Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 vs Vivo X300s

The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 (2025) runs on the Samsung Exynos 2500, while the Vivo X300s (2026) runs on the Dimensity 9500; launch prices were $1099 and $723. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo X300s leads — 89/100 vs 72/100 (a 17-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo X300s has the bigger battery (7100 mAh vs 4300); the main camera is 50 MP vs 200 MP; the Vivo X300s is faster in AnTuTu (3,703,823 vs 2,289,696); the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 is noticeably lighter (188g vs 217g).

The Vivo X300s is noticeably better than the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 — the overall rating gap is 17 points.

Profile comparison

Category scores

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7

Performance 84
Display 81
Camera 70
Battery 37
Portability 83
Value for money 54

Vivo X300s

Performance 95
Display 94
Camera 94
Battery 83
Portability 42
Value for money 92

What makes Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 better?

  • Lighter: 188g vs 217g

  • Better portability (83/100 vs 42/100)

What makes Vivo X300s better?

  • Higher AnTuTu: 3703823 vs 2289696
  • Better Geekbench Single: 3293 vs 2358
  • Better Geekbench Multi: 10243 vs 8211
  • Bigger battery: 7100 vs 4300 mAh
  • Faster charging: 90W vs 25W
  • Better main camera: 200MP vs 50MP
  • Higher refresh rate: 144Hz vs 120Hz
  • Faster wireless charging: 40W vs 15W
  • Cheaper at launch: $723 vs $1099

  • Higher performance (95/100 vs 84/100)
  • Better camera (94/100 vs 70/100)
  • Longer battery life (83/100 vs 37/100)
  • Better display (94/100 vs 81/100)

Comparison verdict

Comparing the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 vs the Vivo X300s, the Vivo X300s scores 17 points higher (89/100 vs 72/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300s leads (95/100 vs 84/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300s leads (94/100 vs 70/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300s leads (83/100 vs 37/100). Value score: Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 — 54/100, Vivo X300s — 92/100; 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 Vivo X300s is a bit better (95/100 vs 84/100). In the "display" category, the Vivo X300s is a bit better (94/100 vs 81/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300s notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 (94/100 vs 70/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300s significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 (83/100 vs 37/100). In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 significantly outperforms the Vivo X300s (83/100 vs 42/100).

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7: The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 is a better fit for gamers and power users.
Vivo X300s: The Vivo X300s 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 Z Flip7 Vivo X300s
Processor Samsung Exynos 2500 Dimensity 9500
AnTuTu 2289696 3703823
Geekbench Single 2358 3293
Geekbench Multi 8211 10243
Display 6.9" Dynamic AMOLED 2X 6.8" LTPO AMOLED
Resolution 2640x1080 2800x1260
Refresh rate 120 Hz 144 Hz
Battery 4300 mAh 7100 mAh
Charging 25W 90W
Wireless charging 15W 40W
DXOMark (camera) 137 —
Main camera 50 MP 200 MP
Ultrawide 12 MP 50 MP
Telephoto 0 MP 50 MP
Front camera 10 MP 50 MP
RAM 12GB 12GB / 16GB
Storage 256GB / 512GB 256GB / 512GB / 1TB
OS Android 16 / One UI 8 Android 16 / OriginOS 6
Brightness (peak) 2600 nits —
NFC yes —
Protection IP48 —
Dimensions 166.7×75.2×6.5 mm —
Weight 188 g 217 g
Launch price $1099 $723

Camera comparison

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7

  • Main: 50MP f/1.8
  • Ultrawide: 12MP
  • Front: 10MP
70
camera

Vivo X300s

  • Main: 200MP f/1.7
  • Ultrawide: 50MP
  • Telephoto: 50MP
  • Front: 50MP
94
camera

Display comparison

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7

  • 6.9" Dynamic AMOLED 2X
  • Resolution: 2640x1080
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz
81
display

Vivo X300s

  • 6.8" LTPO AMOLED
  • Resolution: 2800x1260
  • Refresh rate: 144 Hz
94
display

Battery and charging

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7

  • 4300 mAh
  • Wired: 25W
  • Wireless: 15W
37
battery

Vivo X300s

  • 7100 mAh
  • Wired: 90W
  • Wireless: 40W
83
battery

Overall performance score

We compared Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 and Vivo X300s, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 Samsung Exynos 2500
72/100
2289696 AnTuTu
Vivo X300s Dimensity 9500
89/100 +38.2%
3703823 AnTuTu

Vivo X300s leads Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 by 38.2% in our overall performance rating.

Benchmarks

Launch prices and where to check today's

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7

$1099

Vivo X300s

$723

Launch price difference: $376. Vivo X300s was $376 cheaper at launch.

Detailed category analysis

performance

In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300s is a bit better (95/100 vs 84/100).

display

In the "display" category, the Vivo X300s is a bit better (94/100 vs 81/100).

camera

In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300s notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 (94/100 vs 70/100).

battery

In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300s significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 (83/100 vs 37/100).

portability

In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 significantly outperforms the Vivo X300s (83/100 vs 42/100).

Frequently asked questions

Which is better: the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 or the Vivo X300s?

The Vivo X300s is noticeably better than the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 — the overall rating gap is 17 points.

What is the rating of the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 and the Vivo X300s?

The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 has a MobileRank rating of 72/100, the Vivo X300s — 89/100.

Which has the better camera: the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 or the Vivo X300s?

The Vivo X300s leads on camera score (94/100 vs 70/100).

Which is more powerful: the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 or the Vivo X300s?

The Vivo X300s leads on performance (95/100 vs 84/100).

Should you choose the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 over the Vivo X300s?

The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 is a better fit for gamers and power users. The Vivo X300s is a better fit for gamers and power users, mobile photography enthusiasts, those who care about battery life, budget-conscious buyers.