Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 72.2 | 80.4 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 11, 10 | -- |
| 2020-06-12 | 2017-07-07 |
| 6.37 x 2.98 x 0.36 inches | 6.04 x 2.91 x 0.31 inches |
| 6.68 ounces | 5.89 ounces |
| Pearl white | Black, Blue, Gold and Silver |
| Plastic | -- |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 200.00 | $ 611.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 1560 x 720 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 268 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.2 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 SM6125 chipset | Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890 chipset |
| Kryo 260, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | Exynos M1and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 610 GPU | Mali-T880 MP12 GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot |
| 9.84 | 10.78 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.4 inches (1/2.5") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.01 | 9.57 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.1 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Battery | 3200mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 5.92 | 5.2 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| -- | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Galaxy Note Fan Edition has an overall score of 80.4, which is better than the Moto G Fast's score of 72.2. Although the Galaxy Note Fan Edition is way older than the Moto G Fast, it's body is somewhat lighter and thinner. The Galaxy Note Fan Edition counts with a bit better hardware performance than Moto G Fast, and although they both have the same number of cores, the Galaxy Note Fan Edition also has 1 GB more RAM.
Galaxy Note Fan Edition has a much better screen than Moto G Fast, because although it has a quite smaller display, it also counts with a way better resolution of 1440 x 2560 and a lot better number of pixels per display inch. Motorola Moto G Fast counts with just a bit better camera than Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has a tinier back-facing camera sensor taking lower quality videos and images, and they both have a F1.7 diafragm aperture, the same 30 fps video frame rates and the same (4K) video definition, the Motorola Moto G Fast also counts with a camera with much more mega-pixels.
Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition features just a bit bigger storage for games and applications than Motorola Moto G Fast, because although it has an external memory slot that admits a maximum of 256 GB against 512 GB, it also counts with 32 GB more internal memory. The Motorola Moto G Fast has greater battery duration than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because it has a 4000mAh battery capacity.
Although Galaxy Note Fan Edition is a better device, it costs a lot more money than Moto G Fast, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as Moto G Fast. If you are trying to save a few dollars, you can buy the Moto G Fast, giving up a couple features, but you'll get the most out of your savings.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.