Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 98 | 75.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 13, 12, 11, 10 | Android 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow |
| 2020-03-06 | 2016-09-01 |
| 6.57 x 2.99 x 0.35 inches | 6.14 x 2.98 x 0.28 inches |
| 7.83 ounces | 5.75 ounces |
| Cosmic black and Cosmic grey | Black, Gold and Gray |
| Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 6) | -- |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 1400.00 | $ 250.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.9 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 3200 x 1440 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Dynamic AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 509 pixels per inch | 534 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.7 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 SM8250 (7 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset |
| Kryo 585, 64-bit (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 650 GPU | Adreno 530 GPU |
| 9.72 | 9 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1000 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 15.38 | 14.66 |
| Camera | |
| 108.00 MP + 40.00 MP | 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.5 inches (1/2") 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 | 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 13.42 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| 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 | 5.5 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 3500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 6.8 | 5.44 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.1 |
| 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
The Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has a general score of 98, which is much better than Motorola Moto Z Force's 75.8 score. Both phones we compare here use Android OS, but Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has an older 13 version while Motorola Moto Z Force has Android 7.0 Nougat. The Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G construction is noticeably newer than Motorola Moto Z Force's, although it is notably heavier and somewhat thicker.
Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G counts with a bit superior processor than Motorola Moto Z Force, because it has 8 GB more RAM and a larger number of cores (and faster). The Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G counts with a bit sharper screen than Motorola Moto Z Force, because although it has a bit less pixels per screen inch, it also counts with a bigger display and a bit higher resolution of 1440 x 3200 pixels.
The Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G takes much clearer pictures and videos than Moto Z Force, and although they both have the same camera aperture, the Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G also has a way higher 108 megapixels resolution camera and a much better video quality. The Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G counts with a little bit more memory capacity to install applications and games than Moto Z Force, because although it has a slot for external memory cards that allows a maximum of 1000 GB against 1,95 TB, it also counts with 128 GB internal storage capacity.
Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G has a superior battery duration than Motorola Moto Z Force, because it has 5000mAh of battery capacity instead of 3500mAh.
Although Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G is a better device, it is way more expensive than the Moto Z Force, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as the Moto Z Force. If you want to save some money, you can buy Moto Z Force, letting go a couple features and specs, but you will get the most with your money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.