Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.5 | 88.5 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 12, 11, 10 |
| 2016-09-01 | 2020-02-14 |
| 6.04 x 2.96 x 0.20 inches | 6.59 x 2.90 x 0.28 inches |
| 4.80 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| 16 777 216 | Mirror black and Mirror purple |
| Aluminum | Aluminum |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 284.00 | $ 1380.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2636 x 1080 pixels |
| AMOLED | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 534 pixels per inch | 425 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.6 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ SM8150-AC (7 nm) chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor | Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2960 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Adreno 640 GPU |
| 9 | 9.72 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 12.76 | 13.3 |
| Camera | |
| 13.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 27.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 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 | 10.23 |
| 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 | 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 4.56 | 5.28 |
| 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, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Galaxy Z Flip is better than Moto Z, getting an 88.5 score against 74.5. These devices come with Android OS, but the Galaxy Z Flip has the older 12 version while Moto Z has Android 8.0 Oreo version. Galaxy Z Flip's body is way newer than the Moto Z's, although it is a lot heavier and notably thicker.
Moto Z has a little bit better screen than Galaxy Z Flip, because although it has a bit smaller screen, it also counts with a slightly better 1440 x 2560 resolution and a higher screen pixel density. Galaxy Z Flip counts with a slightly better memory capacity for games and applications than Moto Z, because although it has no slot for an external memory card, it also counts with more internal storage.
Galaxy Z Flip has a bit more powerful CPU than Motorola Moto Z, because it has 4 GB more RAM memory and a higher number of cores. Galaxy Z Flip captures just a bit better photographs and videos than Moto Z, although it has a camera with less megapixels and a lower (4K) video definition, they both have a same size aperture.
The Galaxy Z Flip counts with greater battery duration than Moto Z, because it has a 3300mAh battery capacity.
Although Galaxy Z Flip is a better device, it costs a lot more than Motorola Moto Z, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as the Motorola Moto Z. If you are trying to save some money, you can get Motorola Moto Z, letting go a couple features, but you will get the most out of your money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.