Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 76.1 | 81 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 11, 10 |
| 2020-04-16 | 2020-01-31 |
| 6.29 x 2.99 x 0.38 inches | 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches |
| 7.02 ounces | 7.76 ounces |
| Smoke black | Black |
| Aluminum and Plastic | -- |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 150.00 | $ 421.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 6.3 inches |
| 2300 x 1080 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| IPS LCD | IPS LCD |
| 397 pixels per inch | 409 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 SM6125 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| Kryo 260, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 610 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.27 |
| 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 | 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.25 inches (1/4") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 10.01 | 9.79 |
| 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, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4050mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 6.8 | 6 |
| 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, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro is a bit better than the Moto G Power, with an 81 score against 76.1. Despite being the best we are comparing, the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro is an a little bit heavier and just a bit thicker device than the Moto G Power. These phones have the same Android 11 operating system, so they should count with all the same OS features.
Galaxy XCover Pro has just a little better performance than Motorola Moto G Power. They have the same RAM amount and the same number of cores. The Galaxy XCover Pro features just a bit better looking display than Motorola Moto G Power, because although it has a bit smaller screen, it also counts with a little bit greater screen pixel density and a slightly better 1080 x 2340 resolution.
The Galaxy XCover Pro's memory capacity for games and applications is just as good as Moto G Power's one, both have an external SD slot that allows a maximum of 512 GB and equal internal storage capacity. Motorola Moto G Power features greater battery life than Galaxy XCover Pro, because it has a 23 percent more battery size.
Moto G Power takes slightly better pictures and videos than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a camera with a way worse resolution, and they both have the same diafragm aperture, the Moto G Power also counts with a much higher video quality and a much bigger camera sensor which offers a much better image and video quality.
Although Galaxy XCover Pro is a better device, it is way more expensive than the Motorola Moto G Power, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as the Motorola Moto G Power. So if you need that extra features and specs, you can buy the Galaxy XCover Pro, else you can save a couple dollars and get the Motorola Moto G Power, letting go a couple features and specs.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.