makes Samsung Galaxy A36 better?
  • Lighter: 195g vs 226g
  • Cheaper at launch: $330 vs $899

  • Better portability (68/100 vs 43/100)
What makes Vivo X300 Pro better?
  • Higher AnTuTu: 3269794 vs 826996
  • Better Geekbench Single: 3228 vs 1015
  • Better Geekbench Multi: 9553 vs 2920
  • Bigger battery: 6510 vs 5000 mAh
  • Faster charging: 90W vs 45W
  • Better main camera: 200MP vs 50MP

  • Higher performance (93/100 vs 55/100)
  • Better camera (96/100 vs 34/100)
  • Longer battery life (81/100 vs 48/100)
  • Better display (84/100 vs 79/100)
Comparison verdict

Comparing the Samsung Galaxy A36 vs the Vivo X300 Pro, the Vivo X300 Pro scores 35 points higher (87/100 vs 52/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (93/100 vs 55/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (96/100 vs 34/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (81/100 vs 48/100). Value score: Samsung Galaxy A36 — 46/100, Vivo X300 Pro — 86/100; it is biased by price level, so it should not be compared directly between devices at different prices. In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A36 (93/100 vs 55/100). In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Pro is a bit better (84/100 vs 79/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A36 (96/100 vs 34/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A36 (81/100 vs 48/100). In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy A36 notably outperforms the Vivo X300 Pro (68/100 vs 43/100).

Samsung Galaxy A36: The Samsung Galaxy A36 is a better fit for everyday use.
Vivo X300 Pro: The Vivo X300 Pro 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 A36 Vivo X300 Pro
Processor Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 3 Dimensity 9500
AnTuTu 826996 3269794
Geekbench Single 1015 3228
Geekbench Multi 2920 9553
Display 6.7" Super AMOLED 6.8" AMOLED
Resolution 1080x2340 1260x2800
Refresh rate 120 Hz 120 Hz
Battery 5000 mAh 6510 mAh
Charging 45W 90W
Wireless charging 0W 40W
DXOMark (camera) 171
Main camera 50 MP 200 MP
Ultrawide 8 MP 50 MP
Telephoto 0 MP 50 MP
Front camera 12 MP 32 MP
RAM 6GB / 8GB / 12GB 12GB / 16GB
Storage 128GB / 256GB 256GB / 512GB / 1TB
OS Android 15, up to 6 major Android upgrades, One UI 7 Android 16
Brightness (peak) 1900 nits 4500 nits
NFC yes yes
Protection IP67 IP68
Dimensions 162.9×78.2×7.4 mm 161.2×75.5×8.0 mm
Weight 195 g 226 g
Launch price $330 $899
Camera comparison
Samsung Galaxy A36
  • Main: 50MP f/f/1.8
  • Ultrawide: 8MP
  • Front: 12MP
34
camera
Vivo X300 Pro
  • Main: 200MP f/f/1.57
  • Ultrawide: 50MP
  • Telephoto: 50MP
  • Front: 32MP
96
camera
Display comparison
Samsung Galaxy A36
  • 6.7" Super AMOLED
  • Resolution: 1080x2340
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz
79
display
Vivo X300 Pro
  • 6.8" AMOLED
  • Resolution: 1260x2800
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz
84
display
Battery and charging
Samsung Galaxy A36
  • 5000 mAh
  • Wired: 45W
  • No wireless charging
48
battery
Vivo X300 Pro
  • 6510 mAh
  • NanoReview test: web browsing 13:30 hrs, total 24:37 hrs
  • Wired: 90W
  • Wireless: 40W
81
battery
Overall performance score

We compared Samsung Galaxy A36 and Vivo X300 Pro, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Samsung Galaxy A36 Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 3
52/100
826996 AnTuTu
Vivo X300 Pro Dimensity 9500
87/100 +74.7%
3269794 AnTuTu

Vivo X300 Pro leads Samsung Galaxy A36 by 74.7% in our overall performance rating.

Benchmarks
Launch prices and where to check today's
Samsung Galaxy A36
$330
Vivo X300 Pro
$899

Launch price difference: $569. Samsung Galaxy A36 was $569 cheaper at launch.

Detailed category analysis
performance

In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A36 (93/100 vs 55/100).

display

In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Pro is a bit better (84/100 vs 79/100).

camera

In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A36 (96/100 vs 34/100).

battery

In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A36 (81/100 vs 48/100).

portability

In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy A36 notably outperforms the Vivo X300 Pro (68/100 vs 43/100).

Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Samsung Galaxy A36 or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A36 by 35 points (87/100 vs 52/100).

What is the rating of the Samsung Galaxy A36 and the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Samsung Galaxy A36 has a MobileRank rating of 52/100, the Vivo X300 Pro — 87/100.

Which has the better camera: the Samsung Galaxy A36 or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro leads on camera score (96/100 vs 34/100).

Which is more powerful: the Samsung Galaxy A36 or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro leads on performance (93/100 vs 55/100).

Should you choose the Samsung Galaxy A36 over the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Samsung Galaxy A36 is a better fit for everyday use. The Vivo X300 Pro is a better fit for gamers and power users, mobile photography enthusiasts, those who care about battery life, budget-conscious buyers.