Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 76.3 | 81 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11, 10 |
| 2018-06-29 | 2020-01-31 |
| 6.16 x 3.01 x 0.27 inches | 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches |
| 5.50 ounces | 7.76 ounces |
| 16 777 216 | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 3) | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 500.00 | $ 421.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 6.3 inches |
| 2160 x 1080 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | IPS LCD |
| 402 pixels per inch | 409 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 SDM636 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset |
| Kryo 260, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 1800 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 509 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 8.91 | 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 + 8.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.25 inches (1/4") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.68 | 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 5.0 | 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 |
Comparison review
Galaxy XCover Pro is just a bit better than Moto Z3 Play, with an 81 score against 76.3. Although Galaxy XCover Pro is newer than the Moto Z3 Play, it is much thicker and extremely heavier. Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro has just a bit better hardware performance than Moto Z3 Play. They have a 4 GB RAM and 8 cores.
The Galaxy XCover Pro features a bit sharper display than Moto Z3 Play, because it has a quite better 1080 x 2340 resolution, a bit larger display and a little more pixels per inch of display. The Motorola Moto Z3 Play has much more storage capacity to store more apps and games than Galaxy XCover Pro, and although they both have the same internal storage capacity, the Motorola Moto Z3 Play also has an external memory card slot that supports a maximum of 1,95 TB.
Galaxy XCover Pro has a much better battery life than Moto Z3 Play, because it has 4050mAh of battery capacity. Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro takes just a bit better photos and videos than Motorola Moto Z3 Play, because although it has a much tinier sensor taking less light and duller colors, and they both have the same video frame rate, the same 1920x1080 video definition and the same aperture, the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro also counts with a back facing camera with a way higher resolution.
Despite of being the best phone of the ones we compare here, Galaxy XCover Pro is also very cheap compared to the other phones.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.