Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.8 | 78.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | |
| Android 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 11, 10, 9.0 Pie |
| 2016-09-01 | 2019-05-07 |
| 6.14 x 2.98 x 0.28 inches | 5.96 x 2.76 x 0.32 inches |
| 5.75 ounces | 5.19 ounces |
| Black, Gold and Gray | Black, Purple and White |
| -- | Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 250.00 | $ 186.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 5.6 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2220 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | OLED |
| 534 pixels per inch | 441 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.6 | 8.2 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 SDM670 chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor | Kryo 360, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Adreno 615 GPU |
| 9 | 9.09 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 14.66 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 28.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 10.01 | 9.79 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| -- | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 5.5 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3500mAh Battery | 3000mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.44 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | 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 |
Comparison review
The Google Pixel 3a is slightly better than Moto Z Force, getting a overall score of 78.8 against 75.8. The Google Pixel 3a body is noticeably newer and a little lighter than the Moto Z Force's, although it is somewhat thicker. These phones have Android OS (operating system), but the Google Pixel 3a has 11 version and Moto Z Force has Android 7.0 Nougat.
Moto Z Force features a little bit better looking screen than Google Pixel 3a, because although it has a quite smaller screen, it also counts with a higher resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels and a little bit higher quantity of pixels in each inch of screen. Moto Z Force has a much bigger memory capacity to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Google Pixel 3a, and although they both have equal internal memory, the Moto Z Force also has an external memory slot that allows up to 1,95 TB.
The Google Pixel 3a has a little better performance than Motorola Moto Z Force, and although they both have 4 GB of RAM memory, the Google Pixel 3a also has 4 more cores (but slower). Motorola Moto Z Force has a bit better camera than Google Pixel 3a, and although they both have the same 3840x2160 (4K) video quality, the same video frame rate and the same aperture, the Motorola Moto Z Force also has a back camera with a much better resolution.
The Moto Z Force counts with just a little bit longer battery life than Google Pixel 3a, because it has 3500mAh of battery capacity.
Despite of being the best phone of the ones we are comparing here, the Google Pixel 3a is also by far the cheapest one.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.