Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 79.3 | 77.4 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 5.1 | -- |
| 2015-08-13 | 2017-06-29 |
| 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.30 inches | 6.15 x 3.00 x 0.24 inches |
| 6.03 ounces | 5.11 ounces |
| Black, Gold, Gray and White | Gold, Gray and Silver |
| Glass; metal | Metal |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 415.00 | $ 200.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) |
| Super AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 515 pixels per inch | 401 pixels per inch |
| Capacitive, Multi-touch | No touch screen |
| 9.4 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Exynos 7 Octa 7420 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 626 8953 Pro chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Single-Core 2100 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| ARM Mali-T760 MP8 GPU | Adreno 506 GPU |
| 8.46 | 9.18 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 7.7 | 14.66 |
| Camera | |
| 16.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.90 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor | -- |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 2560 x 1440 (60 fps) (Quad HD / 2K) slow motion video | 720 x 480 (480 fps) slow motion video |
| 10.01 | 9.46 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), HSPA, HSUPA, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.8 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 336 hours standby time 22 hours talk time | -- |
| 4.96 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 4.2, EDR |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 is just a bit better than the Motorola Moto Z2 Play, getting a general score of 79.3 against 77.4. Samsung Galaxy Note 5's construction is older, somewhat heavier and a lot thicker than the Motorola Moto Z2 Play. The Moto Z2 Play counts with a little bit better performance than Galaxy Note 5, and although they both have the same RAM memory amount, the Moto Z2 Play also has 7 more CPU cores.
The Samsung Galaxy Note 5 counts with a brighter screen than Moto Z2 Play, because it has a better resolution of 2560 x 1440 pixels, a little bigger display and a better display pixel density. The Galaxy Note 5 has just a bit better camera than Moto Z2 Play, because although it has a tinier aperture which is not favorable for taking images and videos in low-light situations, and they both have the same video frame rates and the same (4K) video resolution, the Galaxy Note 5 also counts with a much higher resolution back camera.
The Motorola Moto Z2 Play counts with a superior memory for games and applications than Samsung Galaxy Note 5, and although they both have exactly the same internal storage, the Motorola Moto Z2 Play also has a slot for SD memory cards that supports up to 1,95 TB. The Moto Z2 Play's battery life is just as good as Samsung Galaxy Note 5's battery life.
Although Samsung Galaxy Note 5 is a better device, it is way more expensive than Motorola Moto Z2 Play, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as the Motorola Moto Z2 Play. If you want to save a few dollars, you can get Motorola Moto Z2 Play, giving up a few features and specs, but you will get the most with your budget.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.