Samsung Galaxy S25 VS Vivo X Fold 5

The most fundamental design difference here is form factor: the Samsung Galaxy S25 is a traditional candy-bar smartphone, while the Vivo X Fold 5 is a foldable device — and that single distinction cascades into every other physical attribute. The Vivo's unfolded width of 142.7 mm gives it a tablet-like display surface, but when folded in half that footprint shrinks dramatically, making it pocketable. This versatility comes at a cost: the Vivo weighs 219 g versus the Galaxy S25's 162 g, a difference of roughly 57 g that users will feel acutely during prolonged one-handed use or all-day carry. The S25 is simply a lighter, more ergonomically conventional device.

Thickness tells an interesting story. At 4.7 mm unfolded, the Vivo X Fold 5 achieves a remarkably slim profile — thinner than almost any slab phone on the market — which is an engineering feat for a foldable. However, that measurement applies only when the device is lying flat and open; folded, the thickness roughly doubles, making the S25's 7.2 mm the more consistently slim option in day-to-day pocket use.

On durability, the Galaxy S25 holds a clear edge. Its IP68 rating means full waterproofing submersion protection, whereas the Vivo X Fold 5 carries an IP58 rating — the lower ″5″ dust-ingress digit indicates it is not fully dust-tight, only protected against limited dust contact. Both handle water, but the S25 offers meaningfully stronger all-around environmental protection. In summary, the Galaxy S25 wins on weight, consistent thinness, and durability ratings, while the Vivo X Fold 5 offers the transformative versatility of a foldable form factor for users who prioritize that flexibility over a lighter, more rugged build.

Both phones use OLED/AMOLED panels with a 120Hz refresh rate and near-identical pixel density — 416 ppi on the Galaxy S25 versus 413 ppi on the Vivo X Fold 5 — meaning sharpness in everyday use is virtually indistinguishable between them. Where they diverge sharply is screen real estate. The Vivo's primary display measures 8.03 inches unfolded, dwarfing the S25's 6.2-inch panel, and its unusual 2480 x 2200 resolution reflects a nearly square aspect ratio optimized for multitasking and split-screen productivity. The Vivo also includes a secondary cover screen, which allows basic use without ever unfolding the device — a meaningful convenience the S25 simply cannot offer.

On content and durability, the trade-offs shift. The Galaxy S25 features branded damage-resistant glass over its display, providing a layer of scratch and drop protection that the Vivo X Fold 5 lacks — an expected compromise given the mechanical complexity of a folding hinge. For HDR content, the Vivo gains a slight edge by adding Dolby Vision support on top of the HDR10 and HDR10+ standards both phones share, meaning it can render a wider range of streaming content at its intended mastered quality from platforms like Netflix and Apple TV+.

Overall, the Vivo X Fold 5 holds the display advantage for users who prioritize screen size, multitasking flexibility, and content versatility. The Galaxy S25 counters with a more durable, protected panel and a compact form that suits one-handed, on-the-go use — but purely on display capability and flexibility, the Vivo leads.

The chipset gap between these two devices is substantial. The Galaxy S25 runs on the Snapdragon 8 Elite built on a 3 nm process, while the Vivo X Fold 5 uses the Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 on a 4 nm node — a meaningful generational and tier difference. The Geekbench 6 scores make this concrete: the S25 posts 3175 single-core and 10050 multi-core results versus the Vivo's 2019 single-core and 5570 multi-core. Single-core performance governs the responsiveness of everyday tasks — app launches, UI animations, typing — while multi-core scores reflect sustained workloads like video export or gaming. The S25 leads decisively on both. Its faster RAM speed of 5300 MHz versus 4800 MHz and higher memory bandwidth of 85.1 GB/s versus 64 GB/s compound this advantage, enabling data to be fed to the CPU and GPU more rapidly under load.

The Vivo does win on raw storage: its base configuration ships with 1TB of internal storage compared to the S25's 512 GB, which is a genuine differentiator for users who store large video libraries or shoot in high-bitrate formats. It also carries 16 GB of RAM versus 12 GB, which can help sustain more apps in memory simultaneously — useful given its multitasking-oriented foldable form factor. However, the Vivo's higher TDP of 12.5W versus 8.2W suggests the 8s Gen 3 runs hotter and draws more power relative to its performance output, which is a hallmark of older or mid-tier silicon trying to keep pace.

The Galaxy S25 holds a clear and significant performance advantage across nearly every computational metric. Unless a user specifically requires the extra storage headroom of the Vivo, the S25's combination of cutting-edge silicon, faster memory, and superior efficiency makes it the stronger performer in this category by a wide margin.

Both the Samsung Galaxy S25 and Vivo X Fold 5 feature multi-lens main cameras, but their configurations differ. The Galaxy S25 has a 50 & 12 & 10 MP setup with apertures of 1.8 & 2.2 & 2.4f, while the Vivo X Fold 5 uses three 50 MP sensors with apertures of 1.6 & 2.6 & 2.1f. Both devices offer optical zoom at 3x, built-in optical image stabilization, dual-tone LED flashes with 2 LEDs, phase-detection autofocus, continuous autofocus for video, manual focus, manual ISO, manual exposure, touch autofocus, and the ability to create panoramas in-camera.

The front camera setups differ: the Galaxy S25 has a single 12MP front camera, while the Vivo X Fold 5 has dual 20 & 20 MP front cameras. Neither device has a front-facing LED flash, a camera under the display, a dual-lens front camera, or 3D photo/video recording capabilities. Video recording on the main camera matches at 4320 x 30 fps, and both support slow-motion video, HDR mode, and timelapse functions. The Galaxy S25 can shoot raw images, whereas the Vivo X Fold 5 does not.

Some sensor differences exist: the Galaxy S25 includes a BSI sensor but lacks laser autofocus, while the Vivo X Fold 5 does not have a BSI sensor but does include laser autofocus. Both phones have CMOS sensors, can perform serial shots, and support manual white balance. Neither shoots 360° panoramas or supports Dolby Vision recording on the main camera.

Both the Samsung Galaxy S25 and the Vivo X Fold 5 run Android 15, offering a wide range of privacy features, such as clipboard warnings, location privacy options, and camera/microphone privacy options. Both devices support theme customization, blocking app tracking, on-device machine learning, and have notification permissions. They also include features like dark mode, Wi-Fi password sharing (not available on either device), and battery health checks, with both phones offering an extra dim mode.

There are a few differences in functionality: the Galaxy S25 supports PiP (Picture-in-Picture) mode, can be used as a PC, and provides dynamic theming, while the Vivo X Fold 5 does not have PC functionality. Both devices can offload apps, have customizable notifications, and allow for full-page screenshots. They both support split screen and widgets, and are free and open-source, with offline voice recognition and voice commands available on both.

Both the Galaxy S25 and the Vivo X Fold 5 track the current position of a mobile device and function as multi-user systems. Neither device gets direct OS updates, and neither has Quick Start functionality. The Galaxy S25 has more PC-related features, while the Vivo X Fold 5 lacks that ability but shares a similar suite of privacy and customization options.

The Samsung Galaxy S25 is equipped with a 4000 mAh battery, while the Vivo X Fold 5 features a larger 6000 mAh battery. Both devices support wireless charging, but the Galaxy S25 has a wireless charging speed of 15W, whereas the Vivo X Fold 5 offers faster wireless charging at 40W. In terms of fast charging, the Galaxy S25 supports 25W charging speed, while the Vivo X Fold 5 significantly outpaces it with an 80W charging speed.

Both phones also support reverse wireless charging, with the Galaxy S25 providing a reverse charging speed of 4.5W and the Vivo X Fold 5 offering a slightly higher reverse charging speed of 5W. The Galaxy S25 does not come with a charger, whereas the Vivo X Fold 5 includes one in the box. Neither phone has a removable battery, but both have rechargeable batteries and a battery level indicator.

Both devices share common features such as supporting wireless charging, fast charging, reverse wireless charging, and battery level indicators, but the Vivo X Fold 5 excels with its larger battery, faster charging capabilities, and the inclusion of a charger in the box, making it a more power-efficient option in terms of charging speed and battery capacity.

Both the Samsung Galaxy S25 and Vivo X Fold 5 lack a 3.5 mm audio jack, so users will need to rely on wireless or USB audio solutions. Both devices come with stereo speakers, providing enhanced audio output. The Galaxy S25 supports aptX, LDAC, aptX Adaptive, and aptX Lossless, while the Vivo X Fold 5 also supports aptX, aptX HD, and aptX Adaptive, but it does not support LDAC or aptX Lossless.

Neither device has a built-in radio, but both support high-quality Bluetooth audio technologies, with the Galaxy S25 offering more versatility by supporting LDAC and aptX Lossless for higher audio quality. The Vivo X Fold 5, on the other hand, supports aptX HD, which focuses on delivering high-definition audio over Bluetooth.

In terms of audio technology, the key difference lies in the audio codecs: the Galaxy S25 supports more advanced options for wireless audio, particularly aptX Lossless and LDAC, while the Vivo X Fold 5 focuses on aptX HD and does not include support for LDAC or Lossless codecs.

Both the Samsung Galaxy S25 and Vivo X Fold 5 support 5G and have similar Wi-Fi capabilities, supporting Wi-Fi 4, Wi-Fi 5, Wi-Fi 6, Wi-Fi 6E, and Wi-Fi 7. They both feature Bluetooth 5.4, NFC, USB Type-C (with USB 3.2), and have fingerprint scanners. The download and upload speeds are identical for both devices, with 10000 MBits/s and 3500 MBits/s, respectively. Both phones also include GPS, a compass, a gyroscope, and an accelerometer, providing strong sensor support.

The Galaxy S25 offers more connectivity features, including support for ANT+ and a barometer, while the Vivo X Fold 5 lacks ANT+ and the barometer. The Vivo X Fold 5 also includes an infrared sensor, which the Galaxy S25 does not have. Neither device supports emergency SOS via satellite, crash detection, DLNA certification, or has motion or optical tracking. Both phones lack a stylus, 3D facial recognition, an iris scanner, HDMI output, and a built-in projector.

Overall, the two devices have many similarities in terms of core connectivity and sensor features, with the Galaxy S25 offering a bit more in terms of ANT+ and barometer support, while the Vivo X Fold 5 adds an infrared sensor. Both phones lack some advanced features like motion tracking or optical tracking.

Both the Samsung Galaxy S25 and the Vivo X Fold 5 come with a video light, enhancing their video recording capabilities in low-light environments. Neither device features sapphire glass display protection, a curved display, or an e-paper display. These two phones share similar specifications in this miscellaneous category, with no notable differences between them.

Overall, the key feature for both is the inclusion of a video light, while other features like sapphire glass, curved displays, and e-paper displays are not present on either device.

In this group, the Samsung Galaxy S25 and Vivo X Fold 5 are identical in terms of additional display and video features.