Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.8 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Vivo |
| Android 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 14 |
| 2016-09-01 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.14 x 2.98 x 0.28 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.75 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black, Gold and Gray | Black and White |
| $ 250.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 8 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 534 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.6 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor | processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 14.66 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 23.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 10.01 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| -- | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 5.5 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3500mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.44 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | Bluetooth 5.3 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| 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 vivo X Fold 3 Pro is just a bit better than Motorola Moto Z Force, having a 77.8 score against 75.8. Even though the vivo X Fold 3 Pro is notably heavier than Motorola Moto Z Force, it's much thinner and also much newer. Both phones we compare here work with Android OS (operating system), but vivo X Fold 3 Pro has the older 14 version and Motorola Moto Z Force has Android 7.0 Nougat.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a way better looking screen than Motorola Moto Z Force, because although it has a just a bit lower display pixels density, it also counts with a better 2200 x 2480px resolution and a lot bigger screen. The Moto Z Force counts with a way better hardware performance than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a smaller amount of RAM and a lower number of cores.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a much better storage capacity for applications, games, photos and videos than Moto Z Force, because although it has no slot for external memory cards, it also counts with 512 GB internal storage. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a much better battery lifetime than Moto Z Force, because it has a 63% bigger battery size.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro takes way better photos and videos than Motorola Moto Z Force, because it has a lot higher 7680x4320 video definition, a bigger camera aperture for better images and video in poorly lited environments and a camera in the back with a lot better 50 mega pixels resolution.
Although vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a better device, it is way more expensive than Moto Z Force, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as Moto Z Force. So if you want that extra features and specs, you can buy the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, otherwise you can save some dollars and buy the Moto Z Force, giving up some features and specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.