Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 76.3 | 92.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11, 10 |
| 2018-06-29 | 2020-08-07 |
| 6.16 x 3.01 x 0.27 inches | 6.59 x 2.90 x 0.28 inches |
| 5.50 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| 16 777 216 | Mystic bronze, Mystic gray and Mystic white |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 3) | Aluminum |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 500.00 | $ 603.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2160 x 1080 pixels | 2636 x 1080 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 402 pixels per inch | 425 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 SDM636 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 865+ SM8250-AB chipset |
| Kryo 260, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 1800 MHz) processor | Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 3100 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 8 GB RAM |
| Adreno 509 GPU | Adreno 650 GPU |
| 8.91 | 9.81 |
| 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 + 8.00 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 | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.68 | 10.23 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.7 |
| 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 5.0 | 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 |
Comparison review
The Galaxy Z Flip 5G has a general score of 92.3, which is a lot better than Moto Z3 Play's general score of 76.3. Galaxy Z Flip 5G's body is way newer, but somewhat heavier and a little bit thicker than Moto Z3 Play. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G counts with a better hardware performance than Motorola Moto Z3 Play, and although they both have 8 CPU cores, the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G also has a larger amount of RAM memory.
The Galaxy Z Flip 5G has a little bit better looking screen than Motorola Moto Z3 Play, because it has a quite better 1080 x 2636 resolution, a just a bit higher pixels amount in each inch in the display and a bit larger display. The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G features a bit better camera than Motorola Moto Z3 Play, because although it has a tinier aperture, and they both have the same 3840x2160 video quality, a same size sensor and a back-facing camera with a 12 mega-pixels, the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G also counts with better 60 fps video frame rate.
Moto Z3 Play features a bigger memory capacity for applications, games, photos and videos than Galaxy Z Flip 5G, because although it has 0 less internal storage, it also counts with a slot for an SD memory card that supports up to 1,95 TB. Galaxy Z Flip 5G has just a little better battery life than Motorola Moto Z3 Play, because it has a 3300mAh battery size against 3000mAh.
The Galaxy Z Flip 5G costs more money than the Moto Z3 Play, but you can get a much better phone for that few extra dollars.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.