Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 11.65 | 8.91 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 5.1 |
| 2020-03-06 | 2015-07-28 |
| 6.57 x 2.99 x 0.35 inches | 5.80 x 2.95 x 0.43 inches |
| 7.83 ounces | 5.96 ounces |
| Cosmic black and Cosmic grey | -- |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 6) | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1157.00 | $ 235.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.9 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 3200 x 1440 pixels | 1080 x 1920 pixels (Full HD) |
| Dynamic AMOLED | -- |
| 509 pixels per inch | 401 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | Capacitive, Multi-touch |
| 8.7 | 8.8 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 SM8250 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 615 8939 chipset |
| Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit (Single-Core 1700 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 2 GB (800 MHz) RAM |
| Adreno 650 GPU | Adreno 405 GPU |
| 9.72 | 8.1 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 32 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot | microSD, microSDHC, microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot |
| 15.38 | 8.12 |
| Camera | |
| 108.00 MP + 40.00 MP | 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/2.00 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor | 0.42 inches (1/2.4") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (24 fps) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (960 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 13.42 | 9.68 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE (4G), HSPA, HSUPA, EDGE, GPRS and GSM |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 6.5 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 3630mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 4.88 | 5.76 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has a score of 11.65, which is much better than Moto X Play's 8.91 overall score. The Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G construction is noticeably newer and somewhat thinner, but notably heavier than the Moto X Play. Both phones in this review come with Android OS, but Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has the newer 11 version and Moto X Play has Android 5.1 version, giving you a couple additional features and performance enhancements.
Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has a lot better hardware performance than Motorola Moto X Play, because it has more RAM memory and 7 more processing cores. The Moto X Play features a bit better looking screen than Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G, although it has a lot worse resolution of 1920 x 1080px, a way smaller display and a just a little worse screen density.
The Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has much more storage capacity for games and applications than Motorola Moto X Play, because it has 96 GB more internal memory and a slot for an external memory card that supports up to 1000 GB. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G captures much clearer photos and videos than Moto X Play, because it has a larger aperture for better photography in low-light situations, a way more mega-pixels back facing camera, a larger camera sensor and a way better 7680x4320 video definition.
Motorola Moto X Play counts with better battery duration than Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G, although it has just 3630mAh battery capacity against 5000mAh.
Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G is way more expensive than Motorola Moto X Play, but it's still a great choice, because you can get a lot more for that extra money.