Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold vs Vivo X300s

The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (2025) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite, while the Vivo X300s (2026) runs on the Dimensity 9500; estimated prices are $2899 and $723. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo X300s leads — 89/100 vs 69/100 (a 20-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo X300s has the bigger battery (7100 mAh vs 5600); the Vivo X300s is faster in AnTuTu (3,703,823 vs 2,926,532); the Vivo X300s is noticeably lighter (217g vs 309g).

The Vivo X300s significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold by 20 points (89/100 vs 69/100).
Profile comparison
Category scores
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
Performance 91
Display 70
Camera 52
Battery 63
Portability 20
Value for money 42
Vivo X300s
Performance 94
Display 94
Camera 94
Battery 83
Portability 42
Value for money 90
What makes Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold better?

  • Overall rating 69/100
What makes Vivo X300s better?
  • Higher AnTuTu: 3703823 vs 2926532
  • Better Geekbench Single: 3228 vs 3041
  • Better Geekbench Multi: 9553 vs 9494
  • Bigger battery: 7100 vs 5600 mAh
  • Faster charging: 90W vs 45W
  • Higher refresh rate: 144Hz vs 120Hz
  • Faster wireless charging: 40W vs 15W
  • Lighter: 217g vs 309g
  • Cheaper: $723 vs $2899

  • Higher performance (94/100 vs 91/100)
  • Better camera (94/100 vs 52/100)
  • Longer battery life (83/100 vs 63/100)
  • Better display (94/100 vs 70/100)
  • Better portability (42/100 vs 20/100)
  • Better value for money (90/100 vs 42/100)
Comparison verdict

Comparing the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold vs the Vivo X300s, the Vivo X300s scores 20 points higher (89/100 vs 69/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300s leads (94/100 vs 52/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300s leads (83/100 vs 63/100). In the "value for money" category, the Vivo X300s leads (90/100 vs 42/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300s and the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold are nearly equal (94/100 vs 91/100). In the "display" category, the Vivo X300s notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (94/100 vs 70/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300s significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (94/100 vs 52/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300s notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (83/100 vs 63/100). In the "portability" category, the Vivo X300s notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (42/100 vs 20/100). In the "value for money" category, the Vivo X300s significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (90/100 vs 42/100).

Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold: The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold 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 TriFold Vivo X300s
Processor Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Dimensity 9500
AnTuTu 2926532 3703823
Geekbench Single 3041 3228
Geekbench Multi 9494 9553
Display 10.0" Dynamic AMOLED 2X 6.8" LTPO AMOLED
Resolution 2160x1584 2800x1260
Refresh rate 120 Hz 144 Hz
Battery 5600 mAh 7100 mAh
Charging 45W 90W
Wireless charging 15W 40W
Main camera 200 MP 200 MP
Ultrawide 12 MP 50 MP
Telephoto 10 MP 50 MP
Front camera 10 MP 50 MP
RAM 16GB 12GB / 16GB
Storage 512GB 256GB / 512GB / 1TB
OS Android 16 / One UI 8 Android 16 / OriginOS 6
Brightness (peak) 2600 nits
NFC yes
Protection IP48
Dimensions 159.2×75.0×12.9 mm
Weight 309 g 217 g
Price $2899 $723
Camera comparison
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
  • Main: 200MP f/f/1.7
  • Ultrawide: 12MP
  • Telephoto: 10MP
  • Front: 10MP
52
camera
Vivo X300s
  • Main: 200MP f/f/1.7
  • Ultrawide: 50MP
  • Telephoto: 50MP
  • Front: 50MP
94
camera
Display comparison
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
  • 10.0" Dynamic AMOLED 2X
  • Resolution: 2160x1584
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz
70
display
Vivo X300s
  • 6.8" LTPO AMOLED
  • Resolution: 2800x1260
  • Refresh rate: 144 Hz
94
display
Battery and charging
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
  • 5600 mAh
  • Wired: 45W
  • Wireless: 15W
63
battery
Vivo X300s
  • 7100 mAh
  • Wired: 90W
  • Wireless: 40W
83
battery
Overall performance score

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

Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite
69/100
2926532 AnTuTu
Vivo X300s Dimensity 9500
89/100 +21.0%
3703823 AnTuTu

Vivo X300s leads Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold by 21.0% in our overall performance rating.

Benchmarks
Price and availability
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold
$2899
Vivo X300s
$723

Price difference: $2176. Vivo X300s is cheaper by $2176.

Detailed category analysis
performance

In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300s and the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold are nearly equal (94/100 vs 91/100).

display

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

camera

In the "camera" category, the Vivo X300s significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (94/100 vs 52/100).

battery

In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300s notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (83/100 vs 63/100).

portability

In the "portability" category, the Vivo X300s notably outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (42/100 vs 20/100).

value for money

In the "value for money" category, the Vivo X300s significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold (90/100 vs 42/100).

Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold or the Vivo X300s?

The Vivo X300s significantly outperforms the Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold by 20 points (89/100 vs 69/100).

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

The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold has a MobileRank rating of 69/100, the Vivo X300s — 89/100.

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

The Vivo X300s leads on camera score (94/100 vs 52/100).

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

The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold 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.