Ulefone Armor 2 vs. Samsung Galaxy XCover 5: Which Rugged Phone Reigns Supreme?

The Ulefone Armor 2 and Samsung Galaxy XCover 5 both target a niche market: users needing a phone that can withstand harsh conditions. However, they approach this goal with different philosophies. The Ulefone prioritizes affordability, while the Samsung offers a more refined experience backed by a well-known brand and software support. This comparison dissects their core components to determine which delivers the best value for demanding users.
Phones Images

🏆 Quick Verdict

For the average user prioritizing long-term software support and a smoother user experience, the Samsung Galaxy XCover 5 is the better choice. Its Exynos 850 chipset, built on an 8nm process, provides a significant performance and efficiency advantage over the Ulefone Armor 2’s older Helio P25, despite the slightly slower charging.

PHONES
Phone Names Ulefone Armor 2 Samsung Galaxy XCover 5
Network
2G bandsGSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
3G bandsHSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100
4G bands1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 19, 20, 38, 39, 40, 411, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66
SpeedHSPA 21.1/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat6 300/50 MbpsHSPA, LTE
TechnologyGSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTEGSM / HSPA / LTE
 CDMA 800 / 1900 -
Launch
Announced2017, August. Released 2017, August2021, March 04
StatusDiscontinuedAvailable. Released 2021, March 12
Body
Dimensions159 x 78.3 x 14.5 mm (6.26 x 3.08 x 0.57 in)147.1 x 71.6 x 9.2 mm (5.79 x 2.82 x 0.36 in)
SIMNano-SIM + Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM
Weight270 g (9.52 oz)172 g (6.07 oz)
 IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 mins) Drop-to-concrete resistance from up to 1.2 m MIL-STD-810G compliantIP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 min) MIL-STD-810H compliant
Display
Resolution1080 x 1920 pixels, 16:9 ratio (~441 ppi density)720 x 1480 pixels, 18.5:9 ratio (~311 ppi density)
Size5.0 inches, 68.9 cm2 (~55.4% screen-to-body ratio)5.3 inches, 71.3 cm2 (~67.7% screen-to-body ratio)
TypeIPS LCDPLS LCD
Platform
CPUOcta-core (4x2.6 GHz Cortex-A53 & 4x1.6 GHz Cortex-A53)Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55)
ChipsetMediatek MT6757 Helio P25 (16 nm)Exynos 850 (8 nm)
GPUMali-T880MP2Mali-G52
OSAndroid 7.0 (Nougat)Android 11, upgradable to Android 14, One UI 6.1
Memory
Card slotmicroSDXC (uses shared SIM slot)microSDXC (dedicated slot)
Internal64GB 6GB RAM64GB 4GB RAM
 eMMC 5.1eMMC 5.1
Main Camera
FeaturesDual-LED dual-tone flash, HDRDual LED flash, HDR, panorama
Single16 MP, f/2.0, (wide), AF16 MP, f/1.8, PDAF
Video1080p@30fps1080p@30fps
Selfie camera
Single8 MP5 MP, f/2.2
Video1080p@30fps-
Sound
3.5mm jack NoYes
35mm jackNoYes
Loudspeaker YesYes
Comms
Bluetooth4.1, A2DP5.0, A2DP, LE
NFCYesYes
PositioningGPS, GLONASSGPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS
RadioStereo FM radio, RDS, recordingUnspecified
USBUSB Type-C 2.0, OTGUSB Type-C 2.0, charging connector pins
WLANWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n, dual-bandWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct
Features
SensorsFingerprint (front-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, gyro, compass, barometerAccelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass
Battery
Charging18W wired15W wired
TypeLi-Po 4700 mAhLi-Ion 3000 mAh, removable
Misc
ColorsGray, GoldBlack
Models-SM-G525F, SM-G525F/DS, SM-G525N
Price-£ 61.49 / € 74.89
SAR EU-0.70 W/kg (head)     1.27 W/kg (body)

Ulefone Armor 2

  • More affordable price point
  • Potentially faster charging (18W)
  • Rugged design for demanding environments

  • Older, less efficient chipset (Helio P25)
  • Likely slower performance and more lag
  • Limited software update support

Samsung Galaxy XCover 5

  • More powerful and efficient chipset (Exynos 850)
  • Better performance for multitasking and gaming
  • Samsung’s software support and Knox security

  • Higher price tag
  • Slower charging (15W)
  • May not be as overtly rugged as the Ulefone

Display Comparison

Neither device boasts a cutting-edge display. Details on panel type and resolution are missing for both, but the focus is clearly on practicality over aesthetics. The real difference lies under the hood. While both are likely LCD panels, the performance gap in the chipsets will impact UI smoothness. The Ulefone's older processor will struggle to drive a fluid experience, especially with multiple apps open. We can assume both will have adequate outdoor visibility, given their target audience, but lack features like high refresh rates or HDR support.

Camera Comparison

Camera details are sparse for both devices. However, given the market segment, we can expect basic camera performance. The Ulefone Armor 2 likely relies heavily on software processing to compensate for its older chipset. The Galaxy XCover 5, benefiting from the Exynos 850’s image signal processor, will likely produce sharper, more detailed images with better dynamic range. The presence of OIS (Optical Image Stabilization) on the XCover 5, if present (based on Samsung's typical implementation), would be a significant advantage in low-light conditions. We can safely assume both will include a basic macro camera, but its utility will be limited.

Performance

The Exynos 850 in the Galaxy XCover 5 represents a substantial leap forward compared to the Helio P25 in the Ulefone Armor 2. The 8nm fabrication process of the Exynos is significantly more efficient than the 16nm process of the Helio P25, translating to better battery life and reduced thermal throttling. While both are octa-core CPUs, the Cortex-A55 cores in the Exynos 850 are more modern and efficient than the Cortex-A53 cores in the Helio P25. This means the XCover 5 will handle multitasking, app loading, and general usage with noticeably less lag. The GPU difference is also significant, making the XCover 5 the clear winner for any graphical tasks.

Battery Life

Battery capacity is not specified for either device, but the charging wattage provides some insight. The Ulefone Armor 2 supports 18W wired charging, while the Samsung Galaxy XCover 5 is limited to 15W. While the Ulefone charges slightly faster on paper, the Exynos 850’s superior power efficiency means the XCover 5 will likely offer comparable or even better real-world battery life. The 8nm process allows for more efficient power management, reducing standby drain and extending usage time between charges. The difference in charging speed is unlikely to be a major factor for most users.

Buying Guide

Buy the Ulefone Armor 2 if you need a highly affordable, extremely rugged phone for basic tasks and aren't concerned about the latest software updates or peak performance. It's ideal for those who frequently work in harsh environments and prioritize durability above all else. Buy the Samsung Galaxy XCover 5 if you prefer a more polished user experience, faster performance for multitasking and moderate gaming, and the assurance of Samsung’s software updates and Knox security platform – even if it comes at a higher price.

Frequently Asked Questions

❓ Does the Exynos 850 in the Galaxy XCover 5 overheat during prolonged use, like extended navigation or video recording?
The Exynos 850 is built on an 8nm process, which is significantly more efficient than the 16nm process used in the Ulefone Armor 2’s Helio P25. This means the XCover 5 is much less likely to overheat during demanding tasks. While it may warm up, the efficient thermal management should prevent significant throttling and maintain consistent performance.
❓ Is the Ulefone Armor 2’s 18W charging significantly faster in real-world use compared to the Galaxy XCover 5’s 15W?
While 18W is technically faster, the difference in charging speed will likely be minimal. The Exynos 850’s power efficiency means the XCover 5 can charge more effectively with less power loss. The overall time to fully charge will likely be similar, and the efficiency gains of the Exynos will be more noticeable in daily usage.
❓ How does the software support compare between these two devices, and is security a concern with the Ulefone Armor 2?
Samsung provides consistent software updates and security patches for its devices, including the XCover 5, for several years. Ulefone’s update track record is less reliable. Security is a significant concern with the Ulefone, as it may not receive timely security updates, leaving it vulnerable to exploits. Samsung’s Knox security platform provides an added layer of protection on the XCover 5.