Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special vs Vivo X300 Pro

The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special (2024) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3, while the Vivo X300 Pro (2025) runs on the Dimensity 9500. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo X300 Pro leads — 88/100 vs 64/100 (a 24-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo X300 Pro has the bigger battery (6510 mAh vs 4400); the Vivo X300 Pro is faster in AnTuTu (3,326,259 vs 2,345,563); the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special is thinner (4.9mm vs 8.0mm).

The Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special by 24 points (88/100 vs 64/100).

Profile comparison

Category scores

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special

Performance 82
Display 78
Camera 51
Battery 39
Portability 54
Value for money —

Vivo X300 Pro

Performance 94
Display 84
Camera 96
Battery 81
Portability 43
Value for money 88

What makes Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special better?


  • Better portability (54/100 vs 43/100)

What makes Vivo X300 Pro better?

  • Higher AnTuTu: 3326259 vs 2345563
  • Better Geekbench Single: 3293 vs 2203
  • Better Geekbench Multi: 10243 vs 6511
  • Bigger battery: 6510 vs 4400 mAh
  • Faster charging: 90W vs 25W
  • Faster wireless charging: 40W vs 15W
  • Lighter: 226g vs 236g

  • Higher performance (94/100 vs 82/100)
  • Better camera (96/100 vs 51/100)
  • Longer battery life (81/100 vs 39/100)
  • Better display (84/100 vs 78/100)

Comparison verdict

Comparing the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special vs the Vivo X300 Pro, the Vivo X300 Pro scores 24 points higher (88/100 vs 64/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (94/100 vs 82/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (96/100 vs 51/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (81/100 vs 39/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro is a bit better (94/100 vs 82/100). In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Pro is a bit better (84/100 vs 78/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special (96/100 vs 51/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special (81/100 vs 39/100). In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special is a bit better (54/100 vs 43/100).

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special: The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special is a better fit for gamers and power 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 Z Fold Special Vivo X300 Pro
Processor Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 Dimensity 9500
AnTuTu 2345563 3326259
Geekbench Single 2203 3293
Geekbench Multi 6511 10243
Display 8.0" Foldable Dynamic LTPO AMOLED 2 6.8" AMOLED
Resolution 1968x2184 1260x2800
Refresh rate 120 Hz 120 Hz
Battery 4400 mAh 6510 mAh
Charging 25W 90W
Wireless charging 15W 40W
DXOMark (camera) — 171
Main camera 200 MP 200 MP
Ultrawide 12 MP 50 MP
Telephoto 10 MP 50 MP
Front camera 4 MP 32 MP
RAM 16GB 12GB / 16GB
Storage 512GB 256GB / 512GB / 1TB
OS Android 14, up to 7 major Android upgrades, One UI 6.1.1 Android 16
Brightness (peak) 2600 nits 4500 nits
NFC yes yes
Protection IP48 IP68
Dimensions 157.9×142.6×4.9 mm 161.2×75.5×8.0 mm
Weight 236 g 226 g
Launch price — $899

Camera comparison

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special

  • Main: 200MP f/1.8
  • Ultrawide: 12MP
  • Telephoto: 10MP
  • Front: 4MP
51
camera

Vivo X300 Pro

  • Main: 200MP f/1.57
  • Ultrawide: 50MP
  • Telephoto: 50MP
  • Front: 32MP
96
camera

Display comparison

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special

  • 8.0" Foldable Dynamic LTPO AMOLED 2
  • Resolution: 1968x2184
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz
78
display

Vivo X300 Pro

  • 6.8" AMOLED
  • Resolution: 1260x2800
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz
84
display

Battery and charging

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special

  • 4400 mAh
  • Wired: 25W
  • Wireless: 15W
39
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 Z Fold Special and Vivo X300 Pro, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3
64/100
2345563 AnTuTu
Vivo X300 Pro Dimensity 9500
88/100 +29.5%
3326259 AnTuTu

Vivo X300 Pro leads Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special by 29.5% in our overall performance rating.

Benchmarks

Launch prices and where to check today's

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special

Price unknown

Vivo X300 Pro

$899

Detailed category analysis

performance

In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro is a bit better (94/100 vs 82/100).

display

In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Pro is a bit better (84/100 vs 78/100).

camera

In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special (96/100 vs 51/100).

battery

In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special (81/100 vs 39/100).

portability

In the "portability" category, the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special is a bit better (54/100 vs 43/100).

Frequently asked questions

Which is better: the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special by 24 points (88/100 vs 64/100).

What is the rating of the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special and the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special has a MobileRank rating of 64/100, the Vivo X300 Pro — 88/100.

Which has the better camera: the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro leads on camera score (96/100 vs 51/100).

Which is more powerful: the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special or the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Vivo X300 Pro leads on performance (94/100 vs 82/100).

Should you choose the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special over the Vivo X300 Pro?

The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold Special is a better fit for gamers and power 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.