Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 73.8 | 92.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 6.0, 5.1 | Android 11, 10 |
| 2015-07-28 | 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 | -- |
| $ 599.00 | $ 603.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2636 x 1080 pixels |
| IPS LCD | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 515 pixels per inch | 425 pixels per inch |
| Capacitive, Multi-touch | No touch screen |
| 9.4 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 808 MSM8992 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 865+ SM8250-AB chipset |
| Cortex-A57 (Single-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 |
| 8.19 | 9.81 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| microSD, microSDHC, 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), HSPA, HSUPA, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.8 | 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 is a lot better than Moto X Style, with a 92.3 score against 73.8. Galaxy Z Flip 5G's design is notably newer and much thinner, but just a little heavier than Moto X Style. Both devices we are comparing come with Android operating system, but Galaxy Z Flip 5G has the newer 11 version while Moto X Style has Android 6.0, giving you a couple additional features.
Galaxy Z Flip 5G has a quite superior hardware performance than Moto X Style, because it has a greater amount of RAM memory and a greater number of cores. The Moto X Style features a much better looking display than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G, because although it has a little bit smaller display, it also counts with a bit higher 2560 x 1440 resolution and a quite better quantity of pixels per inch in the display.
Motorola Moto X Style has a little bit better camera than Galaxy Z Flip 5G, because although it has a tinier aperture and slower video frame rate, and they both have the same (4K) video quality, the Motorola Moto X Style also counts with a back camera with lot more MP and a bigger sensor which gives a better image and video quality.
Galaxy Z Flip 5G has a very superior storage capacity for applications, games, photos and videos than Moto X Style, because although it has no SD card slot, it also counts with 256 GB internal memory capacity. Galaxy Z Flip 5G features just a bit better battery duration than Motorola Moto X Style, because it has a 10% bigger battery capacity.
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G costs a little more money than Moto X Style, but it's still a good choice, because you can get a lot more for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.