Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 81 | 77.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 4.4.4 |
| 2020-01-31 | 2014-10-28 |
| 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches | 5.65 x 2.89 x 0.44 inches |
| 7.76 ounces | 6.21 ounces |
| Black | Black and Blue |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 421.00 | $ 135.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.3 inches | 5.2 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 1440 x 2560 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | AMOLED |
| 409 pixels per inch | 565 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | Capacitive, Multi-touch |
| 8.1 | 9.7 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 805 APQ8084 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor | Krait 450 (Quad-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 3 GB (800 MHz) RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP3 GPU | Adreno 420 (500 MHz) GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.54 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 11.74 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 20.70 MP + 2.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/2.00 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.25 inches (1/4") sensor | -- |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (24 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 9.79 | 9.9 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE (4G), HSPA, UMTS, EV-DO A, EDGE, GPRS, GSM and CDMA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4050mAh Battery | 3900mAh Battery |
| Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 6 | 5.84 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | -- |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Galaxy XCover Pro is a little bit better than Motorola DROID Turbo, having a general score of 81 against 77.9. Even though the Galaxy XCover Pro is heavier than the Motorola DROID Turbo, it's thinner and incredibly newer. Both devices we are comparing work with Android OS, but the Galaxy XCover Pro has the older 11 version while Motorola DROID Turbo has Android 4.4.4 version.
The Motorola DROID Turbo has just a little better performance than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a lower amount of RAM memory and an inferior number of cores , it also counts with an extra GPU. Motorola DROID Turbo features a sharper display than Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a bit smaller display, it also counts with a better 2560 x 1440 pixels resolution and more pixels per display inch.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro has much more storage capacity for apps and games than Motorola DROID Turbo, and although they both have the same internal memory capacity, the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro also has a SD extension slot that holds a maximum of 512 GB. The Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro has a bit better battery lifetime than Motorola DROID Turbo, because it has a 4050mAh battery capacity.
Motorola DROID Turbo counts with just a bit better camera than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, because although it has a smaller aperture and a lesser MP camera, it also counts with a much higher 3840x2160 video quality.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro is a better device, it costs a lot more money than the Motorola DROID Turbo, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as Motorola DROID Turbo. If you prefer to save some dollars, you can buy the Motorola DROID Turbo, letting go a few specs and features, but you will get the most out of your budget.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.