Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 77.8 | 77.4 |
| Basic Information | |
| Vivo | Motorola |
| Android 14 | -- |
| 2024-04-03 | 2017-06-29 |
| 6.30 x 5.62 x 0.19 inches | 6.15 x 3.00 x 0.24 inches |
| 7.73 ounces | 5.11 ounces |
| Black and White | Gold, Gray and Silver |
| -- | Metal |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1915.00 | $ 200.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 8 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 2480 x 2200 pixels | 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) |
| AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 414 pixels per inch | 401 pixels per inch |
| 4500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.5 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SM8650-AB (4 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 626 8953 Pro chipset |
| processor | ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 2200 MHz) processor |
| 16 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 750 GPU | Adreno 506 GPU |
| 6.3 | 9.18 |
| 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 | 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.70 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 | 720 x 480 (480 fps) slow motion video |
| 12.87 | 9.46 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5700mAh Li - Ion Battery | 3000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 7.36 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.3 | Bluetooth 4.2, EDR |
| 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 |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a general score of 77.8, which is a bit better than Moto Z2 Play's 77.4 global score. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a way newer and thinner phone than the Moto Z2 Play, but it is notably heavier. Motorola Moto Z2 Play counts with a much more powerful processing unit than vivo X Fold 3 Pro, although it has a smaller amount of RAM, they both have 8 cores.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro has a much more vibrant display than Moto Z2 Play, because it has a quite higher pixel amount per inch in the display, a way better resolution of 2200 x 2480px and a lot larger screen. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro features much more storage capacity to install applications and games than Moto Z2 Play, because although it has no SD card slot, it also counts with 512 GB internal storage.
The vivo X Fold 3 Pro captures greater photographs and videos than Moto Z2 Play, and although they both have the same aperture, the vivo X Fold 3 Pro also has a way better video definition and a much more mega-pixels back facing camera. The vivo X Fold 3 Pro counts with a really longer battery duration than Moto Z2 Play, because it has a 90 percent more battery capacity.
Although vivo X Fold 3 Pro is a better device, it is way more expensive than the Moto Z2 Play, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as Moto Z2 Play. So if you want that extra specs and features, you can buy vivo X Fold 3 Pro, otherwise you can save a couple dollars and get the Moto Z2 Play, letting go some specifications.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.