Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 74.5 | 92.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| Android 8.0 Oreo, 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow | Android 11, 10 |
| 2016-09-01 | 2020-08-07 |
| 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 | Mystic bronze, Mystic gray and Mystic white |
| Aluminum | Aluminum |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 284.00 | $ 603.00 |
| 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 865+ SM8250-AB chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor | Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 3100 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Adreno 650 GPU |
| 9 | 9.81 |
| 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 | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.3 | 10.7 |
| 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
Galaxy Z Flip 5G is way better than Motorola Moto Z, getting a general score of 92.3 against 74.5. Both devices in this comparison review work with Android operating system, but the Galaxy Z Flip 5G has the previous 11 version while Motorola Moto Z has Android 8.0 Oreo. Galaxy Z Flip 5G's construction is newer, but extremely thicker and way heavier than Motorola Moto Z.
The Galaxy Z Flip 5G has a bit superior CPU than Moto Z, because it has a larger amount of RAM memory and 4 more cores. The Moto Z has a little sharper screen than Galaxy Z Flip 5G, because although it has a bit smaller display, it also counts with more pixels per screen inch and a little higher 1440 x 2560 resolution.
The Galaxy Z Flip 5G counts with a bit bigger storage to store more games and applications than Moto Z, because although it has no SD card slot, it also counts with 256 GB internal storage capacity. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G has superior battery duration than Motorola Moto Z, because it has a 3300mAh battery size against 2600mAh.
Galaxy Z Flip 5G captures slightly better pictures and videos than Moto Z, although it has a worse 3840x2160 video resolution and a lower resolution back camera, they both have the same aperture.
The Galaxy Z Flip 5G costs a lot more than the Moto Z, but it's still a great deal, because you can get a much better phone for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.