Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra 256GB VS Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7

The most defining design difference here is obvious: the Galaxy Z Fold 7 folds, and the S25 Ultra does not. When unfolded, the Z Fold 7 spreads to a 143.2 mm width — nearly twice the S25 Ultra's 77.6 mm — yet measures a remarkably slim 4.2 mm thick in that state. In practice, this means the Fold 7 offers a tablet-like footprint when open, but collapses into a more pocketable slab when closed, at the cost of added bulk in its folded state. The S25 Ultra, by contrast, is a fixed-form device that sits at 8.2 mm thick at all times — thicker than the Fold 7 unfolded, but consistent and predictable in hand.

Despite the dramatic difference in form factor, weight is virtually a non-issue: the S25 Ultra weighs 218 g versus the Fold 7's 215 g, a difference of just 3 grams that no user will perceive. More interestingly, the Fold 7's total volume of 95.27 cm³ is actually lower than the S25 Ultra's 103.59 cm³, suggesting Samsung has engineered the Fold 7's hinge and body remarkably efficiently despite its mechanical complexity.

On water resistance, the S25 Ultra holds a clear edge with an IP68 rating versus the Fold 7's IP67. Both are waterproof in everyday scenarios, but IP68 means the S25 Ultra is rated for deeper and longer submersion — a meaningful reassurance for users in more demanding environments. Overall, neither phone dominates on design in a traditional sense: the S25 Ultra wins on water resistance durability, while the Z Fold 7 wins on form-factor versatility — the right choice depends entirely on whether a foldable experience is a priority.

Screen size and pixel density tell contrasting stories here. The Z Fold 7's inner display stretches to 8″ — a genuinely tablet-like canvas that makes a real difference for multitasking, reading, and media consumption. The S25 Ultra counters with a 6.9″ panel, which is large for a traditional smartphone but meaningfully smaller. Where the S25 Ultra reclaims ground, however, is in sharpness: its 498 ppi pixel density is significantly higher than the Fold 7's 368 ppi, a gap that translates to noticeably crisper text and finer detail — particularly relevant for S Pen use and reading small print. The Fold 7's lower ppi is a direct consequence of spreading its resolution across a much larger display area, and while 368 ppi is still respectable, the difference is visible side by side.

Both phones match each other on several key quality metrics: identical 120Hz refresh rates, identical 2600 nits peak brightness, and shared support for HDR10+ and Always-On Display. This means neither has an edge in motion smoothness or outdoor legibility — two areas where flagship buyers rightly have high expectations. The Z Fold 7 does gain a practical advantage through its secondary cover screen, which allows use without unfolding — a convenience the S25 Ultra simply cannot match by design.

Glass protection is a notable differentiator: the S25 Ultra ships with Gorilla Armor 2, a premium anti-reflective and damage-resistant solution, while the Fold 7 uses Gorilla Glass Victus 2 without the Armor designation — meaning no branded anti-reflective coating. For display durability and glare reduction, the S25 Ultra has a tangible edge. In summary, the Z Fold 7 wins on raw screen real estate and versatility, but the S25 Ultra leads on pixel sharpness and glass protection — making it the stronger display package for users who prioritize clarity and durability over size.

At the silicon level, these two phones are built on the same foundation: both run the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite on a 3 nm process, with identical GPU architecture, memory bandwidth, and thermal envelopes. For most buyers, this means day-to-day performance — app launches, scrolling, multitasking — will feel essentially indistinguishable between them. That said, the data reveals some meaningful separations once you look closer.

The Z Fold 7 pulls ahead in every benchmark result provided: its AnTuTu score of 2,771,639 is notably higher than the S25 Ultra's 2,207,809, and it also leads in both Geekbench 6 single-core (3,234 vs 3,057) and multi-core (10,059 vs 9,846) results. Intriguingly, the S25 Ultra actually carries a slightly higher peak CPU clock (4.47 GHz vs 4.32 GHz) and a higher GPU boost clock (1200 MHz vs 1100 MHz), yet scores lower across the board — a result consistent with the Fold 7's larger 16 GB of RAM versus the S25 Ultra's 12 GB, which can meaningfully impact benchmark workloads and sustained multitasking headroom. The Fold 7 also ships with a massive 1 TB of internal storage in this configuration, compared to 256 GB on the S25 Ultra — a stark difference for users with large media libraries or app collections.

On performance, the Z Fold 7 holds a clear edge as configured here: more RAM, more storage, and superior real-world benchmark results — despite sharing the same core chip. The S25 Ultra's raw clock speed advantage does not translate into higher scores based on the provided data, making the Fold 7 the stronger performer in this group by the numbers.

Both phones share the same 200 MP primary sensor, but their rear camera systems diverge significantly from there. The S25 Ultra fields a four-lens array — adding a 50 MP ultrawide and a 50 MP telephoto alongside a 10 MP periscope lens — while the Z Fold 7 makes do with three lenses, pairing its 200 MP main with a 12 MP ultrawide and a 10 MP telephoto. The resolution gap on the secondary lenses is substantial, and it compounds at the telephoto end: the S25 Ultra achieves 5x optical zoom versus the Fold 7's 3x, a difference that matters enormously for portrait compression and distant subject detail. For users who push their zoom regularly, the S25 Ultra's telephoto setup is a clear step up.

Video capability follows a similar pattern. The S25 Ultra records at 4320p at 30 fps, while the Fold 7 caps 8K capture at 24 fps — a lower frame rate that can introduce judder in fast-moving scenes. The S25 Ultra also benefits from a dual-tone LED flash with two LEDs for more color-accurate flash photography, compared to the Fold 7's single LED. On the front camera side, the Fold 7 makes an interesting trade-off: it houses an under-display camera on its inner screen — preserving the full display canvas — alongside a conventional cover screen camera, giving it more flexibility depending on use context. The S25 Ultra has a single conventional front camera at 12 MP, which is higher resolution than either of the Fold 7's front sensors at 10 MP.

Taken together, the S25 Ultra holds a meaningful edge in rear camera versatility — more lenses, higher secondary resolution, stronger optical zoom, and superior video frame rates. The Z Fold 7's under-display camera is a genuinely unique structural advantage for a foldable, but it does not offset the gap in the main system. For camera-first buyers, the S25 Ultra is the stronger choice based strictly on the specs provided.

Running the same Android 15 base, these two phones are nearly identical in software capability — and for the vast majority of daily use, users switching between them would notice no meaningful difference. Core productivity and privacy features such as split-screen multitasking, Picture-in-Picture, on-device machine learning, customizable notifications, and full-page screenshots are present on both. The shared foundation also means neither has an advantage in update cadence, as neither receives direct OS updates according to the provided data.

The divergences are real but narrow. The S25 Ultra supports cross-site tracking blocking and Wi-Fi password sharing, both absent on the Z Fold 7 — the former being a meaningful privacy safeguard during browsing, and the latter a small but genuinely convenient feature for sharing network access without revealing the actual password. The S25 Ultra also includes focus modes, which allow users to filter notifications and limit distractions by context — a useful workflow tool that the Z Fold 7 lacks according to the provided specs.

The differences here are modest in the grand scheme of a purchasing decision, but they consistently favor the S25 Ultra. It offers a slightly more complete software feature set across privacy controls and daily convenience tools. The Z Fold 7 is not meaningfully deficient — it simply misses a handful of features that the S25 Ultra includes, giving the latter a slim but clear edge in this category.

Battery capacity is where the S25 Ultra establishes a meaningful lead: its 5000 mAh cell is 600 mAh larger than the Z Fold 7's 4400 mAh pack — a 13% difference that, all else being equal, translates to a proportionally longer time between charges. That gap becomes even more relevant when you consider the Fold 7's larger 8″ inner display, which draws more power during active use. In other words, the Z Fold 7 pairs a smaller battery with a more power-hungry screen, a combination that puts meaningful pressure on all-day endurance for heavy users.

Wired charging speed widens the gap further. The S25 Ultra supports 45W fast charging, compared to the Fold 7's 25W — nearly double the wired charging rate. Practically, this means the S25 Ultra can recover from a low battery significantly faster, which matters for users who rely on short top-up windows throughout the day. Wireless charging is where the two converge: both deliver 15W wireless charging and 4.5W reverse wireless charging, making them equivalent for cable-free use cases.

The S25 Ultra wins this category decisively — it carries more capacity, charges faster over wired connections, and faces a less demanding display to power. The Z Fold 7 is not deficient in absolute terms, but the combined disadvantage of a smaller battery and slower wired charging makes it the weaker option here for users who prioritize longevity and rapid recovery.

Audio is one of the few categories in this comparison where the data tells a simple story: the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra 256GB and the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7 are completely identical across every provided specification. Both feature stereo speakers, both omit a 3.5 mm headphone jack, and both support the full trio of high-quality Bluetooth audio codecs — aptX, aptX HD, and LDAC. Neither includes a built-in radio.

The codec support is worth highlighting for wireless audio users. LDAC in particular allows for significantly higher bitrate transmission than standard Bluetooth audio — up to 990 kbps — making it the codec of choice when pairing with compatible high-resolution headphones. The inclusion of aptX HD alongside LDAC ensures broad compatibility with premium wireless audio hardware regardless of brand.

This category is a dead tie. There is no differentiator to call out between these two devices based on the provided specs — a user's audio experience, whether through speakers or wireless headphones, will be shaped by identical hardware capabilities on both phones.

Wireless connectivity is essentially a wash between these two devices. Both support Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 5.4, 5G, and NFC, and both deliver identical peak download and upload speeds. The sensor array is also largely shared — gyroscope, accelerometer, barometer, compass, and GPS are present on each. For the vast majority of connectivity use cases, users will find no practical difference between them.

Two distinctions are worth calling out. The S25 Ultra supports 2 physical SIMs plus 2 eSIMs, while the Z Fold 7 is limited to 1 physical SIM and 1 eSIM. For frequent travelers or users managing separate personal and work lines, the S25 Ultra's dual-SIM plus dual-eSIM setup offers meaningfully more flexibility. The S25 Ultra also supports ANT+ — a low-power wireless protocol commonly used to connect fitness accessories like heart rate straps and cycling sensors — which the Z Fold 7 lacks. This is a niche but real advantage for fitness-oriented users with ANT+ compatible gear.

The other major differentiator sits outside connectivity strictly defined but belongs in this category: the S25 Ultra includes a built-in S Pen stylus, while the Z Fold 7 does not. For note-taking, sketching, or precision input, this is a significant functional advantage that the Fold 7 simply cannot replicate without an accessory. On balance, the S25 Ultra holds a clear edge in this group — broader SIM flexibility, ANT+ support, and an included stylus give it a more complete feature set.

The Miscellaneous group for these two devices contains only three data points, and all three are identical: both the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra 256GB and the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7 include a video light, neither uses a sapphire glass display, and neither incorporates an e-paper display. There is simply no differentiator to analyze here.

This category is a complete tie based on the provided data. Neither product holds any advantage over the other within this specification group.