The market for foldable phones is still getting hotter in 2025. The Vivo X Fold 5 and Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7 are two of the best high-end foldables on the market. You’re probably trying to choose between the Vivo X Fold 5 and the Z Fold 7 because you want the best foldable phone 2025 in terms of performance, build quality, camera, battery life, and long-term support.
Contents
This detailed guide looks at all the important features of these two high-end foldables and gives expert opinions and real-world benchmarks. This guide will help you choose the best foldable for you, whether you’re a power user, a mobile gamer, a photography fan, or just want the most future-proof one.
Overview of the Vivo X Fold 5 and the Z Fold 7
| Feature | Vivo X Fold 5 | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7 |
|---|---|---|
| Launch Date | July 2025 | July 2025 |
| Inner Display | 8.03″ 2K LTPO AMOLED, 120Hz | 7.6″ Dynamic AMOLED 2X, 120Hz |
| Outer Display | 6.53″ AMOLED, 120Hz | 6.3″ AMOLED, 120Hz |
| CPU | Snapdragon 8 Gen 4 | Snapdragon 8 Gen 4 |
| RAM & Storage | 12GB/16GB RAM, up to 1TB storage | 12GB/16GB RAM, up to 1TB storage |
| Battery Capacity | 5400 mAh, 100W wired, 50W wireless | 4900 mAh, 45W wired, 25W wireless |
| Rear Cameras | 50MP (main), 48MP (ultrawide), 64MP (periscope) | 50MP (main), 12MP (ultrawide), 10MP (telephoto) |
| Front Cameras | 16MP (outer), 16MP (under-display) | 10MP (outer), 4MP (under-display) |
| Operating System | OriginOS 5 (Android 15 based) | One UI 7 (Android 15 based) |
| Hinge | Carbon fiber design (durable) | Improved Armor Aluminum hinge |
| Starting Price | $1799 | $1899 |
Design and Quality of Construction
Both foldables show off great engineering, but they do it in different ways.
Vivo X Fold 5
- Features a better carbon fiber hinge that makes folding easier with an almost invisible crease.
- Thinner than the previous model.
- Folds completely flat, eliminating the wedge gap people complained about in the past.
- Built with aerospace-grade aluminum and options for eco-leather or matte glass finishes.
- Feels very high-end and premium.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7
- Incorporates small but important design improvements.
- New Armor Aluminum 2.0 hinge makes it lighter and slightly thinner.
- Crease is still visible in some lighting but less noticeable than the Fold 6.
- Improved IPX8 water resistance and better dust protection, nearing full IP68 certification.
Verdict
- Vivo wins if a fold-flat design and minimal crease are important.
- Samsung wins if water resistance and ecosystem integration matter more.
Experience on the Screen
Vivo X Fold 5
- Inner display: 8.03-inch LTPO AMOLED, clear 2K resolution, adaptive 120Hz refresh rate.
- Outer display: Tall 6.53″ AMOLED, feels like a regular smartphone.
- Peak brightness: 2800 nits.
- Inner crease is less noticeable.
- 21:9 aspect ratio ideal for reading documents and multitasking.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7
- Inner display: 7.6″ Dynamic AMOLED 2X with deep blacks and bright colors.
- Outer display: 6.3″ AMOLED with a standard smartphone aspect ratio.
- Improved viewing angles, less crease depth.
- Supports S Pen Fold for stylus input.
Verdict
- Vivo display offers fewer creases and a more immersive experience.
- Samsung display offers better stylus support.
- Choose Samsung if stylus input is a priority; choose Vivo for media and productivity.
Software and Performance
Performance Benchmarks
- Both phones use Snapdragon 8 Gen 4 chipsets, ensuring top-tier performance.
- Geekbench 6 (multi-core): Vivo ~7200, Samsung ~7150.
- 3DMark Wild Life: Vivo ~14500, Samsung ~14400.
- App launch speed: Both excellent.
- Gaming (Genshin Impact): 60 FPS on High settings for both.
Software Experience
- Vivo runs OriginOS 5 with multi-window features and device syncing for seamless multitasking.
- Samsung offers One UI 7, optimized for foldables with taskbar-like interface, DeX support, and promises 7 years of updates.
Verdict
- Samsung has an edge in future-proofing with long-term software support.
- Vivo excels in interface smoothness and innovative multitasking features.
Cameras
Vivo X Fold 5
- Main sensor: 50MP Sony IMX989, f/1.75, OIS.
- Ultra-wide: 48MP, 114° field of view.
- Periscope: 64MP with 3.5x optical zoom and up to 100x digital zoom.
- Partnership with ZEISS enhances color science.
- V3 imaging chip improves night and portrait shots.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7
- Main sensor: 50MP, f/1.8, OIS.
- Ultra-wide: 12MP.
- Telephoto: 10MP, 3x optical zoom.
- Enhanced computational photography with AI ISP improvements.
- Hardware slightly behind Vivo in sensor specs.
Verdict
- Vivo offers better optics, zoom, and versatility for photography enthusiasts.
- Samsung provides excellent image processing, especially for social media-ready shots.
Battery and Charging Features
| Feature | Vivo X Fold 5 | Galaxy Z Fold 7 |
|---|---|---|
| Battery Capacity | 5400 mAh | 4900 mAh |
| Wired Charging | 100W | 45W |
| Wireless Charging | 50W | 25W |
| Charging Time (0-100%) | ~35 minutes | ~60 minutes |
- Vivo leads in battery capacity and charging speed.
- With the included charger, Vivo charges from 0% to 50% in just 15 minutes.
Verdict
- Vivo X Fold 5 is the clear winner for fast charging and longer battery life.
Sturdiness
- Vivo uses a carbon fiber hinge tested for 500,000 folds but lacks full water resistance certification.
- Samsung offers IPX8 water resistance and improved hinge dust protection.
- Samsung’s longer track record in foldable durability gives it a slight edge, especially for outdoor or rough use.
Ecosystem and Extras
Samsung Ecosystem
- Strong integration with Galaxy Buds, Galaxy Watch, and Tab S-series.
- Samsung DeX for PC-like experience.
- Link to Windows for seamless connectivity.
- Optimized for S Pen (optional accessory).
Vivo Ecosystem
- Works well with Vivo Pad 2 Pro and TWS Air 2.
- Vivo PC Connect for syncing with Windows devices.
- No stylus support.
Verdict
- If you already own Samsung devices, the Galaxy Z Fold 7 offers a smoother cross-device experience.
- Vivo’s ecosystem is growing but less mature.
Software Updates
- Samsung promises up to 7 years of major OS and security updates (industry-leading).
- Vivo promises 4 years of major updates and 5 years of security patches.
Long-term software support is crucial for those wanting a secure and functional device for years.
Cost and Value
- Vivo X Fold 5 starts at $1799.
- Galaxy Z Fold 7 starts at $1899.
Vivo offers slightly better value with a superior camera system, faster charging, and bigger battery. However, Samsung’s higher price is justified by better resale value, warranty coverage, and ecosystem perks.
Real-Life Examples for Different Users
For Business People
- Winner: Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7
- Reasons: Samsung DeX, stylus input, and Microsoft integration make it great for productivity on the go.
For Photographers and Content Creators
- Winner: Vivo X Fold 5
- Reasons: Superior camera system, ZEISS tuning, and natural bokeh.
For Gamers
- Tie:
- Both run Snapdragon 8 Gen 4 excellently; Vivo’s larger screen and better cooling may appeal slightly more.
For Travelers
- Winner: Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7
- Reasons: Water resistance, global support, and Samsung’s repair network make it more reliable abroad.
Final Decision: Vivo X Fold 5 or Z Fold 7?
Choosing between the Vivo X Fold 5 and the Z Fold 7 depends on your priorities:
Pick Vivo X Fold 5 if you:
- Want the best camera setup on a foldable phone.
- Care about fast charging and longer battery life.
- Prefer a design with minimal creases and folds.
Pick Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7 if you:
- Need water resistance and tested durability.
- Require stylus support for productivity.
- Value long-lasting software updates and ecosystem integration.
Expert Advice
- The Vivo X Fold 5 offers the best hardware for tech fans, mobile photographers, and power users, all at a slightly lower price.
- The Z Fold 7 is a better long-term investment for business users, frequent travelers, or those deeply integrated into the Samsung ecosystem.
Both are excellent foldables and strong contenders for the best foldable phone 2025. Your brand loyalty and intended use case will likely be the deciding factors.
