Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 92.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | Android 12, 11 |
| 2020-04-04 | 2021-08-19 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.42 x 2.99 x 0.31 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 6.70 ounces |
| Black | Blue Vegan Leather, Iridescent White and Midnight Blue |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Glass |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | -- |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| -- | OLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 393 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8.2 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragonn 870 SM8250-AC (7 nm) chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 585, 64-bit (Octa-Core 3200 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 12 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 650 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.9 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 256 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 11.74 | 13.3 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 108.00 MP + 32.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.90 aperture |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | -- |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 7680 x 4320 (24 fps) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (960 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 12.87 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 10.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 4500mAh Nano SIM Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.1 |
| 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 |
Comparison review
The Motorola Edge 20 Pro has an overall score of 92.8, which is better than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro's global score of 80.1. Both phones in this review have Android operating system, but Motorola Edge 20 Pro has an older 12 version while Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has Android 8.0 Oreo. The Motorola Edge 20 Pro body is newer, a lot lighter and noticeably thinner than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro.
The Motorola Edge 20 Pro counts with a bit superior processor than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have 8 cpu cores, the Motorola Edge 20 Pro also has 8 GB more RAM. Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has just a bit better looking display than Motorola Edge 20 Pro, because although it has a really smaller screen, it also counts with a better pixel density and a better 1440 x 2560px resolution.
The Motorola Edge 20 Pro has a lot better camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a lot tinier aperture, it also counts with a back-facing camera with much more megapixels and a much higher video definition. Motorola Edge 20 Pro counts with a better storage capacity for apps and games than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has no external SD slot, it also counts with more internal memory.
The Motorola Edge 20 Pro counts with a battery performance that's just as good as the Galaxy XCover FieldPro one.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.