Motorola Moto G vs Motorola Moto X vs Google Nexus 5: specs comparison
0. phoneArena 14 Jan 2014, 02:33 posted on
After months worth of anticipation, Motorola's foray into the low-end smartphone market is now a reality, thanks to the just-outed Moto G...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. AppleHateBoy (unregistered)
Moto G has the Adreno 305 GPU according to Wikipedia.
The CPU consists of four Cortex A7s clocked at 1.2 GHz.
Thank God it doesn't use the cheapo Mediatek processors.
7. saiki4116 (Posts: 375; Member since: 31 Mar 2011)
The So called cheapo MediaTek Processors can do 1080P Recording. Even Before Moto started the mission of connecting next Billion with this cheap Device, they have connected many people.It's just the companies who are buying these(MediaTek) processors are not doing much software optimization,cause of limited R&D, they were not giving good experience with Sensors, especially Navigation and Camera. I have seen a dual core MT6589 touting MMX Canvas(10K INR) outperform a Galaxy S2(25K INR) while loading TempleRun. The OS is near AOSP and these phones are more responsive in general usage(even though they have Less RAM) then many samsung phones. Now Moto solves all the problems in these type of Phones, i.e they are offering Better Build Quality,Software optimizations.Currently in India arrogant Samsung is selling Gran Quattro with same processor(I guess it's Quad A5) at 15K,If MOTO undercuts or matches these,it would Sell.If they price Higher at around 19K, then people will flock to buy Nexus 4 currently selling at 22K.I am sure that India would not get 199$ equivalent price(i.e near 12K) because of hefty Taxes levied by the Govt.8GB without SD card expansion, I want to see a person who buys that, as Cloud services are not that popular in India(because of less BB penetration).
9. varuntis1993 (Posts: 48; Member since: 13 Jun 2012)
Hey ! first and foremost MTK 6589 is a quad core processor clocked at 1.2 GHz so you must have seen MMX canvas HD or canvas 4 and Moto G has Qualcomm snapdragon 400 8926 and not 200 which is in galaxy grand quattro and I think Adreno 305 supports full hd but don't know why full hd is not there.
And I wish it had a external sd card and as for pricing we can expect it around 15-16k.
11. saiki4116 (Posts: 375; Member since: 31 Mar 2011)
Actually 6572(6589 slipped out,because it's the MTK chipset, I hear always now) is the one I am mentioning, dual core A9 one.After Seeing that I had suggested to my friend to Buy Xolo A700, and He is still Happy with that Purchase, it used to outperform my S advance in gaming, but most of the times it is limited by Low RAM. Yeah Adreno 305 supports 1080P, It's performance will be notch lesser than last year's Flagship Adreno 225 GPU found in Nexus 4(Bundled with S4 Pro). I know Quattro has 200 i.e Quad core A5,but A5 or A7 single Threaded performance is lower than A9. A good Dual core A9 is way better than Quad A7 as most applications are not that multithreaded, But the battery Efficiency is better than in A7 due to small Die Size and newer architecture that is designed with battery efficiency as prime feature.
12. varuntis1993 (Posts: 48; Member since: 13 Jun 2012)
dude nexus 4 has Adreno 320 which is much powerful than any Mediatek processor gpu and its all about optimisation and how well they optimise the software to produce better results and about the single threaded and multi threaded performance we have to see benchmark test.
yeaa I know samsung doesn't have any good mid range phone right now and choosing b/w micromax and xolo I will go for xolo.
Right now I also prefer to have micromax and xolo phones in the price range of around 8-15k but not more than that.
33. frybread (Posts: 1; Member since: 07 May 2014)
Both are great phones, and if you're choosing for republics wireless, make sure to use the promo link as well (20 off at checkout):
(copy & paste) republicswireless.com/promo
I went with the moto X, even though it was 2x as much. Having a great camera is worth it.
2. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3429; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
The Moto G has a smaller screen & battery, but is bigger in all three dimensions & weighs more than the Moto X? o_O
3. JerryTime (Posts: 468; Member since: 09 Nov 2013)
I was scratching my head on this one as well haha.
4. adrialk (Posts: 20; Member since: 04 Sep 2013)
The answer is it costs $179 Off Contract. It takes $$ to make lightweight, compact phones.
5. kabhijeet.16 (Posts: 740; Member since: 05 Dec 2012)
+1 to you Sir... Donno why people are scatching their heads.. Its so obvious
6. good2great (Posts: 1042; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)
this is what i don't like about android... all three phones are released with three different versions of the OS. smh...
10. squallz506 (banned) (Posts: 1075; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)
I only see one version of android per phone.
8. Multisitio (Posts: 1; Member since: 13 Nov 2013)
Great idea to choose Brazil for the launch.
But there's a major problem here: It sure isn't gonna cost $179 in Brazil. In fact, 8GB model is to cost 650 reais - ie 280 USD. Forgive me if I'm wrong Mr Woodside, but isn't that MORE THAN 200??? Substantially so, I'd say. And USD 343 for 16GB - we're almost in Sammy and Apple territory (well actually they cost even more with the absurd Brazilian premium.)
29. asclepius (Posts: 1; Member since: 23 Jan 2014)
Why are you getting mad at Dennis Woodside? He's not the one who sets the retarded import tax on consumer electronics in your country. Blame that female you elected. The Moto G costs $179 in countries with sane and reasonable import taxes.
13. kenemu (Posts: 19; Member since: 22 Oct 2011)
1. 720p screen is fine on 4.5 inch. 2. no 1080p video recording is fine , managerable file size. 3. 1g ram? well lets see, probably still ok. 4. no lte, real deal breaker for me. 5. only 8g storage! come moto you can be much more generous than this. 6. 2070mha batt, probably on par while lte is missing. 7. usd 180 off contract, fair enoguh, but i dont mind paying a bit more for better specs.... overall a mediore device priced reasonably.
14. Tech_Junkie1996 (Posts: 43; Member since: 29 Aug 2013)
Its actually an excellent device priced cheaply. Think about this, the Galaxy S2 when it came out was well over $300. For that price you got specs that most $300 phones still give; an example of that is the HTC Desire 601 on Virgin Mobile. That phone has roughly the same specs as the S2, with a worse camera, and is $279. When this is taken into consideration, the Moto G is an excellent deal; you get $300 specs for a little over half that. Also, your argument on LTE is slightly unnecessary, this is a global phone; most countries oustide the North America and Western Europe do not use LTE; they use the slightly slower HSPA + and HSDPA channels.
21. TerryCrowley (Posts: 194; Member since: 31 Jul 2011)
Are you high? When the Galaxy S2 first came out it was the same price as todays current flagships at around $500 USD.
16. TerryCrowley (Posts: 194; Member since: 31 Jul 2011)
As someone who's used both Nexus 5 And Moto X extensively I got to say take the spec sheets with a grain of salt when it comes to battery life. the Moto X has faired far better than the Nexus 5 in real life usage, so people should keep that in mind if they're worried about the battery life on the Moto G.
22. PootisMan (Posts: 232; Member since: 02 Aug 2013)
I don't know. I've had both and the Nexus 5 wins by more than a thin hair.
23. jellmoo (Posts: 920; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)
I've had both as well, and I'd say that the Moto X wins by a somewhat thick hair. It all depends on what you value.
24. PapaSmurf (Posts: 9848; Member since: 14 May 2012)
Moto's software is the best aspect of the Moto X, but the exclusives found on the N5 are worth it imo, especially screen recording.
25. jellmoo (Posts: 920; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)
Again, it really depends on what you value. Screen recording isn't a feature I would use. Doesn't make it a bad feature per se, just one of limited value to me. On the other hands, I consider Active Notifications to be absolutely incredible, and pretty close to a "must have" feature for me.
I think the target audience is really important when considering these devices. The Moto X is a much more consumer friendly device. It comes with more direct features for the casual consumer. The Nexus 5 appeals more to users looking for raw power or hackability. Despite their similarities, they really do cater to different groups.
18. abhishekrocks (Posts: 6; Member since: 19 Apr 2012)
processor clocked in MHz really.......what are u doing PA
26. Augustine (Posts: 960; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
The slimmer Moto G is very appealing as a value phone. Unfortunately, the lack of LTE and 42Mbps HSPA+ detract somewhat from an otherwise excellent proposition.
But I don't see the point of having the tech specs of the EU Nexus 5 when the tech specs for the other phones are for the US versions.
30. Tech_Junkie1996 (Posts: 43; Member since: 29 Aug 2013)
The Moto G, while a nice phone, is not slimmer than either phone. It is actually the thickest phone of the three. Also, what makes you say that those are the European specs? The Nexus is a global device, the specifications are the same all over the world.
31. Augustine (Posts: 960; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
Bad choice of words. I meant to say that the G is pretty sleek, about as much as the X and the 5.
The 5 is quoted as supporting these frequencies: 800, 850, 900, 1800, 2100, 2600MHz. These are the frequencies of the rest-of-the-world version. The US version supports these frequencies instead: 700, 800, 850, 1700/2100, 1900, 1900, 2100MHz (v. bottom of bit.ly/1jtSYyP). The 5 is indeed a global 3G GSM phone, but the 4G side is localized.
32. dpknyk1993 (Posts: 1; Member since: 23 Feb 2014)
Proud Moto G user. Buttery smooth in process and great device. Always needed to own a Motorola product after so long time. Thanks to Google for providing the phone. Only lack is that it should had a active display notification like moto x has.