Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 72.2 | 85.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 11 |
| 2020-06-12 | 2021-08-11 |
| 6.37 x 2.98 x 0.36 inches | 6.54 x 2.84 x 0.27 inches |
| 6.68 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Pearl white | Cream, Lavender and Phantom Black |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Glass |
| $ 200.00 | $ 1000.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 1560 x 720 pixels | 2636 x 1080 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 268 pixels per inch | 425 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.2 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 SM6125 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 SM8350 chipset |
| Kryo 260, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | Kryo 680, 64-bit, 5 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 610 GPU | Adreno 660 GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.63 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 9.84 | 10.1 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | -- |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | -- |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.01 | 7.92 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Battery | 3300mAh Nano SIM Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.92 | 5.28 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.1 |
| 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 Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 is much better than the Moto G Fast, with a general score of 85.6 against 72.2. Both phones in our current comparison include the same Android 11 operating system, so both should provide all the same OS features. The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 body is newer, just a little lighter and much thinner than Moto G Fast.
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 features a sharper display than Motorola Moto G Fast, because it has a way better count of pixels per inch of display, a much higher 1080 x 2636 resolution and a bit larger screen. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 has a little faster processing unit than Moto G Fast, and although they both have a Octa-Core CPU, the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 also has a higher amount of RAM.
Moto G Fast takes a lot better videos and photos than Galaxy Z Flip 3, because it has a back-facing camera with a lot better resolution and a bigger aperture for better captures and video in low-light environments. The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 counts with a slightly better storage capacity for games and applications than Moto G Fast, because although it has no external memory card slot, it also counts with more internal storage.
The Motorola Moto G Fast features greater battery lifetime than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3, because it has a 4000mAh battery capacity against 3300mAh.
Although Galaxy Z Flip 3 is a better device, it is way more expensive than Moto G Fast, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as Moto G Fast. If you want to save a few dollars, you can get Moto G Fast, giving up some specs and features, but you will get the most with your money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.