Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 76.3 | 79.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 5.1 |
| 2018-06-29 | 2015-08-13 |
| 6.16 x 3.01 x 0.27 inches | 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches |
| 5.50 ounces | 6.03 ounces |
| 16 777 216 | Black, Gold, Gray and White |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 3) | Glass; metal |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 500.00 | $ 415.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 2160 x 1080 pixels | 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 402 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | Capacitive, Multi-touch |
| 8 | 9.4 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 SDM636 chipset | Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset |
| Kryo 260, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Single-Core 2100 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 509 GPU | ARM Mali-T760 MP8 GPU |
| 8.91 | 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 + 8.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.90 aperture |
| -- | 28.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video |
| 9.68 | 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 5.0 | 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 |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 is just a bit better than the Moto Z3 Play, with a 79.3 score against 76.3. Despite being the best phone in our current comparison, the Samsung Galaxy Note 5 design is extremely older, a little heavier and a little thicker than the Moto Z3 Play. Motorola Moto Z3 Play features a bit better processing power than Galaxy Note 5, and although they both have a 4 GB RAM, the Motorola Moto Z3 Play also has a higher number of cores.
The Galaxy Note 5 counts with a more vivid display than Moto Z3 Play, because although it has a little smaller screen, it also counts with a higher resolution of 2560 x 1440 pixels and more pixels per screen inch. The Moto Z3 Play counts with a lot bigger storage capacity to store more games and applications than Galaxy Note 5, and although they both have exactly the same internal storage, the Moto Z3 Play also has a slot for external memory cards that holds a maximum of 1,95 TB.
The Samsung Galaxy Note 5 shoots a bit better pictures and videos than Moto Z3 Play, because although it has a smaller camera aperture which is not favorable for taking photographs and video in low-light situations and a tinier back-facing camera sensor shooting lower quality photos and videos, and they both have the same 30 fps video frame rates and the same 3840x2160 (4K) video quality, the Samsung Galaxy Note 5 also counts with a back facing camera with lot more mega pixels.
Galaxy Note 5's battery performance is just as good as the battery performance in Moto Z3 Play.
Despite of being the best phone of the ones in this comparison, the Galaxy Note 5 is also a bargain compared to the other ones, which makes it an easy decision.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.