Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.5 | 85.5 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 11, 10 |
| 2016-09-01 | 2019-12-27 |
| 6.04 x 2.96 x 0.20 inches | 6.24 x 2.90 x 0.31 inches |
| 4.80 ounces | 6.07 ounces |
| 16 777 216 | Prism Crush black, Prism Crush blue, Prism Crush pink and Prism Crush white |
| Aluminum | Plastic and Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 284.00 | $ 282.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 6.5 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 534 pixels per inch | 405 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.6 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 12.76 | 14.14 |
| Camera | |
| 13.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 48.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/2.00 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.57 | 11.55 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.3 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 2600mAh Battery | 4000mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 4.56 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| 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 |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The Galaxy A51 is much better than Moto Z, having an 85.5 score against 74.5. The Galaxy A51 design is a lot newer than the Moto Z's, but it's noticeably heavier and thicker. Both of these phones come with Android OS (operating system), but the Galaxy A51 has the previous 11 version and Moto Z has Android 8.0 Oreo version.
Motorola Moto Z has a bit sharper screen than Galaxy A51, because although it has a bit smaller screen, it also counts with a higher pixels density and a higher 1440 x 2560 resolution. Samsung Galaxy A51 has more storage to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Moto Z, because although it has an external SD slot that admits up to 512 GB against 1,95 TB, it also counts with 96 GB more internal storage.
Samsung Galaxy A51 counts with just a little better hardware performance than Moto Z, and although they both have the same RAM amount, the Samsung Galaxy A51 also has 4 more cores. Galaxy A51 counts with a much longer battery lifetime than Moto Z, because it has a 4000mAh battery size instead of 2600mAh.
Galaxy A51 captures much better videos and photos than Moto Z, because although it has a smaller camera aperture which is not favorable for low-light captures, and they both have the same (4K) video resolution and the same video frame rate, the Galaxy A51 also counts with a lot higher resolution back facing camera.
Even being the best phone in this comparison, Galaxy A51 is also cheaper than the Moto Z, making it an easy decision.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.