Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.4 | 90.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11, 10 |
| 2015-10-29 | 2020-04-29 |
| 5.90 x 3.07 x 0.36 inches | 6.26 x 2.90 x 0.34 inches |
| 5.96 ounces | 6.60 ounces |
| Black and White | Prism cube black |
| -- | Aluminum and Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 135.00 | $ 339.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.4 inches | 6.5 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 544 pixels per inch | 405 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.7 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 MSM8994 chipset | Samsung Exynos 980 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A77 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 8 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Adreno 430 GPU | Mali-G76 MP5 GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot |
| 14.66 | 15.38 |
| Camera | |
| 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/2.00 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.79 | 11.55 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| -- | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE (4G), HSPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 5.5 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3760mAh Battery | 4500mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.68 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The Galaxy A51 5G is much better than Motorola DROID Turbo 2, with a overall score of 90.8 against 75.4. Galaxy A51 5G's design is newer and just a bit thinner than the Motorola DROID Turbo 2's, but it's just a bit heavier. The Motorola DROID Turbo 2 has a bit better looking screen than Galaxy A51 5G, because although it has a little smaller display, it also counts with more pixels per screen inch and a higher resolution of 1440 x 2560.
Galaxy A51 5G has a bit better hardware performance than Motorola DROID Turbo 2, and although they both have 8 processing cores, the Galaxy A51 5G also has more RAM. Galaxy A51 5G features a slightly better memory capacity to install applications and games than Motorola DROID Turbo 2, because although it has a slot for external memory cards that allows 1000 GB smaller, it also counts with more internal storage capacity.
Samsung Galaxy A51 5G takes better videos and photos than Motorola DROID Turbo 2, and although they both have the same 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution, the same aperture and the same 30 fps video frame rates, the Samsung Galaxy A51 5G also has a camera in the back with a much better resolution. The Samsung Galaxy A51 5G has superior battery duration than Motorola DROID Turbo 2, because it has a 20 percent more battery size.
The Samsung Galaxy A51 5G costs a lot more than the Motorola DROID Turbo 2, but it's still a great choice, because you can get a much better phone for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.