Nokia Lumia 630 vs Motorola Moto G
The Nokia Lumia 630 is the new kid on the affordable phone market: a Windows Phone 8.1 device of very low price yet with a healthy screen size of 4.5 inches, the processor power of the quad-core Snapdragon 400, and nice enough design. With all this, there is simply no way not to compare it to its affordable Android sibling - the Motorola Moto G. Just like the Lumia 630, the Moto G showcases the best of Google’s operating system at a very affordable price - it’s got a 4.5” 720p display, larger than most devices its class, a powerful quad-core Snapdragon 400 processor, and a decent 5-megapixel camera.
Both showcase the latest of both platforms, and both are sold at very low profitability; both devices serve more to proliferate and popularize their operating systems among customers on a budget, rather than to make a profit for the company that manufactures them.
How do they differ, though, and is one better than the other? Let’s find out.
The Lumia 630 comes with a typical for Nokia form, boasting а wrap-around plastic shell that is easy to replace and swap for another one of different color. The material used in the 630 is plastic, with a paper-feeling soft touch finish that does not stain easily, and overall the phone is well put together.
The Moto G, on the other hand, is also a plastic phone, but unlike the flat lines of the Lumia, it has a preference for curves, and it uses a plastic shell that is a magnet for fingerprints. Notable on the Moto G is also the dimple on the back with the ‘M’ for Motorola, a nice cosmetic touch that gives the phone character.
In terms of pure size, both are of nearly the same - the Moto G being just a hair narrower, but noticeably thicker, so overall the Lumia 630 feels more elegant and well-refined.
Both use on-screen buttons - a novelty for Windows Phone where the Lumia 630 is the first phone to ever use such navigation, while in the Android world, on-screen buttons are pretty much a standard. The Lumia 630 and Moto G both have all their physical keys on the right - lock key in the middle and a volume rocker above for the Lumia, and the same in reverse position for the Moto G. The feel of the plastic keys on the Nokia phone is a bit shallow, though, and while they get the job done, the meticulously crafted buttons of the Moto G are much more responsive and solid.
One of the biggest disadvantages for the Nokia Lumia 630 is the fact that its 4.5-inch display has a lowly resolution of just 480 x 854 pixels. This translates into a pixel density of just 218ppi, and makes everything on the screen a bit pixelized, an issue particularly noticeable when you read text in small fonts. The Moto G 4.5” display, on the other hand, is much sharper, with a resolution of 720 x 1280 pixels, granting it pixel density of the respectable 329ppi.
Turning over to the actual color fidelity, the Nokia Lumia 630 does fairly well for the class, with the white point at 7049K, pretty close to the reference 6500K value, which means that whites on the display appear just very slightly on the cold side. Colors are mostly within the industry-standard sRGB color gamut, but there is also a very noticeable oversaturation and some colors (most notably green) are way off. The Moto G has a little colder white point, but in terms of saturations it is even better, with rich colors within the sRGB gamut that are just slightly overblown, but overall this is one of the most accurate screens for this affordable class of devices.
Looking at the screens outdoors, the Lumia 630 is a bit less reflective and that makes it slightly easier to use under direct sunlight. Viewing angles, however, are much better on the Moto G, as it preserves a lot of the color vibrancy and brightness at an angle, while colors on the Lumia 630 wash out noticeably when you tilt the phone.
Display measurements and quality
|Maximum brightness (nits)Higher is better||Minimum brightness (nits)Lower is better||Contrast Higher is better||Color temperature (Kelvins)||Gamma||Delta E rgbcmy Lower is better||Delta E grayscale Lower is better|
|Motorola Moto G||429
|Nokia Lumia 630||398
The numbers below represent the amount of deviation in the respective property, observed when a display is viewed from a 45-degree angle as opposed to direct viewing.
|Maximum brightness Lower is better||Minimum brightness Lower is better||Contrast Lower is better||Color temperature Lower is better||Gamma Lower is better||Delta E rgbcmy Lower is better||Delta E grayscale Lower is better|
|Nokia Lumia 630||89.4%
|Motorola Moto G||90.7%
The CIE 1931 xy color gamut chart represents the set (area) of colors that a display can reproduce, with the sRGB colorspace (the highlighted triangle) serving as reference. The chart also provides a visual representation of a display's color accuracy. The small squares across the boundaries of the triangle are the reference points for the various colors, while the small dots are the actual measurements. Ideally, each dot should be positioned on top of its respective square. The 'x: CIE31' and 'y: CIE31' values in the table below the chart indicate the position of each measurement on the chart. 'Y' shows the luminance (in nits) of each measured color, while 'Target Y' is the desired luminance level for that color. Finally, 'ΔE 2000' is the Delta E value of the measured color. Delta E values of below 2 are ideal.
This measurements are made using SpectraCal's CalMAN calibration software.
The Color accuracy chart gives an idea of how close a display's measured colors are to their referential values. The first line holds the measured (actual) colors, while the second line holds the reference (target) colors. The closer the actual colors are to the target ones, the better.
This measurements are made using SpectraCal's CalMAN calibration software.
The Grayscale accuracy chart shows whether a display has a correct white balance (balance between red, green and blue) across different levels of grey (from dark to bright). The closer the Actual colors are to the Target ones, the better.
This measurements are made using SpectraCal's CalMAN calibration software.
1. rodneyej1 (Posts: 3561; Member since: 06 Jul 2013)
I just don't see the point of the Lumia 630.. It's an awesome device for the money, but it's not super competitive like the 520 was...
Am I missing something here?
11. rodneyej1 (Posts: 3561; Member since: 06 Jul 2013)
Kinda a weird move by "Microkia" with us knowing they can do much better that this... It's almost like some abstract way of getting stomped by the competition to achieve what, I'm not sure of.. Pretty weird IMO.... What was MS's plan here?
35. lalalaman (Posts: 387; Member since: 19 Aug 2013)
Also it doesn't come anywhere near Nokia's lumia 6xx line.....that device should have been called lumia 530
13. Commentator (Posts: 2494; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
I wouldn't even necessarily call it an awesome device for the money, especially compared to the competition. In absolutely every category, the similarly priced G beats it, with the possible exception of camera and OS (which is totally subjective anyways.)
Heck, even the 420 had a camera key and capacitive buttons on the bottom, and I'm no selfie aficionado, but $160 should at least get me a front-facing camera.
20. rodneyej1 (Posts: 3561; Member since: 06 Jul 2013)
Well, considering that there's not too many other quality devices that are better I would still say that it's an awesome device for the money... I'm speaking relatively here... I mean, I'm not going to totally trash the 630.. It still is a nice device, especially if you want to experience WP8.1 on an affordable Lumia... I guess the MG can't do that, and maybe that's what MS was thinking here..... Nevertheless, I'll give it some credit where credit is due..
29. Commentator (Posts: 2494; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
I don't know, I'd rather the 630 was priced more along the lines of the Moto E. For $30 less you get basically the same phone spec-wise (albeit with a qHD display and slightly worse processor, but slightly more RAM).
30. rodneyej1 (Posts: 3561; Member since: 06 Jul 2013)
Well, that's why the MG has more bang for the buck here... I can't argue with that..
14. michaelmicro (unregistered)
You're missing that the 630 is currently new to market and thus commands a price premium, and that the price will drop accordingly over the next few months. The Lumia 520 also started on the market at approximately £100 and is now available for around £50-£60, so I expect the 630 to follow the same sort of trajectory.
By the time prices settle, the Moto G and Moto G 4G will probably be two or three times the price of the Lumia 630 respectively, which in the world of price conscious and price limited buyers is a very large difference.
16. Commentator (Posts: 2494; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
The Moto G launched at $180 last year when its specs were newer. The 630 is launching at $160 with the same/worse specs than the G. Even at $20, the G is a much better deal.
17. Commentator (Posts: 2494; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
Although I did misunderstand what you wrote. You're right, assuming the 630 price does drop as drastically as the 420.
18. rodneyej1 (Posts: 3561; Member since: 06 Jul 2013)
That makes it even worse!... There's no denying the fact that MS dropped the ball here with the 630... It could've offered more in terms of hardware... Just a little bit more, and it would've held its own... But instead it looks like much less of a device when laid out on paper... It's not horribly bad, or worse than the MG, but this just proves how tight the competition is these days...
And, lets not forget that these devices don't make any money.. They are "Image" devices, and this WOULD'VE been a great opportunity for MS to take advantage of the image building capabilities that devices like this can have... But, they didn't.. Maybe next time....
56. Jason78 (Posts: 73; Member since: 10 Apr 2013)
The price has already fallen. I picked up a Nokia Lumia 630 from Cricket for free after rebate. (Purchase price of $50 with a $50 rebate) It is the same as the AT&T version but has a green shell with the Cricket logo. The phone is locked to Cricket but they will unlock after 3 months of usage. I picked it up on a whim figuring I would at least have a free GPS (Nokia's Here Maps use maps downloaded to the phone so a SIM car isn't needed for mapping and turn by turn navigation.) The offer is good until Sept 11th:
I currently own a Lumia 925, Moto G (16GB) and Lumia 630. I have also owned 2 Lumia 521's in the past. The 630 is without a doubt a step up from the 521. The increased screen size alone makes for a much better experience. I rate the 630 to be a bit better than the Moto G for my purposes.
The Moto G beats the 630 in:
The unlocked version allows tethering
Better apps store of course
Slightly better camera (though neither are very good)
The Lumia 630 beats the Moto G:
Nokia HERE Maps (I can't stress enough how great HERE Maps are!)
Both phones seem to load webpages and apps at the same speed. I can't see any real world performance advantage for the Moto G's extra RAM.
3. Sniggly (Posts: 7182; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
It's really no surprise that with inexpensive devices like these, Motorola is climbing back into the ranks of best sellers.
7. kareivis (Posts: 32; Member since: 23 Jan 2012)
If you can deal with just 8GB of storage...
9. sgodsell (Posts: 1433; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)
The moto g can use USB otg, so you can use regular USB flash drives on the moto g if you want. Or better yet you can use WiFi storage with the moto g, like the Sandisk Connect. Its so small that its the size of a USB flash drive that can just stay on your key chain if you want. Both USB otg and WiFi storage is not supported on WP, but it is with a number Android devices which includes the Moto G.
25. kareivis (Posts: 32; Member since: 23 Jan 2012)
I am not sure, that someone, that buys Moto G will bring OTG cable with flash drive, so he could listen to some tunes. It`s frustrating process for my own Tablet Z, to watch movie from flash drive, but sitting with phone somewhere and listen music from flash drive... I dont think so. It`s nice feature, i know, but not for such purpose.
Similar case, you can download an app on WP device, and stream your Steam games. Is it possible? Yes. Will you use such feature? Yes... Maybe? It`s a feature, but as i said, it`s not for everyday usage.
37. sgodsell (Posts: 1433; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)
Users at least have a choice. Also there are micro usb and full usb storage devices now, all in one. Have you even looked at a Sandisk Connect. Its WiFi storage and if you are playing music or watching movies or videos then its perfect. Like I said you can leave it on your keychain. There is no physical connection to the moto g and a Sandisk Connect. It even allows you to change the micro SD cards. Put in a 32gb or even 64gb card and leave it on your key chain like magic from the moto g you can see all the files
Like I said above WP doesn't support these WiFi Storage devices.
48. kareivis (Posts: 32; Member since: 23 Jan 2012)
As i said, it`s great feature, but i doubt, that such feature would be on potential Moto G buyers list. On the other hand, didn`t know that, sounds fun. I should test it myself.
10. Sniggly (Posts: 7182; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Or if you don't want to deal with 512 MB of RAM...
19. kareivis (Posts: 32; Member since: 23 Jan 2012)
Yeah, but for average user, expandable storage is much more useful, than lack of 1GB of RAM. For photos, music, video and lot of games/apps 512MB of RAM isn`t a dealbreaker.
26. Sniggly (Posts: 7182; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
You're right, especially since Android does have a lot more games and apps available for download. 8 GB just isn't enough to store them all!
32. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3616; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)
You do realise that there is a 16gb model too. And the lte model has an SD card slot too.
39. kareivis (Posts: 32; Member since: 23 Jan 2012)
16GB is not the same as 8GB + 128GB if you want. You do realise, that LTE with SD is not so cheap anymore? Lumia is already less expensive. All the value is lost for Moto G with LTE and SD card slot, cause for such price, you can get something more powerful.
43. Sniggly (Posts: 7182; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
The LTE version is 220 bucks unlocked. Now you go ahead and tell me what smartphone I can buy for 220 bucks that is "more powerful" than the Moto G.
47. kareivis (Posts: 32; Member since: 23 Jan 2012)
Ok, didn`t know that. But still, in Lumia SD card slot is included in "basic" package, but in Moto G it`s in expensive variation.
Don`t get me wrong, Moto G is great phone, i just want to say, that 8GB sucks big time (khm khm...iPhone 5c... khm... khm...).
45. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3616; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)
Well truth to be told, we are in extreme minority to talk about tech online. My peer has an iPhone 5s 32gb and he barely uses around 8gb. And we are talking about a low end phone.... I bet most buyers won't even use the existing 8gb, at most they would swap in an 8gb card. Get real.
51. elitewolverine (Posts: 2054; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)
When you do not get real 8gb, yes yes they will
I get so many calls of 8gb androids, being memory hogged, you cannot move all apps/data to the sd card, they get all hurt that they just spend 20+$ for a 16gb-32gb card at a store (most wont buy from amazon).
Where as on windows phone, just popped in my 32gb sd card, hit transfer and my internal storage went from 900mb free to nearly 6gb free, lets see the moto g do that. (the process is the same for the 630)
8. Sniggly (Posts: 7182; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Let's not forget that the Moto G is the subject of one of the most kickass phone commericals ever:
12. rodneyej1 (Posts: 3561; Member since: 06 Jul 2013)
I agree.. I'd have to nominate the Moto G as the best mid/low end device for the money in 2014.. Motorola did a great job here, and I hope they teach MS to stay on their game....
Sorry WP fans.. The MG killed us this time around... Lol!!!
52. hemedans (Posts: 216; Member since: 01 Jun 2013)
for $190 you can get lumia 820 which is bad ass for that price, i agree with you x30 device are dissapointment i still prefer lumia 520, 620, 625 over 530 and 630.
58. rodneyej1 (Posts: 3561; Member since: 06 Jul 2013)
Right.. But, its only fair to stick with this specific comparison...
15. AfterShock (Posts: 2955; Member since: 02 Nov 2012)
I think Moto wins here too, not by a lot but enough to seal a victory.
Looks a little more pocket friendly as well.
23. gazmatic (Posts: 628; Member since: 06 Sep 2012)
the moto is both bigger and heavier... yet it is more pocket friendly smh
33. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3616; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)
Those curves and the curved back help it.
36. AfterShock (Posts: 2955; Member since: 02 Nov 2012)
Bang on the money SEN!
That slight taper an slope on back should make it almost disappear in a pocket.
Heft/weight is not off the charts, and a little adds some reassuring to some to not slip out of hand.
41. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3616; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)
Well to be honest, it doesn't exactly disappear because it is quite thick. The Moto X has best ergonomics I've ever seen on a modern smartphone though. Perfect balance.
21. Warren2185 (Posts: 2; Member since: 06 Jul 2014)
Great review. I own both and am deciding if I should port my "official" phone number over to the Lumia 630. I love the Windows OS, it's simple and quick to navigate, but everything on the Moto G is more refined, seems faster and more consistent. For example, To open my TuneIn Radio app, pull up my favorite station (just talk streaming stations), and make the connection and start listening is always much faster on the Moto G (both on wifi). Web pages load faster and render slightly better on the Moto G as well. Native Google Maps is better (especially the accuracy of traffic info) and looks better too. The apps that show Google Traffic information on a Windows phone don't look that good.
So I feel if I finally port over to the Lumia 630, that it's partly in "fanboy" support of the Windows platform and trying to support it. But they both work well enough for my use. It's the simple and quick Windows OS that keeps it in the running.
53. Landmarkcm (Posts: 464; Member since: 11 Aug 2009)
Something is off in this review phoneArena. There is no way that the last picture of the camera samples that says it's from the lumia taken in complete darkness came out that clear with no flash.??
59. Crispin_Gatieza (Posts: 278; Member since: 23 Jan 2014)
I haven't used the 630 but the 920 shoots unbelievable low-light photos. The rest of the phone may be questionable but that PureView camera is something special.
65. Jason78 (Posts: 73; Member since: 10 Apr 2013)
I have a Lumia 925 and the 630. The 630 doesn't have a PureView camera and the picture quality isn't anywhere close to the 920 or 925.
63. hurrycanger (Posts: 1287; Member since: 01 Dec 2013)
You can clearly tell there is a light of some sort pointing there. Yep. Something is way off.
64. Victor.H (Posts: 459; Member since: 27 May 2011)
Good catch! We've obviously messed up something in the order/names of images - now, it should be all fixed.
66. colinkiama (Posts: 53; Member since: 23 Nov 2013)
yes. I feel that a 730 may be released. But it's taking too long
67. yoeasie (Posts: 9; Member since: 24 Oct 2013)
The camera is AWFUL on the Moto G. I know it is well-spec'd on everything else (especially that quad), but the camera is just something you DON'T try to save money on.
68. jgalvez21 (Posts: 21; Member since: 29 May 2014)
wow moto G still amazing device. if the get L it will be killer device
nokia is pretty much dead, its incredible how moto g even have better performance.
that as the main point of windows phone, with android one coming up it going to get bad for microsoft, even worse when they cannot abuse the nokia brand anymore
69. softskillstech (Posts: 1; Member since: 31 Aug 2014)
Thanks for the wonderful information. Information about tips and uses of Mobiles/Tablets. Please visit softskillstech.com
72. james987 (Posts: 3; Member since: 21 Sep 2014)