Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 79.7 | 79.4 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 14 |
| 2020-04-16 | 2024-03-11 |
| 6.24 x 2.98 x 0.36 inches | 6.37 x 3.07 x 0.32 inches |
| 6.77 ounces | 7.37 ounces |
| Mystic indigo | -- |
| Aluminum and Plastic | Plastic and Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 300.00 | -- |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 6.6 inches |
| 2300 x 1080 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 397 pixels per inch | 390 pixels per inch |
| -- | 500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 SM6125 chipset | Exynos 1380 (5 nm) chipset |
| Kryo 260, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Adreno 610 GPU | Mali-G68 MP5 GPU |
| 9.09 | 6.12 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 14.14 | 10.1 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 16.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 13.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor | 0.51 inches (1/1.96") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (120 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 11.55 | 11.44 |
| 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, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Battery | 5000mAh Nano SIM Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.92 | 6.8 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | 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 | -- |
Comparison review
The Motorola Moto G Stylus is a little bit better than the Galaxy A35 5G, having a global score of 79.7 against 79.4. Motorola Moto G Stylus is a way older and thicker phone than Galaxy A35 5G, but Motorola could make it just a bit lighter anyway. Both of these devices include Android OS, but the Motorola Moto G Stylus has an older 11 version while Galaxy A35 5G has Android 14 version.
The Galaxy A35 5G features a bit more vivid screen than Moto G Stylus, because although it has a little worse pixel count per inch in the display, it also counts with a little bit higher resolution of 1080 x 2340 and a little bit larger screen. Moto G Stylus has much more memory to install games and applications than Samsung Galaxy A35 5G, and although they both have equal internal memory capacity, the Moto G Stylus also has a slot for an SD memory card that allows a maximum of 512 GB.
Moto G Stylus counts with a lot better performance than Samsung Galaxy A35 5G, although it has 2 GB less RAM, they both have the same number of cores. The Motorola Moto G Stylus shoots just a bit better photographs and videos than Galaxy A35 5G, because although it has a back camera with less mega-pixels, a smaller sensor taking less light and dull colors and a worse 3840x2160 (4K) video quality, it also counts with a bigger camera aperture to take better low-light captures and videos.
The Galaxy A35 5G has better battery performance than Moto G Stylus, because it has a 5000mAh battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.