Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 81 | 77.4 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 11, 10 | -- |
| 2020-01-31 | 2017-06-29 |
| 6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 inches | 6.15 x 3.00 x 0.24 inches |
| 7.76 ounces | 5.11 ounces |
| Black | Gold, Gray and Silver |
| -- | Metal |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 421.00 | $ 200.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.3 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 409 pixels per inch | 401 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9611 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 626 8953 Pro chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP3 GPU | Adreno 506 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.18 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 14.66 |
| Camera | |
| 25.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.25 inches (1/4") sensor | -- |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (480 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 720 x 480 (480 fps) slow motion video |
| 9.79 | 9.46 |
| 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, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4050mAh Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.2, EDR |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The Galaxy XCover Pro has a score of 81, which is a little bit better than the Moto Z2 Play's 77.4 global score. The Galaxy XCover Pro body is newer than the Moto Z2 Play's, although it's way thicker and incredibly heavier. Galaxy XCover Pro counts with a little bit better looking display than Moto Z2 Play, because it has a slightly higher resolution of 1080 x 2340, a just a bit better pixels amount per screen inch and a quite larger screen.
Motorola Moto Z2 Play counts with a much bigger memory to install applications and games than Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, and although they both have the same internal memory capacity, the Motorola Moto Z2 Play also has a slot for SD memory cards that allows up to 1,95 TB. Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro has a bit better hardware performance than Motorola Moto Z2 Play. Both of them have a 4 GB RAM memory and 8 cpu cores.
The Galaxy XCover Pro features a really longer battery performance than Motorola Moto Z2 Play, because it has a 4050mAh battery capacity against 3000mAh. Galaxy XCover Pro features a slightly better camera than Motorola Moto Z2 Play, and although they both have the same video frame rates, the same 1920x1080 (Full HD) video quality and a F1.7 aperture, the Galaxy XCover Pro also has a way higher 25 MP resolution back-facing camera.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro is a better device, it costs a lot more than the Moto Z2 Play, and it doesn't have such a good relation between it's price and quality as the Moto Z2 Play. So if you want that extra features and specs, you can buy Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, else you can save some money and buy the Moto Z2 Play, resigning a couple specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.