Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.5 | 92.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 10 |
| 2016-09-01 | 2020-07-16 |
| 6.04 x 2.96 x 0.20 inches | 6.41 x 2.98 x 0.33 inches |
| 4.80 ounces | 6.63 ounces |
| 16 777 216 | Prism bricks black |
| Aluminum | Aluminum and Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 284.00 | $ 650.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED Plus |
| 534 pixels per inch | 393 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.6 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor | Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Adreno 620 GPU |
| 9 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot |
| 12.76 | 15.38 |
| Camera | |
| 13.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 64.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.59 inches (1/1.7") 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 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.57 | 12.21 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.3 | 10.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 2600mAh Battery | 4500mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 4.56 | 6.32 |
| 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
Galaxy A71 5G UW has a general score of 92.9, which is much better than the Moto Z's 74.5 overall score. These phones use Android OS (Operating System), but Galaxy A71 5G UW has an older 10 version and Moto Z has Android 8.0 Oreo version. The Galaxy A71 5G UW body is a lot newer than the Moto Z's, although it's noticeably thicker and heavier.
Moto Z features a bit more vivid display than Galaxy A71 5G UW, because although it has a bit smaller screen, it also counts with a greater pixel count in each inch of screen and a higher resolution of 1440 x 2560px. The Galaxy A71 5G UW features a much better storage capacity to store more apps and games than Moto Z, because although it has a SD card slot that holds 1000 GB smaller, it also counts with more internal memory capacity.
The Galaxy A71 5G UW counts with a bit better performance than Moto Z, because it has a greater amount of RAM and a larger number of cores (and faster). The Galaxy A71 5G UW counts with a very superior camera than Moto Z, and although they both have a same size diafragm aperture, the same (4K) video quality and the same video frame rate, the Galaxy A71 5G UW also has a lot higher resolution camera in the back.
The Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW features a much longer battery lifetime than Moto Z, because it has a 4500mAh battery size.
Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW costs a lot more money than the Motorola Moto Z, but you can get a much better phone for that few extra dollars.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.