Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold vs Vivo X300 Pro
The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (2025) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite, while the Vivo X300 Pro (2025) runs on the Dimensity 9500; launch prices were $2899 and $899. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo X300 Pro leads — 88/100 vs 69/100 (a 19-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo X300 Pro has the bigger battery (6510 mAh vs 5600); the Vivo X300 Pro is faster in AnTuTu (3,326,259 vs 2,926,532); the Vivo X300 Pro is noticeably lighter (226g vs 309g).
Profile comparison
Category scores
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
Vivo X300 Pro
What makes Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold better?
- Overall rating 69/100
What makes Vivo X300 Pro better?
- Higher AnTuTu: 3326259 vs 2926532
- Better Geekbench Single: 3293 vs 3013
- Better Geekbench Multi: 10243 vs 9287
- Bigger battery: 6510 vs 5600 mAh
- Faster charging: 90W vs 45W
- Faster wireless charging: 40W vs 15W
- Lighter: 226g vs 309g
- Cheaper at launch: $899 vs $2899
- Higher performance (94/100 vs 90/100)
- Better camera (96/100 vs 52/100)
- Longer battery life (81/100 vs 63/100)
- Better display (84/100 vs 70/100)
- Better portability (43/100 vs 20/100)
Comparison verdict
Comparing the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold vs the Vivo X300 Pro, the Vivo X300 Pro scores 19 points higher (88/100 vs 69/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (96/100 vs 52/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (81/100 vs 63/100). Value score: Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold — 46/100, Vivo X300 Pro — 88/100; 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 X300 Pro and the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold are nearly equal (94/100 vs 90/100). In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Pro is a bit better (84/100 vs 70/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (96/100 vs 52/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (81/100 vs 63/100). In the "portability" category, the Vivo X300 Pro notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (43/100 vs 20/100).
Specs comparison
| Specification | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X300 Pro | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Processor | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite | Dimensity 9500 | |
| AnTuTu | 2926532 | 3326259 | |
| Geekbench Single | 3013 | 3293 | |
| Geekbench Multi | 9287 | 10243 | |
| Display | 10.0" Dynamic AMOLED 2X | 6.8" AMOLED | |
| Resolution | 2160x1584 | 1260x2800 | |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 120 Hz | |
| Battery | 5600 mAh | 6510 mAh | |
| Charging | 45W | 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 | 10 MP | 32 MP | |
| RAM | 16GB | 12GB / 16GB | |
| Storage | 512GB | 256GB / 512GB / 1TB | |
| OS | Android 16 / One UI 8 | Android 16 | |
| Brightness (peak) | 2600 nits | 4500 nits | |
| NFC | yes | yes | |
| Protection | IP48 | IP68 | |
| Dimensions | 159.2×75.0×12.9 mm | 161.2×75.5×8.0 mm | |
| Weight | 309 g | 226 g | |
| Launch price | $2899 | $899 |
Camera comparison
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
- Main: 200MP f/1.7
- Ultrawide: 12MP
- Telephoto: 10MP
- Front: 10MP
Vivo X300 Pro
- Main: 200MP f/1.57
- Ultrawide: 50MP
- Telephoto: 50MP
- Front: 32MP
Display comparison
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
- 10.0" Dynamic AMOLED 2X
- Resolution: 2160x1584
- Refresh rate: 120 Hz
Vivo X300 Pro
- 6.8" AMOLED
- Resolution: 1260x2800
- Refresh rate: 120 Hz
Battery and charging
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
- 5600 mAh
- Wired: 45W
- Wireless: 15W
Vivo X300 Pro
- 6510 mAh
- NanoReview test: web browsing 13:30 hrs, total 24:37 hrs
- Wired: 90W
- Wireless: 40W
Overall performance score
We compared Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold and Vivo X300 Pro, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Vivo X300 Pro leads Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold by 12.0% in our overall performance rating.
Benchmarks
Launch prices and where to check today's
Launch price difference: $2000. Vivo X300 Pro was $2000 cheaper at launch.
Detailed category analysis
performance
In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro and the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold are nearly equal (94/100 vs 90/100).
display
In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Pro is a bit better (84/100 vs 70/100).
camera
In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (96/100 vs 52/100).
battery
In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (81/100 vs 63/100).
portability
In the "portability" category, the Vivo X300 Pro notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (43/100 vs 20/100).
Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold or the Vivo X300 Pro?
The Vivo X300 Pro is noticeably better than the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold — the overall rating gap is 19 points.
What is the rating of the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold and the Vivo X300 Pro?
The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold has a MobileRank rating of 69/100, the Vivo X300 Pro — 88/100.
Which has the better camera: the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold or the Vivo X300 Pro?
The Vivo X300 Pro leads on camera score (96/100 vs 52/100).
Should you choose the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold over the Vivo X300 Pro?
The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold 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.