Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 71.6 | 79.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 5.1 |
| 2016-11-11 | 2015-08-13 |
| 5.96 x 2.97 x 0.31 inches | 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches |
| 5.75 ounces | 6.03 ounces |
| Gold, Gray and Silver | Black, Gold, Gray and White |
| Metal | Glass; metal |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 415.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 401 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | Capacitive, Multi-touch |
| 8 | 9.4 |
| Performance | |
| MediaTek Helio P15 chipset | Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Single-Core 2100 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-T860 MP2 GPU | ARM Mali-T760 MP8 GPU |
| 9.18 | 8.46 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 8.12 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.90 aperture |
| -- | 28.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| -- | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | LTE-A (4G), HSPA, HSUPA, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 5.5 | 6.8 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3050mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| -- | 336 hours standby time 22 hours talk time |
| 5.04 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| -- | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Galaxy Note 5 is better than Moto M, getting a global score of 79.3 against 71.6. The Galaxy Note 5 is an older and a little bit heavier phone than the Moto M, but Samsung was able to build it just a little thinner anyway. The Moto M has a little bit better performance than Galaxy Note 5, and although they both have a 4 GB RAM memory, the Moto M also has a greater number of cores.
The Samsung Galaxy Note 5 features a sharper display than Moto M, because it has a better number of pixels per inch of display, a bit bigger screen and a higher 2560 x 1440px resolution. The Galaxy Note 5 takes much clearer pictures and videos than Moto M, and although they both have a 16 mega-pixels back camera, the Galaxy Note 5 also has a larger diafragm aperture to capture better low light images and videos and a lot better (4K) video resolution.
Motorola Moto M features a bit bigger memory capacity to install games and applications than Galaxy Note 5, because although it has only 32 GB internal memory, it also counts with a slot for an external memory card that allows up to 128 GB. Moto M counts with just a bit better battery duration than Galaxy Note 5, because it has a 3050mAh battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.