Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.4 | 81 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11, 10 |
| 2017-06-29 | 2020-01-31 |
| 6.15 x 3.00 x 0.24 inches | 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches |
| 5.11 ounces | 7.76 ounces |
| Gold, Gray and Silver | Black |
| Metal | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 200.00 | $ 421.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 6.3 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | IPS LCD |
| 401 pixels per inch | 409 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 626 8953 Pro chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-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 506 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.18 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 14.66 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.25 inches (1/4") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| 720 x 480 (480 fps) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.46 | 9.79 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4050mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 4.96 | 6 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2, EDR | 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 | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Galaxy XCover Pro is slightly better than the Moto Z2 Play, with an 81 score against 77.4. The Galaxy XCover Pro is a way newer cellphone than the Moto Z2 Play, although it is much thicker and way heavier. Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro counts with just a bit better processing power than Motorola Moto Z2 Play. Both have the same RAM memory amount and a Octa-Core CPU.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro counts with just a bit better looking screen than Motorola Moto Z2 Play, because it has a quite greater pixels quantity per inch of screen, a slightly higher resolution of 1080 x 2340px and a little larger screen. Moto Z2 Play features much more storage for applications, games, photos and videos than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, and although they both have equal 64 GB internal storage capacity, the Moto Z2 Play also has an external memory slot that admits up to 1,95 TB.
The Galaxy XCover Pro has a superior battery life than Moto Z2 Play, because it has 4050mAh of battery capacity. The Galaxy XCover Pro takes slightly better photographs and videos than Motorola Moto Z2 Play, and although they both have a same size aperture, the same video frame rates and the same video resolution, the Galaxy XCover Pro also has a much higher resolution back camera.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro is a better device, it costs a lot more than the Motorola Moto Z2 Play, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as Motorola Moto Z2 Play. So if you want that extra features, you can buy the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, otherwise you can save some dollars and buy the Motorola Moto Z2 Play, letting go a couple features and specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.