Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.4 | 80.4 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | -- |
| 2016-10-04 | 2017-07-07 |
| 6.16 x 3.01 x 0.28 inches | 6.04 x 2.91 x 0.31 inches |
| 5.82 ounces | 5.89 ounces |
| Black, Gold, Gray and White | Black, Blue, Gold and Silver |
| Glass and Metal | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 280.00 | $ 611.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 401 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 625 8953 chipset | Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | Exynos M1and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 506 GPU | Mali-T880 MP12 GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot |
| 12.76 | 10.78 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/2.00 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.4 inches (1/2.5") 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 | -- |
| 9.68 | 9.57 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.1 | 6.1 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3510mAh Battery | 3200mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 5.44 | 5.2 |
| 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, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Galaxy Note Fan Edition is slightly better than Motorola Moto Z Play, getting a general score of 80.4 against 74.4. Galaxy Note Fan Edition's construction is newer, but a little bit heavier and a little bit thicker than Motorola Moto Z Play. The Galaxy Note Fan Edition features just a bit better performance than Motorola Moto Z Play, and although they both have the same number of cores, the Galaxy Note Fan Edition also has 1 GB more RAM memory.
The Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition features a little more vivid screen than Motorola Moto Z Play, because it has a better 1440 x 2560px resolution, a little larger screen and a greater screen pixel density. The Motorola Moto Z Play captures a bit better pictures and videos than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has a tinier diafragm aperture which is not recommended for low-light images and video, and they both have the same (4K) video definition and the same 30 frames per second video frame rates, the Motorola Moto Z Play also counts with a lot higher 16 megapixels resolution back-facing camera.
The Moto Z Play has more storage capacity to store more games and applications than Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has less internal memory capacity, it also counts with a slot for an SD memory card that supports up to 1,95 TB. Moto Z Play counts with just a little bit longer battery duration than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because it has 3510mAh of battery capacity.
Although Galaxy Note Fan Edition is a better device, it is way more expensive than Moto Z Play, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as Moto Z Play. So if you need that extra features, you can buy the Galaxy Note Fan Edition, otherwise you can save some dollars and get the Moto Z Play, giving up some features and specs.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.