Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 98.9 | 74.4 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 13, 12, 11, 10 | Android 8.0 Oreo, 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow |
| 2020-08-21 | 2016-10-04 |
| 6.49 x 3.04 x 0.32 inches | 6.16 x 3.01 x 0.28 inches |
| 7.34 ounces | 5.82 ounces |
| Mystic black, Mystic bronze and Mystic white | Black, Gold, Gray and White |
| Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass Victus) and Stainless steel | Glass and Metal |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1300.00 | $ 280.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.9 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 3088 x 1440 pixels | 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) |
| Dynamic AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 494 pixels per inch | 401 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.7 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 865+ SM8250-AB (7 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 625 8953 chipset |
| Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 3000 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 3 GB RAM |
| Adreno 650 GPU | Adreno 506 GPU |
| 9.81 | 9.09 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 32 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 15.38 | 12.76 |
| Camera | |
| 108.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/2.00 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.75 inches (1/1.33") sensor | -- |
| 7680 x 4320 (24 fps) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (120 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 13.64 | 9.68 |
| 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) and HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 6.1 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 3510mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 6.32 | 5.44 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
Galaxy Note 20 Ultra has an overall score of 98.9, which is much better than Moto Z Play's global score of 74.4. Both phones in this comparison review have Android OS, but Galaxy Note 20 Ultra has an older 13 version and Moto Z Play has Android 8.0 Oreo. Galaxy Note 20 Ultra's body is much newer than Moto Z Play's, but it is notably heavier and somewhat thicker.
The Galaxy Note 20 Ultra counts with just a bit better screen than Motorola Moto Z Play, because it has a bigger display, a way better resolution of 1440 x 3088 pixels and a just a bit greater quantity of pixels per screen inch. The Galaxy Note 20 Ultra has a superior storage capacity to store more games and applications than Moto Z Play, because although it has a SD memory card expansion slot that allows 1000 GB smaller, it also counts with 128 GB internal storage capacity.
The Galaxy Note 20 Ultra has a little better hardware performance than Moto Z Play, and although they both have 8 processing cores, the Galaxy Note 20 Ultra also has 9 GB more RAM. The Galaxy Note 20 Ultra counts with better battery duration than Motorola Moto Z Play, because it has a 4500mAh battery size.
The Galaxy Note 20 Ultra counts with a much better camera than Motorola Moto Z Play, because it has a back camera with way more megapixels, a bigger camera aperture to capture better low light captures and a way better 7680x4320 video quality.
Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra is way more expensive than Moto Z Play, but it's still a good choice, as you can get a lot more features for that extra money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.