Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.1 | 97.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 9.0 Pie |
| 2015-09-01 | 2019-09-27 |
| 6.06 x 3.00 x 0.44 inches | 6.33 x 4.64 x 0.27 inches |
| 6.31 ounces | 9.74 ounces |
| Black, Gray and White | Cosmos black and Space silver |
| Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 1980.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 7.3 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2152 x 1536 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 515 pixels per inch | 362 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.5 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 808 MSM8992 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Hexa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 12 GB RAM |
| Adreno 418 GPU | Adreno 640 GPU |
| 8.82 | 9.72 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 10.02 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.42 inches (1/2.4") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 10.34 | 10.23 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.3 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4380mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 4.96 | 6.24 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | Bluetooth 5.0, EDR |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Galaxy Fold is much better than the Motorola Moto X Style, with a 97.6 score against 74.1. Although the Galaxy Fold is way heavier than the Motorola Moto X Style, it's a lot thinner and incredibly newer. Samsung Galaxy Fold counts with a better performing processor than Moto X Style, because it has more processing cores and a greater amount of RAM.
The Moto X Style features a bit more vivid screen than Galaxy Fold, because although it has a way smaller display, it also counts with a greater pixel density and a little higher 1440 x 2560 pixels resolution. The Galaxy Fold counts with a superior storage capacity to install applications and games than Moto X Style, because although it has no external SD slot, it also counts with more internal storage.
Galaxy Fold has a really longer battery life than Motorola Moto X Style, because it has 4380mAh of battery capacity instead of 3000mAh. The Moto X Style shoots a bit better photographs and videos than Samsung Galaxy Fold, because although it has a lot smaller diafragm aperture and slower video frame rates, and they both have the same 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution, the Moto X Style also counts with a larger back camera sensor and a way more mega-pixels back facing camera.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.