Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 72.8 | 87.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| -- | Android 14 |
| 2015-12-16 | 2024-04-16 |
| 5.96 x 2.92 x 0.29 inches | 6.34 x 2.85 x 0.34 inches |
| 5.96 ounces | 6.95 ounces |
| Black, Gold, Pink and White | Forest Grey (Vegan Leather), Nordic Wood and Peach Fuzz (Vegan Leather) |
| -- | Aluminum, Vegan Leather and Wood |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | P-OLED |
| 401 pixels per inch | 393 pixels per inch |
| -- | 2500 cd/m2 brightness |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.9 | 9.6 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 615 8939 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 (4 nm) chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 28 nm (Octa-Core 1600 MHz) processor | processor |
| 3 GB RAM | 12 GB RAM |
| Adreno 405 GPU | Adreno 720 GPU |
| 8.73 | 6.21 |
| Storage | |
| 16 GB internal memory | 512 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 6.72 | 17.6 |
| Camera | |
| 13.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 50.00 MP + 50.00 MP |
| f/1.90 aperture | f/1.60 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | 25.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 8.91 | 12.32 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.1 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3300mAh Battery | 4500mAh Nano SIM, eSIM Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 5.28 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.1 | Bluetooth 5.4 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Motorola Edge 50 Ultra is much better than the Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016), getting a score of 87.1 against 72.8. Motorola Edge 50 Ultra's body is way newer, but somewhat heavier and thicker than the Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016). The Galaxy A7 (2016) counts with a really superior hardware performance than Motorola Edge 50 Ultra, although it has less RAM, they both have the same number of cores.
Motorola Edge 50 Ultra counts with a much more vibrant screen than Galaxy A7 (2016), because although it has a little bit worse display pixels density, it also counts with a larger screen and a bit higher 1080 x 2400 resolution. Motorola Edge 50 Ultra features a much greater memory for games and applications than Galaxy A7 (2016), because although it has no slot for external memory cards, it also counts with 512 GB internal storage.
Motorola Edge 50 Ultra has a much better camera than Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016), because it has a lot more mega-pixels back facing camera, a bigger aperture and a way higher 3840x2160 (4K) video quality. Motorola Edge 50 Ultra counts with better battery lifetime than Galaxy A7 (2016), because it has a 36 percent bigger battery size.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.