Compare phones
Samsung Galaxy Note 3
Dual SIMN9002
| Global Score | |
| 74.4 | 81.2 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 5.0, 4.4.4, 4.4, 4.3 |
| 2016-10-04 | 2013-09-04 |
| 6.16 x 3.01 x 0.28 inches | 5.95 x 3.12 x 0.33 inches |
| 5.82 ounces | 5.93 ounces |
| Black, Gold, Gray and White | Black, Pink and White |
| Glass and Metal | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 280.00 | $ 265.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 1080 x 1920 pixels (Full HD) |
| Super AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 401 pixels per inch | 386 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | Capacitive, Multi-touch |
| 8 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 625 8953 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 MSM8974 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | Krait 400 (Quad-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 3 GB (800 MHz) RAM |
| Adreno 506 GPU | Adreno 330 (450 MHz) GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSD, microSDHC (up to 64 GB) external memory slot |
| 12.76 | 9.46 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 13.00 MP + 2.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/2.20 aperture |
| -- | 31.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.33 inches (1/3.06") 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 | 1280 x 720 (120 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.68 | 9.68 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA, HSUPA, UMTS, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA |
| Nano SIM | Micro SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.1 | 7.1 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3510mAh Battery | 3200mAh Li-Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| -- | 528 hours standby time 25 hours talk time |
| 5.44 | 5.2 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.0 | Bluetooth 4.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 is a little bit better than the Moto Z Play, getting an 81.2 score against 74.4. Both phones we compare here work with Android OS, but Samsung Galaxy Note 3 has the older 5.0 version while Moto Z Play has Android 8.0 Oreo version. Even being the best in our current comparison, we must note that it is also noticeably older, just a little heavier and somewhat thicker.
Galaxy Note 3 counts with a better looking screen than Motorola Moto Z Play, because although it has a little bit worse display pixel density, and they both have the same resolution of 1920 x 1080, the Galaxy Note 3 also counts with a little larger screen. Motorola Moto Z Play counts with a way bigger storage capacity to store more games and applications than Samsung Galaxy Note 3, because although it has only 32 GB internal memory capacity, it also counts with a slot for SD memory cards that admits a maximum of 1,95 TB.
Galaxy Note 3 counts with just a bit better hardware performance than Moto Z Play, because although it has less cores (but faster), and they both have a 3 GB RAM, the Galaxy Note 3 also counts with a graphics processor. The Samsung Galaxy Note 3 has a camera that's very similar to the camera in Motorola Moto Z Play, although the Samsung Galaxy Note 3 has a lesser MP back camera, a worse video resolution and a tinier diafragm aperture which is not good for shooting images and video in low-light situations.
The Motorola Moto Z Play counts with just a bit better battery performance than Galaxy Note 3, because it has a 3510mAh battery capacity against 3200mAh.
Even being the best phone of the ones we compare here, Galaxy Note 3 is also cheaper.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.