Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 76.1 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2020-04-16 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.29 x 2.99 x 0.38 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 7.02 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Smoke black | Black |
| Aluminum and Plastic | Plastic |
| $ 150.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2300 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | -- |
| 397 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 SM6125 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 260, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 610 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 16.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.01 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 6.8 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| 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
Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a score of 80.1, which is a bit better than Moto G Power's score of 76.1. These devices use Android operating system, but the Galaxy XCover FieldPro has 8.0 Oreo version while Moto G Power has Android 11, providing lots of additional features. Even being the best in this comparison review, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a incredibly thicker and notably heavier device than Moto G Power.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a much better looking screen than Moto G Power, because although it has a much smaller screen, it also counts with more pixels per screen inch and a better resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels. Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a bit better processor than Motorola Moto G Power. Both of them have 8 cpu cores and a 4 GB RAM memory.
The Moto G Power features a greater camera than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller camera aperture which is worse for low light captures and video and a smaller back-facing camera sensor giving a worse image quality, it also counts with a back facing camera with a way better 16 mega-pixels resolution and a lot better 3840x2160 (4K) video definition.
The Moto G Power and the Galaxy XCover FieldPro both feature similar storage for applications, games, photos and videos, they have a SD card slot that allows a maximum of 512 GB and exactly the same internal memory capacity. The Moto G Power has a bit longer battery duration than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has 5000mAh of battery capacity against 4500mAh.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more than the Motorola Moto G Power, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as the Motorola Moto G Power. So if you want that extra specs, you can buy the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, but if you don't you can save some money and get the Motorola Moto G Power, letting go some specs and features.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.