Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Motorola | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2019-09-05 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.22 x 2.95 x 0.35 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 6.70 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Brushed bronze, Cosmic purple and Electric gray | Black |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 3) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 450.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| OLED | -- |
| 403 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 SM6150 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| Kryo 460, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 612 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 12.42 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 25.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (120 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 11.55 | 8.14 |
| 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 |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 5.92 | 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 |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
Galaxy XCover FieldPro is slightly better than Motorola One Zoom, having a general score of 80.1 against 80. Despite being the best cellphone in this review, we must note that it is also a way thicker and way heavier cellphone. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a bit more powerful CPU than Motorola One Zoom. They have the same RAM memory amount and 8 processing cores.
The Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a sharper display than Motorola One Zoom, because although it has a way smaller display, it also counts with a higher 1440 x 2560 resolution and more pixels per inch of screen. Motorola One Zoom counts with a greater camera than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller camera aperture which is not recommended for shooting photographs and videos in low light environments, it also counts with a way more megapixels back-facing camera, a lot better 3840x2160 video quality and a lot larger back-facing camera sensor capturing more light and vivid colors.
The Motorola One Zoom has a slightly bigger storage for games and applications than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has an external memory card slot that admits up to 128 GB against 512 GB, it also counts with 64 GB more internal storage capacity. The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little better battery life than Motorola One Zoom, because it has a 4500mAh battery capacity.
Although Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it is a lot more expensive than the Motorola One Zoom, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as the Motorola One Zoom. If you prefer to save a few dollars, you can get the Motorola One Zoom, and give up a few features and specifications, but you will get the most out of your money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.