Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 92.3 | 75.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 11, 10 | Android 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow |
| 2020-08-07 | 2016-09-01 |
| 6.59 x 2.90 x 0.28 inches | 6.14 x 2.98 x 0.28 inches |
| 6.46 ounces | 5.75 ounces |
| Mystic bronze, Mystic gray and Mystic white | Black, Gold and Gray |
| Aluminum | -- |
| $ 603.00 | $ 250.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 2636 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Dynamic AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 425 pixels per inch | 534 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.3 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 865+ SM8250-AB chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset |
| Kryo 585, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 3100 MHz) processor | Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 650 GPU | Adreno 530 GPU |
| 9.81 | 9 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 13.3 | 14.66 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | -- |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) 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 |
| 10.23 | 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, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.7 | 5.5 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 3500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.28 | 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 |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G is much better than Moto Z Force, getting a 92.3 score against 75.8. The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G construction has the same thickness than the Moto Z Force, but it is heavier. Both devices in this comparison review include Android operating system, but Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G has 11 version and Moto Z Force has Android 7.0 Nougat version.
Moto Z Force features a little more vivid screen than Galaxy Z Flip 5G, because although it has a quite smaller screen, it also counts with a little higher 1440 x 2560px resolution and more pixels per screen inch. Galaxy Z Flip 5G counts with a bit better hardware performance than Moto Z Force, because it has a larger amount of RAM memory and more CPU cores.
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5G features a slightly better camera than Moto Z Force, although it has a back facing camera with a much lower resolution and a lower 3840x2160 (4K) video resolution, they both have a F1.8 aperture. Motorola Moto Z Force counts with more storage for applications and games than Galaxy Z Flip 5G, because although it has 0 less internal storage, it also counts with a slot for SD memory cards that allows a maximum of 1,95 TB.
The Moto Z Force counts with a bit superior battery lifetime than Galaxy Z Flip 5G, because it has a 3500mAh battery size.
The Galaxy Z Flip 5G is a lot more expensive than the Moto Z Force, but you can get a much better phone for that few more dollars.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.