Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 75.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Motorola |
| Android 14 | Android 7.0 Nougat, 6.0 Marshmallow |
| 2024-04-03 | 2016-09-01 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 6.14 x 2.98 x 0.28 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 5.75 ounces |
| Black and White | Black, Gold and Gray |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 250.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 534 pixels per inch |
| 4500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.5 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset |
| processor | Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2200 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 530 GPU |
| 6.3 | 9 |
| Storage | |
| 512 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 17.6 | 14.66 |
| Camera | |
| 50.00 MP + 32.00 MP | 21.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 23.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.77 inches (1/1.3") sensor | -- |
| 7680 x 4320 (30 fps) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 3840 x 2160 (60 fps) (4K) slow motion video | 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 12.87 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | -- |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G) and HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 5.5 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 7.36 | 5.44 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.3 | Bluetooth 4.1 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Infra-red port | -- |
| 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 vivo X Fold 3 Pro is just a bit better than Moto Z Force, having a 77.8 score against 75.8. Even though vivo X Fold 3 Pro is way heavier than Moto Z Force, it's notably thinner and much newer. Both of these phones have Android OS, but the vivo X Fold 3 Pro has older 14 version and Moto Z Force has Android 7.0 Nougat version.
Moto Z Force counts with a lot better processing power than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has 4 lesser cores (although they are faster) and a lower amount of RAM memory. Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with an incredibly better screen than Motorola Moto Z Force, because although it has a little worse pixel density, it also counts with a lot larger display and a better resolution of 2200 x 2480 pixels.
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a lot better camera than Moto Z Force, because it has a camera in the back with lot more mega-pixels, a bigger diafragm aperture for better captures in poorly lited environments and a much higher 7680x4320 video resolution. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a way bigger storage for applications and games than Moto Z Force, because although it has no external memory card slot, it also counts with more internal memory.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features a superior battery lifetime than Motorola Moto Z Force, because it has a 63% bigger battery size.
Although vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a better device, it is a lot more expensive than the Moto Z Force, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as the Moto Z Force. If you are trying to save some money, you can buy Moto Z Force, giving up a couple features, but you'll get the most with your money.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.