Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.4 | 77 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | HTC |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | -- |
| 2016-10-04 | 2017-02-21 |
| 6.16 x 3.01 x 0.28 inches | 6.39 x 3.14 x 0.31 inches |
| 5.82 ounces | 6.00 ounces |
| Black, Gold, Gray and White | 16 777 216 |
| Glass and Metal | Aluminum and Glass |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 280.00 | $ 749.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | S-LCD 5 |
| 401 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 625 8953 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro-AB chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2150 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 506 GPU | Adreno 530 GPU |
| 9.09 | 8.91 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 12.76 | 14.66 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 16.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 0.43 inches (1/2.3") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (120 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 1920 x 1080 (120 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 9.68 | 9.9 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.1 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3510mAh Battery | 3000mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.44 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.0 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| 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 |
Comparison review
The HTC U Ultra is a bit better than the Moto Z Play, with a score of 77 against 74.4. Even being the best in our current comparison, we must note that it is also a just a little bit thicker and a little bit heavier device. The Moto Z Play has a little bit better processing power than HTC U Ultra, because although it has 1 GB less RAM, it also counts with 4 more processing cores.
The HTC U Ultra counts with a slightly better looking display than Moto Z Play, because it has a higher 1440 x 2560 resolution, a little bit bigger screen and a better amount of pixels per inch in the screen. HTC U Ultra has a slightly better camera than Moto Z Play, because although it has a lower (4K) video resolution and a camera with a lot lower resolution, it also counts with a bigger diafragm aperture to capture better low light photography and videos.
HTC U Ultra features a bigger memory capacity to install applications and games than Motorola Moto Z Play, and although they both have an external memory slot that supports a maximum of 1,95 TB, the HTC U Ultra also has 64 GB internal storage. Motorola Moto Z Play counts with just a bit better battery performance than HTC U Ultra, because it has 3510mAh of battery capacity against 3000mAh.
Although HTC U Ultra is a better device, it costs a lot more money than Moto Z Play, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as the Moto Z Play. So if you want that extra specs, you can buy HTC U Ultra, else you can save a couple dollars and get the Moto Z Play, resigning some features and specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.