Samsung Galaxy A56 vs Vivo X300 Pro

The Samsung Galaxy A56 (2025) runs on the Exynos 1580, while the Vivo X300 Pro (2025) runs on the Dimensity 9500; launch prices were $499 and $899. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo X300 Pro leads — 87/100 vs 60/100 (a 27-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 1,222,280); per DXOMark lab testing, the Vivo X300 Pro has the stronger camera (171 vs 114); the Samsung Galaxy A56 is noticeably lighter (198g vs 226g).

The Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 by 27 points (87/100 vs 60/100).
Profile comparison
Category scores
Samsung Galaxy A56
Performance 64
Display 79
Camera 53
Battery 48
Portability 67
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 A56 better?
  • Lighter: 198g vs 226g
  • Cheaper at launch: $499 vs $899

  • Better portability (67/100 vs 43/100)
What makes Vivo X300 Pro better?
  • Higher AnTuTu: 3269794 vs 1222280
  • Better Geekbench Single: 3228 vs 1353
  • Better Geekbench Multi: 9553 vs 3832
  • Bigger battery: 6510 vs 5000 mAh
  • Faster charging: 90W vs 45W
  • Better main camera: 200MP vs 50MP

  • Higher performance (93/100 vs 64/100)
  • Better camera (96/100 vs 53/100)
  • Longer battery life (81/100 vs 48/100)
  • Better display (84/100 vs 79/100)
Comparison verdict

Comparing the Samsung Galaxy A56 vs the Vivo X300 Pro, the Vivo X300 Pro scores 27 points higher (87/100 vs 60/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (93/100 vs 64/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (96/100 vs 53/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (81/100 vs 48/100). Value score: Samsung Galaxy A56 — 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 notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (93/100 vs 64/100). 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 A56 (96/100 vs 53/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (81/100 vs 48/100). In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy A56 notably outperforms the Vivo X300 Pro (67/100 vs 43/100).

Samsung Galaxy A56: The Samsung Galaxy A56 is a better fit for active users.
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 A56 Vivo X300 Pro
Processor Exynos 1580 Dimensity 9500
AnTuTu 1222280 3269794
Geekbench Single 1353 3228
Geekbench Multi 3832 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) 114 171
Main camera 50 MP 200 MP
Ultrawide 12 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 162.2×77.5×7.4 mm 161.2×75.5×8.0 mm
Weight 198 g 226 g
Launch price $499 $899
Camera comparison
Samsung Galaxy A56
  • Main: 50MP f/f/1.8
  • Ultrawide: 12MP
  • Front: 12MP
53
camera
Vivo X300 Pro
  • Main: 200MP f/f/1.57
  • Ultrawide: 50MP
  • Telephoto: 50MP
  • Front: 32MP
96
camera
Display comparison
Samsung Galaxy A56
  • 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 A56
  • 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 A56 and Vivo X300 Pro, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Samsung Galaxy A56 Exynos 1580
60/100
1222280 AnTuTu
Vivo X300 Pro Dimensity 9500
87/100 +62.6%
3269794 AnTuTu

Vivo X300 Pro leads Samsung Galaxy A56 by 62.6% in our overall performance rating.

Benchmarks
Launch prices and where to check today's
Samsung Galaxy A56
$499
Vivo X300 Pro
$899

Launch price difference: $400. Samsung Galaxy A56 was $400 cheaper at launch.

Detailed category analysis
performance

In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (93/100 vs 64/100).

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 A56 (96/100 vs 53/100).

battery

In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 (81/100 vs 48/100).

portability

In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy A56 notably outperforms the Vivo X300 Pro (67/100 vs 43/100).

Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Samsung Galaxy A56 or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy A56 by 27 points (87/100 vs 60/100).

What is the rating of the Samsung Galaxy A56 and the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Samsung Galaxy A56 has a MobileRank rating of 60/100, the Vivo X300 Pro — 87/100.

Which has the better camera: the Samsung Galaxy A56 or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro leads on camera score (96/100 vs 53/100).

Which is more powerful: the Samsung Galaxy A56 or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro leads on performance (93/100 vs 64/100).

Should you choose the Samsung Galaxy A56 over the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Samsung Galaxy A56 is a better fit for active users. 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.