Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.1 | 92.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11, 10 |
| 2015-09-01 | 2020-08-07 |
| 6.06 x 3.00 x 0.44 inches | 6.59 x 2.90 x 0.28 inches |
| 6.31 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Black, Gray and White | Mystic bronze, Mystic gray and Mystic white |
| Plastic | Aluminum |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| -- | $ 603.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2636 x 1080 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 515 pixels per inch | 425 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.5 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 808 MSM8992 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 865+ SM8250-AB chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Hexa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 3100 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 418 GPU | Adreno 650 GPU |
| 8.82 | 9.81 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 10.02 | 13.3 |
| Camera | |
| 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | 27.00mm 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 | 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 4.96 | 5.28 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| 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 Z Flip 5G has an overall score of 92.3, which is a lot better than Moto X Style's 74.1 global score. The Galaxy Z Flip 5G construction is newer and way thinner than the Moto X Style's, although it's a little bit heavier. The Motorola Moto X Style features a bit better display than Galaxy Z Flip 5G, because although it has a little bit smaller screen, it also counts with a little bit higher 1440 x 2560 pixels resolution and a quite higher pixel amount per inch in the screen.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G features a much better storage for games and applications than Motorola Moto X Style, because although it has no SD memory card expansion slot, it also counts with 192 GB more internal memory. The Galaxy Z Flip 5G counts with a better processing power than Moto X Style, because it has a higher number of cores and 5 GB more RAM.
Moto X Style takes a bit better pictures and videos than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G, because although it has a tinier diafragm aperture which is not recommended for taking pictures or video in poorly lited environments and slower 30 frames per second video frame rates, and they both have the same video definition, the Moto X Style also counts with a back camera with a lot higher resolution and a bigger sensor.
Galaxy Z Flip 5G counts with just a little bit longer battery life than Moto X Style, because it has 3300mAh of battery capacity against 3000mAh.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.