CMF Phone 2 Pro VS Vivo S30

The most consequential difference in this category is water protection. The Vivo S30 carries an IP67 rating, meaning it can withstand submersion in up to 1 meter of water for 30 minutes — genuine waterproofing that covers accidental drops in a sink or pool. The CMF Phone 2 Pro is rated IP54, which only guarantees protection against splashes and dust ingress from any direction. In practice, this means the CMF can handle rain or a quick splash, but should never be submerged. For users who frequently use their phone near water or in unpredictable environments, this is a meaningful real-world gap.

On physical dimensions, the two phones tell an interesting story. The Vivo S30 is notably more compact — shorter at 160.2 mm versus 164 mm, narrower at 74.4 mm versus 78 mm, and has a significantly smaller overall volume (89.4 cm³ vs 99.8 cm³). The CMF Phone 2 Pro is, however, slightly lighter at 185 g compared to the Vivo's 192 g, despite being the larger device. The Vivo is also marginally thinner at 7.5 mm vs 7.8 mm. In hand, the Vivo S30 will feel noticeably more pocketable and easier to reach across with one hand, while the CMF's size advantage is limited to a modest weight reduction.

Neither phone has a rugged build or a foldable form factor, so neither targets those niches. Overall, the Vivo S30 holds a clear design edge: it is more compact and meaningfully better protected against water ingress. The CMF Phone 2 Pro's slight weight advantage does not offset the Vivo's superior IP rating and smaller footprint for most users.

Both phones use OLED/AMOLED panels with a 120Hz refresh rate, so the baseline experience — smooth scrolling, deep blacks, infinite contrast — is shared. The differences emerge in the finer details. The Vivo S30 packs a 1260 x 2800 px resolution into a 6.67″ screen, yielding a remarkably sharp 460 ppi pixel density. The CMF Phone 2 Pro stretches to 6.77″ but at a lower 1080 x 2392 px resolution, landing at 388 ppi. In everyday use the CMF's sharpness is perfectly adequate, but the Vivo's display is noticeably crisper — a difference most visible when reading small text or viewing fine detail in photos.

Brightness is another area where the Vivo S30 pulls ahead meaningfully. Its 1300 nits typical brightness significantly outpaces the CMF's 800 nits, which translates directly to better legibility in bright sunlight. The contrast ratio gap is even more dramatic on paper — the Vivo claims 8,000,000:1 versus the CMF's 1,000,000:1 — though both ratios are high enough that the practical difference in everyday viewing is subtle. Where the CMF reclaims some ground is HDR content support: it covers both HDR10 and HDR10+, while the Vivo S30 supports neither standard. This means streaming HDR content from compatible services will render with greater dynamic range and color accuracy on the CMF.

The verdict here is a genuine split. For raw display quality — sharpness, brightness, and outdoor usability — the Vivo S30 has a clear edge. But if consuming HDR video from platforms like Amazon Prime or YouTube is a priority, the CMF Phone 2 Pro's HDR10+ support is a tangible advantage the Vivo simply cannot match.

Both phones are built on a 4nm process node and share the same DDR5 memory standard, so they start from a similar architectural foundation. Beyond that baseline, the chipsets diverge in meaningful ways. The CMF Phone 2 Pro runs on the MediaTek Dimensity 7300, a capable mid-range chip with a straightforward dual-cluster CPU design. The Vivo S30 steps up to the Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 4, which uses a more sophisticated tri-cluster CPU arrangement — one high-performance core at 2.8 GHz, four efficiency-oriented cores, and three low-power cores. This architecture is better tuned to balance peak performance with battery efficiency across varied workloads.

The RAM story is where the gap becomes most tangible for everyday use. The Vivo S30 ships with 16GB of RAM versus the CMF's 8GB — double the headroom for keeping apps alive in the background, which directly reduces reload times when multitasking. The CMF counters with a notably faster RAM speed of 6400 MHz compared to the Vivo's 4200 MHz, meaning individual memory operations are quicker even if total capacity is lower. Storage follows a similar pattern: the Vivo offers 512GB of internal space against the CMF's 256GB, a significant advantage for users who store large media libraries locally.

GPU clock speeds are nearly identical — 1047 MHz on the CMF versus 1000 MHz on the Vivo — so neither holds a meaningful graphics edge on that metric alone. On balance, the Vivo S30 holds the stronger performance profile: its more capable chipset, double the RAM, and double the storage represent a substantial real-world upgrade, even if the CMF's faster RAM speed keeps it competitive in raw memory throughput.

The rear camera systems share the same headline megapixel count — 50 & 50 & 8 MP across three lenses — along with OIS, phase-detection autofocus, and identical 4K/30fps video capability. The meaningful divergence is in zoom reach and aperture trade-offs. The Vivo S30 offers 3x optical zoom versus the CMF Phone 2 Pro's 2x, and its focal length range extends to 70 mm compared to the CMF's 50 mm. For portrait and telephoto shots, the Vivo can compress backgrounds more naturally and get closer to a subject without cropping. However, there is a real trade-off: the Vivo's telephoto lens has a narrower f/2.7 aperture, while the CMF's second lens opens to a wider f/1.9 — meaning the CMF lets in significantly more light through that lens, which matters in lower-light zoom scenarios. The CMF also starts wider at a 15 mm minimum focal length versus the Vivo's 23 mm, giving it more versatility for environmental and architectural shots.

The front camera is where the Vivo S30 establishes an unambiguous advantage. Its 50 MP selfie sensor dwarfs the CMF's 16 MP shooter — more than three times the resolution. For users who prioritize selfie quality, video calls, or front-camera content creation, this gap is substantial: the Vivo can resolve far more detail and offers much greater cropping flexibility without losing clarity.

Tallying it up, neither phone dominates across every dimension. The CMF Phone 2 Pro has a wider field of view and a brighter telephoto aperture, while the Vivo S30 reaches further with its zoom and excels dramatically up front. For users who value selfie performance or telephoto reach, the Vivo S30 holds the overall camera edge; for those who shoot wide scenes or prioritize low-light zoom, the CMF's configuration is more accommodating.

Across every single specification in this category, the CMF Phone 2 Pro and Vivo S30 are identical — both ship with Android 15 and share the exact same feature set without a single point of divergence. Privacy controls, multitasking capabilities, customization options, and accessibility features all match one-for-one.

This is a complete tie. Neither phone holds any advantage over the other in operating system features based on the provided data, and any differences a user might experience in practice would come down to each manufacturer's custom Android skin — which falls outside the scope of these specs.

The Vivo S30 dominates this category on two fronts. Its 6500 mAh battery is 30% larger than the CMF Phone 2 Pro's 5000 mAh cell — a gap that, in practical terms, can translate to several additional hours of screen-on time before needing to reach for a cable. For heavy users or those who travel without reliable access to a charger, that extra capacity is a genuine daily-life advantage.

Charging speed compounds the lead further. The Vivo S30 supports 90W fast charging, nearly three times the CMF's 33W. Despite carrying a significantly larger battery, the Vivo is capable of replenishing it in a fraction of the time it would take to charge the CMF. The Vivo also ships with a charger included in the box, while CMF Phone 2 Pro buyers need to source one separately — an added cost and inconvenience worth factoring into the total ownership picture. Neither phone supports wireless charging, so that is a non-factor for this comparison.

The verdict is straightforward: the Vivo S30 holds a commanding battery advantage in every measurable dimension — more capacity, dramatically faster charging, and a charger included out of the box. The CMF Phone 2 Pro has no offsetting strengths in this category.

Audio is another category where the Vivo S30 pulls clearly ahead. It features stereo speakers — a capability the CMF Phone 2 Pro entirely lacks, relying instead on a single mono speaker. For media consumption, gaming, or simply playing music without headphones, stereo output creates a noticeably wider, more immersive soundstage. The CMF's mono setup, by contrast, compresses all audio to a single channel.

The wireless audio codec support tells a similar story. The Vivo S30 supports aptX, aptX HD, and aptX Adaptive, enabling significantly higher-quality Bluetooth audio transmission to compatible headphones — aptX HD targets 24-bit lossless-grade wireless audio, while aptX Adaptive dynamically adjusts bitrate for stability and quality. The CMF Phone 2 Pro supports none of these codecs, meaning users with premium Bluetooth headphones will be unable to unlock their full audio potential when paired with the CMF. Notably, neither phone supports LDAC, so Sony-ecosystem users are equally limited on both devices.

Both phones drop the 3.5mm headphone jack, so wired audio options are equally constrained. That shared omission aside, the Vivo S30 wins this category decisively — stereo speakers for everyday listening and a strong aptX codec stack for wireless audio make it the substantially better-equipped phone for users who care about sound quality.

The connectivity foundations are nearly identical — both phones offer 5G, the same tri-band Wi-Fi stack (Wi-Fi 4/5/6), dual SIM, NFC, USB-C, and an identical sensor suite including GPS, gyroscope, and accelerometer. Given how much ground these two cover in common, the differentiators here are few but worth understanding clearly.

Each phone claims one exclusive feature the other lacks. The CMF Phone 2 Pro includes an external memory slot, allowing users to expand storage via a microSD card — a meaningful practical advantage for anyone who shoots lots of video or stores large local media libraries, especially given the CMF's more limited 256GB internal storage. The Vivo S30 counters with an infrared sensor, which lets the phone function as a universal remote for TVs, air conditioners, and other IR-compatible appliances — a niche but genuinely useful convenience for users in IR-heavy households. The Vivo also edges ahead on Bluetooth 5.4 versus the CMF's 5.3, though in practice the real-world difference between these two adjacent versions is negligible for most users.

This category is effectively a wash with different trade-offs: the CMF Phone 2 Pro appeals to users who prioritize storage flexibility, while the Vivo S30 suits those who value smart-home device control. Neither advantage is universally more important — it comes down entirely to individual use patterns.

Every specification in this group matches exactly between the two phones — both have a video light, neither features sapphire glass, a curved display, or an e-paper display. There is simply nothing to separate them here, making this a complete tie with no advantage to either device.