Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.8 | 92.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 10 |
| 2016-09-01 | 2020-07-16 |
| 6.14 x 2.98 x 0.28 inches | 6.41 x 2.98 x 0.33 inches |
| 5.75 ounces | 6.63 ounces |
| Black, Gold and Gray | Prism bricks black |
| -- | Aluminum and Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 250.00 | $ 650.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED Plus |
| 534 pixels per inch | 393 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.6 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor | Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Adreno 620 GPU |
| 9 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot |
| 14.66 | 15.38 |
| Camera | |
| 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 64.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.59 inches (1/1.7") 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 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 10.01 | 12.21 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| -- | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 5.5 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3500mAh Battery | 4500mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.44 | 6.32 |
| 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, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Galaxy A71 5G UW is much better than the Motorola Moto Z Force, with a 92.9 score against 75.8. Galaxy A71 5G UW is a a lot newer phone than Motorola Moto Z Force, but it is somewhat heavier and somewhat thicker. Both phones in this review include Android OS, but the Galaxy A71 5G UW has older 10 version while Motorola Moto Z Force has Android 7.0 Nougat.
The Galaxy A71 5G UW counts with a bit superior processing unit than Moto Z Force, because it has a higher number of cores and more RAM. The Motorola Moto Z Force counts with a little more vivid display than Galaxy A71 5G UW, because although it has a bit smaller screen, it also counts with a better amount of pixels per display inch and a better 1440 x 2560 resolution.
The Galaxy A71 5G UW takes a lot better photographs and videos than Moto Z Force, and although they both have the same 3840x2160 video resolution, a F1.8 aperture and the same video frame rates, the Galaxy A71 5G UW also has a back camera with a much better resolution. The Galaxy A71 5G UW has just a bit more storage for apps and games than Moto Z Force, because although it has an external memory slot that admits up to 1000 GB against 1,95 TB, it also counts with 128 GB internal memory.
Galaxy A71 5G UW has improved battery life than Moto Z Force, because it has a 29% more battery size.
The Galaxy A71 5G UW is way more expensive than the Moto Z Force, but you can get a much better phone for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.