Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 87.1 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 14 | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2024-04-16 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.34 x 2.85 x 0.34 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 6.95 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Forest Grey (Vegan Leather), Nordic Wood and Peach Fuzz (Vegan Leather) | Black |
| Aluminum, Vegan Leather and Wood | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2400 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| P-OLED | -- |
| 393 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| 2500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 9.6 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 (4 nm) chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 720 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 6.21 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 512 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 17.6 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 50.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.60 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 25.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 12.32 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Nano SIM, eSIM Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 6.32 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.4 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Motorola Edge 50 Ultra is slightly better than the Galaxy XCover FieldPro, having an 87.1 score against 80.1. Motorola Edge 50 Ultra is a a lot newer device, and it is also way thinner and a lot lighter than Galaxy XCover FieldPro. These devices have Android operating system, but Motorola Edge 50 Ultra has an older 14 version and Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a much faster CPU than Motorola Edge 50 Ultra, although it has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have the same number of cores. The Motorola Edge 50 Ultra has just a bit better looking display than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a much lower pixels density and a little lower resolution of 1080 x 2400 pixels, it also counts with a really larger screen.
Motorola Edge 50 Ultra captures way better photographs and videos than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier camera aperture which is not nice for capturing photos in low light environments, it also counts with a much better video quality, a much better resolution camera and a lot bigger back camera sensor capturing more light and vivid colors.
The Motorola Edge 50 Ultra counts with a much better storage capacity to store more apps and games than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has no external SD slot, it also counts with 512 GB internal storage. Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a battery lifetime that is just as good as Motorola Edge 50 Ultra's battery lifetime.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.