Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.4 | 88.5 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 12, 11, 10 |
| 2017-06-29 | 2020-02-14 |
| 6.15 x 3.00 x 0.24 inches | 6.59 x 2.90 x 0.28 inches |
| 5.11 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Gold, Gray and Silver | Mirror black and Mirror purple |
| Metal | Aluminum |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 200.00 | $ 1380.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2636 x 1080 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 401 pixels per inch | 425 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 626 8953 Pro chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ SM8150-AC (7 nm) chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor | Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2960 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 506 GPU | Adreno 640 GPU |
| 9.18 | 9.72 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 14.66 | 13.3 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP |
| f/1.70 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 |
| 720 x 480 (480 fps) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.46 | 10.23 |
| 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 | 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 4.96 | 5.28 |
| 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, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
Galaxy Z Flip has a score of 88.5, which is better than the Moto Z2 Play's 77.4 global score. Although the Galaxy Z Flip is way newer than Moto Z2 Play, it is way heavier and somewhat thicker. The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip has a bit better processing unit than Motorola Moto Z2 Play, and although they both have 8 processing cores, the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip also has a higher amount of RAM.
The Galaxy Z Flip features a little sharper screen than Moto Z2 Play, because it has a just a bit better pixel density, a quite better 1080 x 2636 resolution and a bigger display. Galaxy Z Flip takes slightly better videos and photos than Motorola Moto Z2 Play, because although it has a smaller camera aperture which is worse for low light captures, and they both have a back camera with a 12 mega-pixels resolution and the same (4K) video quality, the Galaxy Z Flip also counts with better 60 frames per second video frame rate.
Moto Z2 Play features more storage for games and applications than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip, because although it has less internal memory capacity, it also counts with a SD memory slot that holds a maximum of 1,95 TB. The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip features a bit longer battery performance than Moto Z2 Play, because it has a 3300mAh battery capacity.
Although Galaxy Z Flip is a better device, it costs a lot more money than Moto Z2 Play, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as Moto Z2 Play. So if you want that extra specs, you can buy the Galaxy Z Flip, else you can save some money and buy the Moto Z2 Play, giving up a couple specs and features.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.