Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.4 | 77.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Vivo |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 14 |
| 2016-10-04 | 2024-04-03 |
| 6.16 x 3.01 x 0.28 inches | 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches |
| 5.82 ounces | 7.73 ounces |
| Black, Gold, Gray and White | Black and White |
| Glass and Metal | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 280.00 | $ 1915.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 8 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2480 x 2200 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 401 pixels per inch | 414 pixels per inch |
| -- | 4500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 10.5 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 625 8953 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 16 GB RAM |
| Adreno 506 GPU | Adreno 750 GPU |
| 9.09 | 6.3 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 12.76 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/2.00 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 |
| 1280 x 720 (120 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video |
| 9.68 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.1 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3510mAh Battery | 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.44 | 7.36 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.0 | 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 Play, getting a score of 77.8 against 74.4. Even though vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a lot heavier than the Motorola Moto Z Play, it's a lot thinner and also extremely newer. These devices have Android OS (Operating System), but vivo X Fold 3 Pro has 14 version while Motorola Moto Z Play has Android 8.0 Oreo.
The Motorola Moto Z Play has an extremely better processing unit than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has less RAM, they both have a Octa-Core CPU. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much more vibrant display than Moto Z Play, because it has a lot larger screen, a little bit more pixels per inch in the display and a much higher resolution of 2200 x 2480.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a superior memory capacity to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Moto Z Play, because although it has no SD memory slot, it also counts with 512 GB internal memory capacity. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a way better battery life than Moto Z Play, because it has a 62% greater battery capacity.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro takes much better videos and photos than Moto Z Play, because it has a much better video resolution, a camera with way more MP and a bigger camera aperture.
Although vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a better device, it costs a lot more than the Motorola Moto Z Play, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as Motorola Moto Z Play. So if you need that extra features and specs, you can buy the vivo X Fold 3 Pro, otherwise you can save some money and buy the Motorola Moto Z Play, letting go some features and specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.