Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 76.3 | 94.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 11, 10 |
| 2018-06-29 | 2020-09-18 |
| 6.16 x 3.01 x 0.27 inches | 6.27 x 5.05 x 0.27 inches |
| 5.50 ounces | 9.95 ounces |
| 16 777 216 | Mystic black and Mystic bronze |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 3) | Aluminum and Glass |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 500.00 | $ 1930.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6 inches | 7.6 inches |
| 2160 x 1080 pixels | 2208 x 1768 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | Dynamic AMOLED |
| 402 pixels per inch | 372 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.1 |
| 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 | 12 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 |
| -- | 26.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.57 inches (1/1.76") 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 | 10.45 |
| 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 | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 4.96 | 6.32 |
| 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
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 has a global score of 94.6, which is a lot better than the Moto Z3 Play's global score of 76.3. The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 is a a lot heavier cellphone than Moto Z3 Play, but both of them are equally thin. Galaxy Z Fold 2 counts with a little sharper screen than Moto Z3 Play, because although it has a little bit inferior number of pixels per inch in the screen, it also counts with a better 1768 x 2208 resolution and a larger display.
The Galaxy Z Fold 2 features a superior performance than Motorola Moto Z3 Play, and although they both have 8 CPU cores, the Galaxy Z Fold 2 also has a higher amount of RAM. Moto Z3 Play features a bigger memory for games and applications than Galaxy Z Fold 2, because although it has less internal memory capacity, it also counts with a slot for SD memory cards that admits up to 1,95 TB.
The Galaxy Z Fold 2 features a much better battery duration than Motorola Moto Z3 Play, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity. The Galaxy Z Fold 2 captures a little bit better photographs and videos than Moto Z3 Play, because although it has a smaller aperture which is not good for low-light photography, and they both have the same (4K) video resolution and a 12 MP camera, the Galaxy Z Fold 2 also counts with higher video frame rate and a way larger back-facing camera sensor shooting lot better quality pictures.
Although Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 is a better device, it costs a lot more money than Motorola Moto Z3 Play, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as Motorola Moto Z3 Play. So if you need that extra features and specs, you can buy Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2, but if you don't you can save some dollars and get the Motorola Moto Z3 Play, giving up some features and specs.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.