Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.4 | 79.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 5.1 |
| 2017-06-29 | 2015-08-13 |
| 6.15 x 3.00 x 0.24 inches | 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches |
| 5.11 ounces | 6.03 ounces |
| Gold, Gray and Silver | Black, Gold, Gray and White |
| Metal | Glass; metal |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 200.00 | $ 415.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 401 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | Capacitive, Multi-touch |
| 8 | 9.4 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 626 8953 Pro chipset | Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Single-Core 2100 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 506 GPU | ARM Mali-T760 MP8 GPU |
| 9.18 | 8.46 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 14.66 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.90 aperture |
| -- | 28.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 720 x 480 (480 fps) slow motion video | 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video |
| 9.46 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), HSPA, HSUPA, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.8 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| -- | 336 hours standby time 22 hours talk time |
| 4.96 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2, EDR | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Galaxy Note 5 has a global score of 79.3, which is a little bit better than Motorola Moto Z2 Play's 77.4 general score. Galaxy Note 5 is better than the Motorola Moto Z2 Play, it must be noted that it's also an older, extremely thicker and somewhat heavier phone. Samsung Galaxy Note 5 has a sharper screen than Moto Z2 Play, because it has a quite larger screen, a higher pixels amount per display inch and a better 2560 x 1440 resolution.
The Motorola Moto Z2 Play features a bit better processing unit than Galaxy Note 5, and although they both have 4 GB of RAM memory, the Motorola Moto Z2 Play also has more processing cores. Moto Z2 Play features a superior storage capacity for games and applications than Galaxy Note 5, and although they both have exactly the same 64 GB internal memory, the Moto Z2 Play also has an external memory card slot that holds up to 1,95 TB.
The Galaxy Note 5 has a little bit better camera than Moto Z2 Play, because although it has a smaller aperture which is not favorable for shooting photos or video in low-light environments, and they both have the same 30 fps video frame rate and the same 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution, the Galaxy Note 5 also counts with a camera with a lot higher resolution.
The Galaxy Note 5 features a battery duration that's just as good as the battery lifetime in Moto Z2 Play.
Although Samsung Galaxy Note 5 is a better device, it costs a lot more money than Motorola Moto Z2 Play, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as the Motorola Moto Z2 Play. If you are trying to save some dollars, you can get the Motorola Moto Z2 Play, and give up a couple features, but you will get the most with your budget.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.