Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) vs Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B)
Direct side-by-side battle analyzing hardware specifications, benchmark percentiles, battery endurance, and category performance advantages.
Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7)
Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B)
WHY IS Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) BETTER THAN Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7)?
Tap an area on the radar to inspect category hardware facts
BIGGEST HARDWARE DIFFERENCES
Margin Delta| SPEC FACTOR | Samsung SM-F966Z | Xiaomi Poco | LEADER |
|---|---|---|---|
| Refresh Rate | 60Hz | 60Hz | 60Hz |
| Battery Capacity | 4,400 mAh | 5,000 mAh | +5,000 mAh |
| Wired Fast Charging | Standard | Standard | 25W |
| Main Camera Sensor | N/A | N/A | 48 MP |
| Screen Display Size | 6.49" | 6.67" | 6.67" |
| Chassis Weight | 215g | 179g | 179g Lightest |
Which Phone Should You Buy: Key Reasons & Hardware Advantages
Swipe across ⇄Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) edges ahead with a BeastScore of 71.4/100
After comprehensive hardware benchmark comparisons, Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) ranks as the overall top pick in this matchup. Key differentiators include its superior specifications and verified build advantages.
Frequently Asked Questions: Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) vs Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B)
Which is better: Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) or Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B)?
Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) leads with an overall BeastScore of 71.4/100 compared to Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) (70.7/100), driven by advantages in Higher overall BeastScore: 71.4 vs top rival 70.7 and Larger battery capacity: 5,000 mAh (+600 mAh more).
What are the primary battery and display differences between Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) and Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B)?
Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) is equipped with a 6.49-inch display and 4400 mAh battery, while Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) features a 6.67-inch display and 5000 mAh battery.
How do the performance capabilities compare between Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) and Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B)?
In objective hardware benchmarks, Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) achieves a 90/100 performance score, while Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) scores 80/100.
Related Smartphones (Based on Benchmark Scores)
Samsung SM-F966J Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG34 (Samsung Q7)
iPhone 13 Pro
Google Pixel 9a 5G TD-LTE 128GB JP G3Y12 (Google Tegu)
OnePlus Nord CE 3 Lite 5G Dual SIM TD-LTE IN 256GB CPH2467 (BBK Larry)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro 5G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 24090RA29G (Xiaomi Malachite B)
BBK Vivo Y100 5G 2024 Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 128GB V2327 (BBK V2327)
Oppo Reno11 5G 2024 Standard Edition Dual SIM TD-LTE ID V2 256GB CPH2599 (BBK 2599)
Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
More Smartphones Battles
Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) vs Xiaomi Poco M8 Pro 5G
Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) vs Xiaomi Poco M7 Pro 5G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 128GB 2409FPCC4G (Xiaomi Beryl Citrine)
Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) vs Xiaomi Poco M6 4G NFC Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 128GB 2404APC5FG (Xiaomi Tides Moon)
Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) vs Xiaomi Poco M6 Plus
Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) vs Samsung SM-F966J Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG34 (Samsung Q7)
Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) vs Samsung SM-F966J Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG34 (Samsung Q7)
Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) vs iPhone 13 Pro
Xiaomi Poco M6 Pro 4G Standard Edition Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 256GB 2312FPCA6G (Xiaomi Emerald B) vs iPhone 13 Pro
Related In-Depth Articles & Lab Reports
ComparisonApple iPhone Duo vs Galaxy Z Fold8 by the numbers
A detailed spec-by-spec breakdown comparing the Apple iPhone Duo and Samsung Galaxy Z Fold8 across screen area, hinge thickness, cameras, battery runtime, and pricing.
Flagship ShowdownSamsung Galaxy Z Fold6 vs. Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold vs. Honor Magic V3 vs. OnePlus Open: The Definitive Flagship Foldable Architecture, Hinge Engineering, Crease-Free Displays, and Camera Benchmark Showdown (2026)
An exhaustive microarchitectural breakdown, hinge mechanism stress-testing, crease analysis, dual-screen multitasking benchmarks, and periscope camera shootout across the 4 premier book-style foldables of 2026.
Definitive Wearable BenchmarkApple Watch Ultra 2 vs. Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra vs. Garmin Fenix 8: The Definitive Rugged Titanium Smartwatch Architecture, Dual-Frequency Multi-Band GPS Accuracy, AMOLED Displays, Scuba Dive Computers, and Extreme Battery Endurance Showdown (2026)
An exhaustive, laboratory-grade architectural deep dive and endurance benchmark comparing Apple's S9 SiP, Samsung's 3nm Exynos W1000, and Garmin's ultra-low-power MCU platform across multi-band GNSS tracking, 3000-nit displays, 40m scuba dive ratings, biometric sensors, and multi-week battery curves.