Sonim XP400 vs. Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro: Which Rugged Phone Reigns Supreme?

The Sonim XP400 and Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro both target the demanding needs of professionals requiring durable smartphones. However, they approach this goal with different philosophies. The XCover Pro, while a capable device, relies on an older chipset, while the XP400 leverages a newer, more efficient processor. This comparison dissects the key differences to determine which phone best suits your needs.
Phones Images

🏆 Quick Verdict

For most users prioritizing performance and future-proofing, the Sonim XP400 is the better choice. Its Snapdragon 4 Gen 2 (4nm) chipset delivers a noticeable performance advantage over the XCover Pro’s Exynos 9611 (10nm), translating to smoother multitasking and potentially longer software support. However, the XCover Pro remains a viable option for those on a tighter budget.

PHONES
Phone Names Sonim XP400 Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro
Network
2G bandsGSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
3G bandsHSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 - International
4G bands1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 42, 68, 711, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - International
5G bands1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41, 71, 75, 77, 78 SA/NSA-
SpeedHSPA, LTE, 5GHSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (3CA) Cat11 600/50 Mbps
TechnologyGSM / HSPA / LTE / 5GGSM / HSPA / LTE
 -1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 13, 14, 20, 29, 38, 40, 41, 66 - Canada
Launch
Announced2025, January 222020, January
StatusAvailable. Released 2025, January 22Available. Released 2020, January
Body
Dimensions170 x 78 x 10.2 mm (6.69 x 3.07 x 0.40 in)159.9 x 76.7 x 10 mm (6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 in)
SIMNano-SIM + Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM
Weight230 g (8.11 oz)218 g (7.69 oz)
 -IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 35 min) Drop-to-concrete resistance from up to 1.5m MIL-STD-810G compliant* *does not guarantee ruggedness or use in extreme conditions
Display
ProtectionCorning Gorilla Glass Victus 2Corning Gorilla Glass 5
Resolution720 x 1612 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~272 ppi density)1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~409 ppi density)
Size6.5 inches, 101.5 cm2 (~76.5% screen-to-body ratio)6.3 inches, 97.4 cm2 (~79.4% screen-to-body ratio)
TypeIPS LCDIPS LCD
Platform
CPUOcta-core (2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x1.95 GHz Cortex-A55)Octa-core (4x2.3 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x1.7 GHz Cortex-A53)
ChipsetQualcomm SM4450 Snapdragon 4 Gen 2 (4 nm)Exynos 9611 (10 nm)
GPUAdreno 613Mali-G72 MP3
OSAndroid 14, up to 2 major Android upgradesAndroid 10, upgradable to Android 13, One UI 5
Memory
Card slotmicroSDXC (uses shared SIM slot)microSDXC (dedicated slot)
Internal128GB 6GB RAM64GB 4GB RAM
Main Camera
Dual50 MP, (wide), PDAF 5 MP, (ultrawide)25 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
FeaturesLED flashDual-LED flash, HDR, panorama
Video1080p@30fps1080p@30fps
Selfie camera
Features-HDR
Single8 MP, (wide)13 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm
Video1080p@30fps1080p@30fps
Sound
3.5mm jack -Yes
35mm jackNoYes
Loudspeaker Yes, with stereo speakersYes
Comms
Bluetooth5.1, A2DP, LE5.0, A2DP, LE
NFCYesYes
PositioningGPS (L1+L5), GALILEO, GLONASSGPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS
RadioFM radioFM radio (market/region dependent)
USBUSB Type-C 3.1USB Type-C 2.0
WLANWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-bandWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/k/v/r, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct
Features
SensorsFingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometerFingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass
 -ANT+
Battery
Charging-15W wired
Type5000 mAhLi-Po 4050 mAh, removable
Misc
ColorsBlackBlack
Models-SM-G715FN/DS, SM-G715FN, SM-G715F, SM-G715W, SM-G715U, SM-G715U1
Price€ 249.90About 120 EUR
SAR EU-0.47 W/kg (head)     1.23 W/kg (body)

Sonim XP400

  • More powerful and efficient Snapdragon 4 Gen 2 chipset
  • Likely longer software support due to newer hardware
  • Potentially better battery life due to 4nm process

  • Less widely available than Samsung devices
  • Specific display details are currently unknown

Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro

  • Samsung ecosystem integration
  • Wider carrier availability
  • Established brand recognition

  • Older and less efficient Exynos 9611 chipset
  • Slower 15W charging
  • Potential for throttling under sustained load

Display Comparison

Neither device is known for a groundbreaking display. Specifics like brightness nits and panel type are unavailable for the XP400, but given its focus on outdoor usability, we can assume a reasonably bright panel. The XCover Pro’s display is similarly functional. The key difference lies in the underlying processing power needed to drive the display; the XP400’s more efficient chipset may contribute to slightly better battery life during prolonged screen-on time. Bezels are likely comparable, prioritizing durability over a sleek aesthetic on both.

Camera Comparison

Detailed camera specs are limited. Both phones likely feature serviceable cameras for documentation purposes, but neither is positioned as a photography powerhouse. The XCover Pro may include features like a dedicated macro lens (often 2MP), but these are typically of limited utility. The larger sensor size, if present on the XP400, would be a key advantage, capturing more light and detail. Image processing will likely differ, with Samsung’s software generally aiming for more vibrant, saturated images, while Sonim may prioritize accuracy.

Performance

The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Sonim XP400’s Qualcomm SM4450 Snapdragon 4 Gen 2 (4nm) is a significant upgrade over the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro’s Exynos 9611 (10nm). The 4nm process node of the Snapdragon offers superior power efficiency and thermal performance. The XP400’s CPU configuration – 2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x1.95 GHz Cortex-A55 – provides a more modern architecture than the XCover Pro’s 4x2.3 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x1.7 GHz Cortex-A53. This translates to faster application loading times, smoother multitasking, and improved responsiveness. The XCover Pro, while adequate for basic tasks, is likely to exhibit throttling under sustained load due to its less efficient chipset and larger process node.

Battery Life

Battery capacity details are missing for the XP400. The XCover Pro supports 15W wired charging, a relatively slow rate by today’s standards. The XP400’s more efficient Snapdragon 4 Gen 2 chipset will likely result in better battery life, even with a comparable or slightly smaller battery capacity. The 4nm process node significantly reduces power consumption, extending usage time between charges. While the XCover Pro’s battery life is adequate, the XP400 is poised to offer a more enduring experience, particularly for users in the field.

Buying Guide

Buy the Sonim XP400 if you need a rugged phone with modern processing power for demanding applications, reliable performance under sustained loads, and a device likely to receive longer software updates. Buy the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro if you prioritize Samsung’s ecosystem integration, prefer a more readily available device through carrier channels, and are comfortable with a slightly older, less efficient chipset for basic task management.

Frequently Asked Questions

❓ Does the Exynos 9611 in the Galaxy XCover Pro overheat during prolonged use of GPS and data?
The Exynos 9611, built on a 10nm process, is known to generate more heat than newer chipsets. Prolonged use of demanding features like GPS, mobile data, and power-intensive apps can lead to noticeable throttling, reducing performance to manage temperatures. Users reporting heavy field work may experience slowdowns.
❓ How does the Snapdragon 4 Gen 2 in the Sonim XP400 handle multitasking compared to the XCover Pro?
The Snapdragon 4 Gen 2’s octa-core CPU, featuring Cortex-A78 cores, provides a significant advantage in multitasking. The more modern architecture and efficient 4nm process allow for smoother switching between apps and handling multiple tasks simultaneously without significant performance degradation, unlike the XCover Pro’s older Exynos 9611.
❓ Is the 15W charging on the Galaxy XCover Pro sufficient for all-day use?
While 15W charging is adequate for overnight charging, it’s relatively slow compared to modern standards. A full charge will take considerably longer, and topping up the battery during a short break may not provide a substantial boost. The XP400’s more efficient chipset may reduce the need for frequent charging, mitigating this issue.