Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 80 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2020-04-04 | 2019-09-05 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.22 x 2.95 x 0.35 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 6.70 ounces |
| Black | Brushed bronze, Cosmic purple and Electric gray |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 3) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 450.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.4 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| -- | OLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 403 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 SM6150 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 460, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 612 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.09 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 12.42 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 48.00 MP + 25.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 27.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (120 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 11.55 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| 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
Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a little bit better than the Motorola One Zoom, getting a overall score of 80.1 against 80. Although it's the best phone in this comparison, the Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a notably thicker and a lot heavier phone than Motorola One Zoom. Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little bit better hardware performance than Motorola One Zoom. Both of them have 8 cpu cores and the same RAM memory amount.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a brighter display than Motorola One Zoom, because although it has a much smaller display, it also counts with a better 1440 x 2560 resolution and a better display pixel density. Motorola One Zoom features a slightly better memory capacity for applications and games than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has an external memory card slot that allows 384 GB smaller, it also counts with 128 GB internal storage.
Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with a little longer battery life than Motorola One Zoom, because it has a 13% more battery capacity. Motorola One Zoom shoots way better videos and photos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier diafragm aperture, it also counts with a much higher (4K) video definition, a much larger sensor providing a lot better image quality and a back camera with a lot higher 48 mega pixels resolution.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more money than the Motorola One Zoom, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as Motorola One Zoom. If you want to save some dollars, you can get the Motorola One Zoom, giving up a few features and specifications, but you'll get the most with your budget.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.