Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 78.6 | 79.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 10 | Android 5.1 |
| 2020-12-05 | 2015-08-13 |
| 6.78 x 3.02 x 0.38 inches | 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches |
| 7.80 ounces | 6.03 ounces |
| Electric violet and Metallic sage | Black, Gold, Gray and White |
| Plastic and Plastic | Glass; metal |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 415.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.8 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 1640 x 720 pixels | 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 263 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | Capacitive, Multi-touch |
| 7.2 | 9.4 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 SM6115 chipset | Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset |
| Kryo 260, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Single-Core 2100 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 610 GPU | ARM Mali-T760 MP8 GPU |
| 9.09 | 8.46 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 14.14 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 64.00 MP + 16.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.90 aperture |
| -- | 28.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video |
| 10.89 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), HSPA, HSUPA, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.8 |
| Battery Life | |
| 6000mAh Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| -- | 336 hours standby time 22 hours talk time |
| 7.52 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy Note 5 is a little bit better than the Moto G9 Power, with a general score of 79.3 against 78.6. The Samsung Galaxy Note 5 construction is notably lighter and way thinner than Moto G9 Power, despite of the fact that it was released 5 years before. Both of these phones come with Android OS (operating system), but Samsung Galaxy Note 5 has older 5.1 version and Moto G9 Power has Android 10.
The Moto G9 Power has a bit better CPU than Galaxy Note 5, and although they both have 4 GB of RAM memory, the Moto G9 Power also has more CPU cores (but slower). Galaxy Note 5 features an incredibly better looking screen than Motorola Moto G9 Power, because although it has a bit smaller display, it also counts with a much greater number of pixels per display inch and a lot higher 2560 x 1440 pixels resolution.
Moto G9 Power features a slightly better camera than Samsung Galaxy Note 5, and although they both have the same (Full HD) video definition, the Moto G9 Power also has a back-facing camera with a lot better 64 mega pixels resolution, better video frame rate and a larger aperture for better images in low light environments.
Moto G9 Power has a very superior storage to store more games and applications than Galaxy Note 5, because it has 128 GB internal memory capacity and an external SD slot that allows up to 512 GB. The Motorola Moto G9 Power features a much better battery duration than Galaxy Note 5, because it has a 6000mAh battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.