Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 vs Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7)
Direct side-by-side battle analyzing hardware specifications, benchmark percentiles, battery endurance, and category performance advantages.
Galaxy Tab S3 9.7
Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7)
WHY IS Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 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 | Galaxy Tab | Samsung SM-F966Z | LEADER |
|---|---|---|---|
| Refresh Rate | 60Hz | 60Hz | 60Hz |
| Battery Capacity | 6,000 mAh | 4,400 mAh | +6,000 mAh |
| Wired Fast Charging | Standard | Standard | 25W |
| Main Camera Sensor | 13 MP | N/A | 48 MP |
| Screen Display Size | 9.7" | 6.49" | 9.7" |
| Chassis Weight | 429g | 215g | 215g Lightest |
Which Phone Should You Buy: Key Reasons & Hardware Advantages
Swipe across ⇄Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 edges ahead with a BeastScore of 71.4/100
After comprehensive hardware benchmark comparisons, Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 ranks as the overall top pick in this matchup. Key differentiators include its superior specifications and verified build advantages.
Frequently Asked Questions: Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 vs Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7)
Which is better: Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 or Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7)?
Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 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: 6,000 mAh (+1,600 mAh more).
What are the primary battery and display differences between Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 and Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7)?
Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 is equipped with a 9.7-inch display and 6000 mAh battery, while Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) features a 6.49-inch display and 4400 mAh battery.
How do the performance capabilities compare between Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 and Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7)?
In objective hardware benchmarks, Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 achieves a 64/100 performance score, while Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) scores 90/100.
Related Smartphones (Based on Benchmark Scores)
Samsung SM-F966D Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 512GB SC-56F (Samsung Q7)
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max 5G A3296 Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 1TB (Apple iPhone 17,2)
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 F 5G 2024 Global Dual SIM TD-LTE V1 256GB CPH2603 (BBK 2603)
Motorola Edge 60 Pro
More Smartphones Battles
Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 vs Samsung SM-F966D Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 512GB SC-56F (Samsung Q7)
Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) vs Samsung SM-F966D Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 512GB SC-56F (Samsung Q7)
Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 vs Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max 5G A3296 Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 1TB (Apple iPhone 17,2)
Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) vs Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max 5G A3296 Global Dual SIM TD-LTE 1TB (Apple iPhone 17,2)
Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 vs Google Pixel 9a 5G TD-LTE 128GB JP G3Y12 (Google Tegu)
Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) vs Google Pixel 9a 5G TD-LTE 128GB JP G3Y12 (Google Tegu)
Galaxy Tab S3 9.7 vs OnePlus Nord CE 3 Lite 5G Dual SIM TD-LTE IN 256GB CPH2467 (BBK Larry)
Samsung SM-F966Z Galaxy Z Fold7 5G UW Dual SIM TD-LTE JP 256GB (Samsung Q7) vs OnePlus Nord CE 3 Lite 5G Dual SIM TD-LTE IN 256GB CPH2467 (BBK Larry)
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.