Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 71.6 | 94.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11, 10 |
| 2016-11-11 | 2020-09-18 |
| 5.96 x 2.97 x 0.31 inches | 6.27 x 5.05 x 0.27 inches |
| 5.75 ounces | 9.95 ounces |
| Gold, Gray and Silver | Mystic black and Mystic bronze |
| Metal | Aluminum and Glass |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 1930.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 7.6 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2208 x 1768 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 401 pixels per inch | 372 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| MediaTek Helio P15 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 865+ SM8250-AB chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor | Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 3100 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 12 GB RAM |
| Mali-T860 MP2 GPU | Adreno 650 GPU |
| 9.18 | 9.81 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 8.12 | 13.3 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.57 inches (1/1.76") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 10.45 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| -- | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 5.5 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3050mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 5.04 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | 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 |
Comparison review
Galaxy Z Fold 2 is a lot better than the Motorola Moto M, having a 94.6 score against 71.6. The Galaxy Z Fold 2 design is notably newer and thinner than the Motorola Moto M's, but it's incredibly heavier. The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 features a bit better processing power than Moto M, and although they both have the same number of cores, the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 also has a higher amount of RAM.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 counts with a little bit better display than Motorola Moto M, because although it has a little less pixels per inch of screen, it also counts with a lot bigger display and a better 1768 x 2208px resolution. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 counts with a superior memory to install applications and games than Moto M, because although it has no slot for an SD memory card, it also counts with 256 GB internal memory.
Galaxy Z Fold 2 features a really longer battery lifetime than Motorola Moto M, because it has a 48 percent larger battery size. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 takes greater photos and videos than Motorola Moto M, because although it has a camera with much less megapixels resolution, it also counts with a lot better video quality and a bigger camera aperture.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.