Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.1 | 81 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11, 10 |
| 2015-09-03 | 2020-01-31 |
| 6.06 x 3.00 x 0.44 inches | 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches |
| 6.31 ounces | 7.76 ounces |
| Black, Gray and White | Black |
| Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 421.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 6.3 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| IPS LCD | IPS LCD |
| 515 pixels per inch | 409 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.5 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 808 MSM8992 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Hexa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 418 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 8.82 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.02 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.42 inches (1/2.4") 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 |
| 10.34 | 9.79 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.3 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4050mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 4.96 | 6 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro has an overall score of 81, which is a bit better than the Moto X Pure Edition (2015)'s 74.1 score. Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro's body is incredibly newer and thinner than Moto X Pure Edition (2015)'s, although it's somewhat heavier. The Galaxy XCover Pro has just a little better processing power than Moto X Pure Edition (2015), because it has 1 GB more RAM and a greater number of cores.
The Motorola Moto X Pure Edition (2015) has a bit sharper screen than Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a bit smaller screen, it also counts with a higher resolution of 1440 x 2560 and a higher amount of pixels per inch of screen. Motorola Moto X Pure Edition (2015) has a little bit better camera than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a smaller camera aperture and a back camera with a lower resolution, it also counts with a lot better 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution and a much bigger sensor which provides a lot higher photo and video quality.
Galaxy XCover Pro counts with more storage capacity for applications and games than Moto X Pure Edition (2015), and although they both have exactly the same 64 GB internal storage capacity, the Galaxy XCover Pro also has a slot for external memory cards that supports a maximum of 512 GB. Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro features a really longer battery duration than Motorola Moto X Pure Edition (2015), because it has 4050mAh of battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.