Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.9 | 80.4 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 4.4.4 | -- |
| 2014-10-28 | 2017-07-07 |
| 5.65 x 2.89 x 0.44 inches | 6.04 x 2.91 x 0.31 inches |
| 6.21 ounces | 5.89 ounces |
| Black and Blue | Black, Blue, Gold and Silver |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 135.00 | $ 611.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.2 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 565 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| Capacitive, Multi-touch | No touch screen |
| 9.7 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 805 APQ8084 chipset | Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890 chipset |
| Krait 450 (Quad-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Exynos M1and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB (800 MHz) RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 420 (500 MHz) GPU | Mali-T880 MP12 GPU |
| 9.54 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot |
| 7.7 | 10.78 |
| Camera | |
| 20.70 MP + 2.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.4 inches (1/2.5") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (24 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 9.9 | 9.57 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE (4G), HSPA, UMTS, EV-DO A, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.6 | 6.1 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3900mAh Battery | 3200mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 5.84 | 5.2 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.0 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Infra-red port | -- |
| -- | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Galaxy Note Fan Edition is slightly better than the Motorola DROID Turbo, getting an 80.4 score against 77.9. The Galaxy Note Fan Edition construction is much newer, way thinner and a bit lighter than Motorola DROID Turbo. The Motorola DROID Turbo features a better looking screen than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has a little smaller screen, and they both have the same exact resolution of 2560 x 1440, the Motorola DROID Turbo also counts with a just a bit higher screen pixels density.
The Motorola DROID Turbo has a little faster CPU than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has lesser RAM memory and a lower number of cores (but faster), it also counts with an extra GPU. Motorola DROID Turbo has a bit better camera than Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has a smaller diafragm aperture which is not nice for low-light photography and videos and slower video frame rate, and they both have the same (4K) video quality, the Motorola DROID Turbo also counts with a camera in the back with a way better 20.7 MP resolution.
Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition features much more storage capacity for apps and games than Motorola DROID Turbo, and although they both have equal internal memory, the Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition also has an external memory card slot that allows a maximum of 256 GB. The Motorola DROID Turbo has improved battery lifetime than Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because it has a 22% more battery size.
Although Galaxy Note Fan Edition is a better device, it is way more expensive than the Motorola DROID Turbo, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as Motorola DROID Turbo. So if you want that extra specs and features, you can buy the Galaxy Note Fan Edition, else you can save some dollars and get the Motorola DROID Turbo, letting go some features and specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.