Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.4 | 77.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| -- | Android 4.4.4 |
| 2017-07-07 | 2014-10-28 |
| 6.04 x 2.91 x 0.31 inches | 5.65 x 2.89 x 0.44 inches |
| 5.89 ounces | 6.21 ounces |
| Black, Blue, Gold and Silver | Black and Blue |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 611.00 | $ 135.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.7 inches | 5.2 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 515 pixels per inch | 565 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | Capacitive, Multi-touch |
| 8.6 | 9.7 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 805 APQ8084 chipset |
| Exynos M1and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor | Krait 450 (Quad-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 3 GB (800 MHz) RAM |
| Mali-T880 MP12 GPU | Adreno 420 (500 MHz) GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.54 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 256 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 10.78 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 20.70 MP + 2.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/2.00 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.4 inches (1/2.5") sensor | -- |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (24 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 9.57 | 9.9 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA | LTE (4G), HSPA, UMTS, EV-DO A, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.1 | 6.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3200mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3900mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.2 | 5.84 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 4.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition is slightly better than Motorola DROID Turbo, with an 80.4 score against 77.9. Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition's construction is incredibly newer, noticeably thinner and a little bit lighter than the Motorola DROID Turbo. Motorola DROID Turbo features a bit better performance than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has 1 GB less RAM and a lower number of cores , it also counts with an extra graphics processor.
Motorola DROID Turbo has a better display than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has a little smaller screen, and they both have the same exact resolution of 2560 x 1440 pixels, the Motorola DROID Turbo also counts with a just a bit more pixels per inch of display. Galaxy Note Fan Edition counts with a superior memory for games and applications than Motorola DROID Turbo, and although they both have exactly the same 64 GB internal memory, the Galaxy Note Fan Edition also has a SD card slot that supports up to 256 GB.
The Motorola DROID Turbo counts with improved battery lifetime than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because it has 3900mAh of battery capacity. The Motorola DROID Turbo features just a bit better camera than Galaxy Note Fan Edition, because although it has a tinier aperture which is not favorable for taking photos and/or video in low-light environments and lower 24 frames per second video frame rate, and they both have the same 3840x2160 video resolution, the Motorola DROID Turbo also counts with a camera with a way higher 20.7 mega-pixels resolution.
Although Galaxy Note Fan Edition is a better device, it costs a lot more money than the Motorola DROID Turbo, and it doesn't have such a good price and quality relation as Motorola DROID Turbo. If you want to save some money, you can buy the Motorola DROID Turbo, letting go a couple features and specs, but you will get the most with your savings.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.