Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold vs Vivo X300 Ultra
The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (2025) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite, while the Vivo X300 Ultra (2026) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5; launch prices were $2899 and $950. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo X300 Ultra leads — 91/100 vs 69/100 (a 22-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo X300 Ultra has the bigger battery (7000 mAh vs 5600); the Vivo X300 Ultra is faster in AnTuTu (4,247,433 vs 2,926,532); the Vivo X300 Ultra is noticeably lighter (230g vs 309g).
Profile comparison
Category scores
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
Vivo X300 Ultra
What makes Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold better?
- Overall rating 69/100
What makes Vivo X300 Ultra better?
- Higher AnTuTu: 4247433 vs 2926532
- Better Geekbench Single: 3639 vs 3013
- Better Geekbench Multi: 11047 vs 9287
- Bigger battery: 7000 vs 5600 mAh
- Faster charging: 100W vs 45W
- Faster wireless charging: 40W vs 15W
- Lighter: 230g vs 309g
- Cheaper at launch: $950 vs $2899
- Higher performance (99/100 vs 90/100)
- Better camera (96/100 vs 52/100)
- Longer battery life (85/100 vs 63/100)
- Better display (89/100 vs 70/100)
- Better portability (39/100 vs 20/100)
Comparison verdict
Comparing the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold vs the Vivo X300 Ultra, the Vivo X300 Ultra scores 22 points higher (91/100 vs 69/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra leads (96/100 vs 52/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra leads (85/100 vs 63/100). Value score: Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold — 46/100, Vivo X300 Ultra — 94/100; 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 Ultra is a bit better (99/100 vs 90/100). In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (89/100 vs 70/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (96/100 vs 52/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (85/100 vs 63/100). In the "portability" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (39/100 vs 20/100).
Specs comparison
| Specification | Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold | Vivo X300 Ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Processor | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 | |
| AnTuTu | 2926532 | 4247433 | |
| Geekbench Single | 3013 | 3639 | |
| Geekbench Multi | 9287 | 11047 | |
| Display | 10.0" Dynamic AMOLED 2X | 6.8" LTPO OLED | |
| Resolution | 2160x1584 | 3168x1440 | |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 120 Hz | |
| Battery | 5600 mAh | 7000 mAh | |
| Charging | 45W | 100W | |
| Wireless charging | 15W | 40W | |
| DXOMark (camera) | — | 170 | |
| Main camera | 200 MP | 200 MP | |
| Ultrawide | 12 MP | 50 MP | |
| Telephoto | 10 MP | 200 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 | — | |
| NFC | yes | yes | |
| Protection | IP48 | IP69 | |
| Dimensions | 159.2×75.0×12.9 mm | 163.0×76.8×8.2 mm | |
| Weight | 309 g | 230 g | |
| Launch price | $2899 | $950 |
Camera comparison
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
- Main: 200MP f/1.7
- Ultrawide: 12MP
- Telephoto: 10MP
- Front: 10MP
Vivo X300 Ultra
- Main: 200MP f/1.6
- Ultrawide: 50MP
- Telephoto: 200MP
- Front: 32MP
Display comparison
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
- 10.0" Dynamic AMOLED 2X
- Resolution: 2160x1584
- Refresh rate: 120 Hz
Vivo X300 Ultra
- 6.8" LTPO OLED
- Resolution: 3168x1440
- Refresh rate: 120 Hz
Battery and charging
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
- 5600 mAh
- Wired: 45W
- Wireless: 15W
Vivo X300 Ultra
- 7000 mAh
- NanoReview test: web browsing 10:18 hrs, total 29:11 hrs
- Wired: 100W
- Wireless: 40W
Overall performance score
We compared Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold and Vivo X300 Ultra, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Vivo X300 Ultra leads Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold by 31.1% in our overall performance rating.
Benchmarks
Launch prices and where to check today's
Launch price difference: $1949. Vivo X300 Ultra was $1949 cheaper at launch.
Detailed category analysis
performance
In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra is a bit better (99/100 vs 90/100).
display
In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (89/100 vs 70/100).
camera
In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (96/100 vs 52/100).
battery
In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (85/100 vs 63/100).
portability
In the "portability" category, the Vivo X300 Ultra notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (39/100 vs 20/100).
Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold or the Vivo X300 Ultra?
The Vivo X300 Ultra significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold by 22 points (91/100 vs 69/100).
What is the rating of the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold and the Vivo X300 Ultra?
The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold has a MobileRank rating of 69/100, the Vivo X300 Ultra — 91/100.
Which has the better camera: the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold or the Vivo X300 Ultra?
The Vivo X300 Ultra leads on camera score (96/100 vs 52/100).
Which is more powerful: the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold or the Vivo X300 Ultra?
The Vivo X300 Ultra leads on performance (99/100 vs 90/100).
Should you choose the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold over the Vivo X300 Ultra?
The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold is a better fit for gamers and power users. The Vivo X300 Ultra is a better fit for gamers and power users, mobile photography enthusiasts, those who care about battery life, budget-conscious buyers.