Compare Samsung Galaxy Grand Neo GT-I9060 vs Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB)

Feature Comparison

  • Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB)'s got 9.0% more Screen Size
  • Internal Storage of Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB)'s is 87.0% more than Samsung Galaxy Grand Neo GT-I9060
  • Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB)'s 4GB RAM is more than Samsung Galaxy Grand Neo GT-I9060's 1GB RAM
 
Samsung Galaxy Grand Neo GT-I9060
We Love
Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB)
Highlight:
All Features
Only Differences
Rank Rank #2Rank #1  
Spec Score 
20 /100
100 /100
  
This score is assigned based on the product's specifications without taking price into consideration.
 
52 Value For Money Score
89 Value For Money Score
  
Display     
Screen Size
5 inch 5.5 inch   
Screen Resolution
800 x 480 pixels 1920 x 1080 pixels   
Screen Type
LCD AMOLED   
Pixel Density
186.6 PPI 400.53 PPI   
Screen Protection
- Corning Gorilla Glass   
Chipset     
Brand
Broadcom MediaTek   
Processor Speed
1.2GHz 2.2GHz   
Processor
Broadcom 23550 MediaTek Helio P15   
Processor Type
Quad-Core Octa-Core   
RAM
1GB 4GB   
Graphics
Mali-400 MP2 Mali-T860 MP2   
Camera     
Rear Camera Resolution
5MP 16MP   
Front Camera Resolution
0.3MP 8MP   
Camera Details
- PDAF, f/2.0, ZSL, Touch Focus, Face Detection, Panorama, Auto-HDR, Beautification Mode   
Video Recording Resolution
HD Video Recording (720p) 4K Video Recording (2160p)   
Camera Features
Autofocus, LED Flash Autofocus, Phase Detection Autofocus (PDAF), Dual Tone LED Flash   
General Specifications     
Operating System
Android Android   
OS Version
- Android 6.0 Marshmallow   
OS Detail
Android (4.2) -   
OS Upgradable To
- Android 7.0   
Device Type
Touchscreen Touchscreen   
USB Connector Type
Micro USB USB Type C   
Features
FM Radio Water Resistance, Fingerprint Scanner, GPS, FM Radio   
Dimensions (mm)
143.7 x 77.1 x 9.6 151.35 x 75.35 x 7.85   
Weight
163 grams 163 grams   
Connectivity
3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth 4G LTE (India Compatible), 3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth, VoLTE (Works with Jio)   
Audio Jack
3.5mm 3.5mm   
Color
White, Black Gold, Silver, Gray   
Build Material
- Metal Unibody   
Device Warranty
- 1 Year   
Warranty Details
- 1 Year for Mobile & 6 Months for Accessories   
Storage     
Internal Storage
8GB 64GB   
Approx. User Available Storage
6.72GB -   
Card Slot
Yes Yes   
Maximum Card Slot Capacity
64GB 128GB   
Communication     
SIM Card Slots
Dual Dual   
Network Type
GSM GSM   
SIM Card Type
Mini (Normal) SIM Nano SIM   
SIM 1 Details
3G, 2G, Mini SIM 4G, 3G, 2G, Nano SIM   
SIM 2 Details
3G, 2G, Mini SIM 4G, 3G, 2G, Nano SIM   
Hybrid SIM (microSD + SIM)
- Yes   
Battery     
Battery Capacity
2100mAh 3050mAh   
Battery Type
Lithium-ion (Li-ion) Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po)   
Removable Battery
Yes No   
Wireless Charging
- No   
Fast Charging
- Yes   

Samsung Galaxy Grand Neo GT-I9060 vs Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB) Specs

Specs
Samsung Galaxy Grand Neo GT-I9060Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB)  
Screen Size 5 inch5.5 inch  
Rear Camera Resolution 5MP16MP  
RAM 1GB4GB  
Battery Capacity 2100mAh3050mAh  
Front Camera Resolution 0.3MP8MP  

Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB) Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Stylish & sturdy build
  • Crisp & vivid display
  • Fast charging via USB Type-C
  • Good front facing camera
The Bad
  • Hybrid second slot
  • Sub-optimal battery life
  • Lacks the usual set of Moto features
  • Mean overall performance
  • Rear camera produces average results

Talk about this comparison, ask your questions!

This page helps you compare Samsung Galaxy Grand Neo GT-I9060 with Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB). When you see Samsung Galaxy Grand Neo GT-I9060 Vs Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB) comparison on Pricebaba, watch-out for the specifications of these phones and also the VFM score. With Pricebaba’s Value For Money Score, you can know how Samsung Galaxy Grand Neo GT-I9060 stands against Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB) and which one you should buy. The best price of Samsung Galaxy Grand Neo GT-I9060 is currently Rs. 19,661. The lowest price for Motorola Moto M (4GB/64GB) is Rs. 14,999. The prices for both these products were updated August 24, 2017.
 
Report an error on this page