SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q vs vivo Y18e
Direct side-by-side battle analyzing hardware specifications, benchmark percentiles, battery endurance, and category performance advantages.
WHY IS vivo Y18e BETTER THAN SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q?
Tap an area on the radar to inspect category hardware facts
BIGGEST HARDWARE DIFFERENCES
Margin Delta| SPEC FACTOR | SM-F916J Galaxy | vivo Y18e | LEADER |
|---|---|---|---|
| Refresh Rate | 120Hz | 120Hz | 120Hz |
| Battery Capacity | 4,500 mAh | 5,000 mAh | +5,000 mAh |
| Wired Fast Charging | 25W | Standard | 25W |
| Main Camera Sensor | 12.2 MP | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Screen Display Size | 6.22" | 6.56" | 6.56" |
| Chassis Weight | 282g | N/A | 282g Lightest |
Which Phone Should You Buy: Key Reasons & Hardware Advantages
Swipe across โvivo Y18e edges ahead with a BeastScore of 79.3/100
After comprehensive hardware benchmark comparisons, vivo Y18e ranks as the overall top pick in this matchup. Key differentiators include its superior specifications and verified build advantages.
Frequently Asked Questions: SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q vs vivo Y18e
Which is better: SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q or vivo Y18e?
vivo Y18e leads with an overall BeastScore of 79.3/100 compared to SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q (79.1/100), driven by advantages in Higher overall BeastScore: 79.3 vs top rival 79.1 and Larger battery capacity: 5,000 mAh (+500 mAh more).
What are the primary battery and display differences between SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q and vivo Y18e?
SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q is equipped with a 6.22-inch display and 4500 mAh battery, while vivo Y18e features a 6.56-inch display and 5000 mAh battery.
How do the performance capabilities compare between SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q and vivo Y18e?
In objective hardware benchmarks, SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q achieves a 90/100 performance score, while vivo Y18e scores 70/100.
Related Smartphones (Based on Benchmark Scores)
More Smartphones Battles
vivo Y18e vs vivo Y200e
vivo Y18t vs vivo Y18e
SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q vs Galaxy S23
vivo Y18e vs Galaxy S23
SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q vs iPhone 16 Pro Max
vivo Y18e vs iPhone 16 Pro Max
SM-F916J Galaxy Z Fold2 UW 5G TD-LTE JP 256GB SCG05 / SM-F916Q vs Pixel 7a
vivo Y18e vs Pixel 7a
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.








