Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 92.9 | 75.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 10 | Android 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow |
| 2020-07-16 | 2016-09-01 |
| 6.41 x 2.98 x 0.33 inches | 6.14 x 2.98 x 0.28 inches |
| 6.63 ounces | 5.75 ounces |
| Prism bricks black | Black, Gold and Gray |
| Aluminum and Plastic | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 650.00 | $ 250.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 2400 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED Plus | AMOLED |
| 393 pixels per inch | 534 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G SM7250-AB chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset |
| Kryo 475, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2400 MHz) processor | Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 620 GPU | Adreno 530 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 15.38 | 14.66 |
| Camera | |
| 64.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.59 inches (1/1.7") sensor | -- |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 12.21 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | -- |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 5.5 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 3500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 5.44 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.1 |
| 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
Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW is way better than the Moto Z Force, having a 92.9 score against 75.8. Even though the Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW is extremely newer than the Moto Z Force, it's somewhat thicker and somewhat heavier. Both devices in this comparison work with Android OS, but the Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW has 10 version and Moto Z Force has Android 7.0 Nougat.
The Moto Z Force has a slightly better looking screen than Galaxy A71 5G UW, because although it has a bit smaller screen, it also counts with a higher pixels density and a better resolution of 1440 x 2560. Galaxy A71 5G UW has just a little better processing power than Moto Z Force, because it has more RAM and 4 more CPU cores.
Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW counts with just a bit bigger memory capacity to install games and applications than Moto Z Force, because although it has a slot for SD memory cards that supports 1000 GB smaller, it also counts with 128 GB internal storage capacity. Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW features a way better camera than Moto Z Force, and although they both have a same size diafragm aperture, the same (4K) video resolution and the same 30 fps video frame rates, the Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW also has a back camera with a much better resolution.
Samsung Galaxy A71 5G UW counts with superior battery duration than Moto Z Force, because it has a 4500mAh battery capacity against 3500mAh.
The Galaxy A71 5G UW is way more expensive than the Moto Z Force, but it's still a convenient choice, as you can get a lot more for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.