Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 11.76 | 8.95 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 11, 10 | -- |
| 2020-08-21 | 2021-01-14 |
| 6.49 x 3.04 x 0.32 inches | 6.56 x 2.99 x 0.37 inches |
| 7.34 ounces | 7.20 ounces |
| Mystic black, Mystic bronze and Mystic white | Misty blue |
| Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass Victus) and Stainless steel | Plastic and Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 1054.00 | $ 170.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.9 inches | 6.5 inches |
| 3088 x 1440 pixels | 1600 x 720 pixels |
| Dynamic AMOLED | IPS LCD |
| 494 pixels per inch | 270 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.7 | 7.2 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 865+ SM8250-AB chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 SM4250-AA chipset |
| Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 3000 MHz) processor | Kryo 240, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 1800 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 3 GB RAM |
| Adreno 650 GPU | Adreno 610 GPU |
| 9.81 | 8.91 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 32 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 15.38 | 9.84 |
| Camera | |
| 108.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 13.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/2.00 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.75 inches (1/1.33") sensor | 0.32 inches (1/3.1") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (24 fps) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 13.64 | 9.24 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 5000mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 4.56 | 5.68 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | -- |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Galaxy Note 20 Ultra has a score of 11.76, which is way better than Moto G Play's 8.95 score. Even though Galaxy Note 20 Ultra and the Moto G Play were only released with a couple months difference, Galaxy Note 20 Ultra's construction is just a little heavier but also somewhat thinner than the Moto G Play.
Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra has a better hardware performance than Moto G Play, and although they both have a Octa-Core CPU, the Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra also has 9 GB more RAM. The Galaxy Note 20 Ultra features a much sharper screen than Moto G Play, because it has a way higher 1440 x 3088 pixels resolution, a bit larger display and a way better pixel density.
Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra captures much better videos and photos than Moto G Play, because it has a much better video resolution, a way bigger sensor shooting lot higher quality pictures and videos, a camera in the back with lot more mega-pixels and a bigger diafragm aperture. Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra counts with a superior storage capacity to store more games and applications than Motorola Moto G Play, because it has a SD card slot that holds up to 1000 GB and 96 GB more internal storage.
The Motorola Moto G Play features a much longer battery duration than Galaxy Note 20 Ultra, because it has 5000mAh of battery capacity against 4500mAh.
Although Galaxy Note 20 Ultra is a better device, it costs a lot more money than the Motorola Moto G Play, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as Motorola Moto G Play. If you are trying to save some money, you can get Motorola Moto G Play, and give up some specs and features, but you'll get the most out of your budget.