Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.8 | 88.5 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 12, 11, 10 |
| 2016-09-01 | 2020-02-14 |
| 6.14 x 2.98 x 0.28 inches | 6.59 x 2.90 x 0.28 inches |
| 5.75 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Black, Gold and Gray | Mirror black and Mirror purple |
| -- | Aluminum |
| $ 250.00 | $ 1380.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2636 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 534 pixels per inch | 425 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.6 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ SM8150-AC (7 nm) chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor | Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2960 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Adreno 640 GPU |
| 9 | 9.72 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 14.66 | 13.3 |
| Camera | |
| 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 27.00mm focal length |
| -- | 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 |
| 10.01 | 10.23 |
| 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, Dual SIM |
| 5.5 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3500mAh Battery | 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 5.44 | 5.28 |
| 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
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip has an overall score of 88.5, which is much better than the Motorola Moto Z Force's 75.8 global score. These phones use Android OS, but Samsung Galaxy Z Flip has the older 12 version and Motorola Moto Z Force has Android 7.0 Nougat version. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip's body has the same thickness than the Motorola Moto Z Force, but it's heavier.
The Moto Z Force counts with a little sharper display than Galaxy Z Flip, because although it has a little smaller display, it also counts with a greater display density and a slightly better resolution of 1440 x 2560px. Moto Z Force counts with a quite bigger memory to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Galaxy Z Flip, because although it has 0 less internal memory, it also counts with a slot for external memory cards that supports up to 1,95 TB.
The Galaxy Z Flip has just a little better hardware performance than Moto Z Force, because it has a higher amount of RAM memory and a higher number of cores (and faster). Galaxy Z Flip has just a bit better camera than Motorola Moto Z Force, although it has a lower 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution and a way worse resolution camera in the back, they both have the same aperture.
The Moto Z Force has a bit better battery duration than Galaxy Z Flip, because it has 3500mAh of battery capacity against 3300mAh.
Although Galaxy Z Flip is a better device, it is way more expensive than Moto Z Force, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as the Moto Z Force. If you want to save some money, you can buy the Moto Z Force, giving up a few features and specs, but you will get the most with your money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.