Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.4 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2017-10-19 | 2020-04-04 |
| 5.84 x 2.89 x 0.31 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.75 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black and Blue | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 3) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 270.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.2 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | -- |
| 424 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.2 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 508 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.18 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 12.76 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 16.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 13.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 9.79 | 8.14 |
| 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 |
| 6.3 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 4.96 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0, EDR | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro is slightly better than the Motorola Moto X4, getting a global score of 80.1 against 74.4. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro design is way newer, but heavier and a lot thicker than Motorola Moto X4. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a bit better looking display than Motorola Moto X4, because although it has a bit smaller screen, it also counts with a better pixel density and a higher 1440 x 2560px resolution.
Motorola Moto X4 features a bit more storage capacity to install applications and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has 0 less internal storage, it also counts with a SD memory slot that admits a maximum of 1,95 TB. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features just a little better performance than Moto X4, and although they both have a Octa-Core CPU, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro also has a larger amount of RAM memory.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a superior battery life than Moto X4, because it has a 50% larger battery capacity. The Moto X4 features a very superior camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a lot tinier aperture, and they both have a 0.39 inches back camera sensor and a 12 mega pixels resolution back-facing camera, the Moto X4 also counts with a lot higher 3840x2160 (4K) video definition.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more than Motorola Moto X4, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as the Motorola Moto X4. So if you need that extra features and specs, you can buy Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, otherwise you can save some dollars and get the Motorola Moto X4, letting go a couple specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.