Poll: Is the Samsung Galaxy Note5 worth $300 more than the Moto X Pure?

Poll: Is the Samsung Galaxy Note5 worth $300 more than the Moto X Pure?
The news just came out that the Moto X Pure Edition has had a number of models sell out via Best Buy. While we're not convinced that is due to high demand rather than low stock, it does beg an important question: are the performance benefits of a flagship like the Samsung Galaxy Note5 worth the price difference between it and the Moto X Pure/Style?

If you're looking at a spec sheet comparison, the $699 Samsung Galaxy Note5 definitely has its advantages, including a base model with 32GB of storage and 4GB of RAM, where the $399 base model Moto X Pure has 16GB of storage and 3GB of RAM, although the Moto X does have microSD expansion. The Moto X Pure has more megapixels in its camera (21 vs 16) and dual-flash, but no optical image stabilization; and, while Motorola has been earning buzz for greatly improving its camera, Samsung's cameras have been considered industry leaders in quality along with the iPhone. The differences in size, display, and resolution are negligible on paper. Both also have 3000mAh batteries and Quick Charging, though the Note5 also has wireless charging

Of course, if you're comparing the screens side-by-side, you may see a difference, but that's not a real-world scenario. And, when you look at the performance benefits, the spec differences may not be as wide. We don't yet have benchmarks for the Moto X Pure, but it has the same SoC (Snapdragon 808) and RAM as the LG G4 and we have compared that to the Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge, which has the same Exynos 7 Octa 7420 and RAM as the Note5. 

As you can see, the Exynos is definitely better all around, but the differences aren't that stark in many places. And, stock Android devices tend to do a bit better than more heavily skinned devices, so it wouldn't be surprising if the Moto X beat the LG G4 on some benchmarks. Even so, benchmarks are one thing, and real-world use is another, because again, unless you're comparing side-by-side, it's unclear if the Moto X would feel that much slower than something like the Note5. 

So, that leaves the question: Are the specs and performance benefits of a Samsung Galaxy Note5 worth $300 at full price than the Moto X Pure/Style? Sound off on the poll and in the comments and we'll bring you the results on Monday!

Is the Samsung Galaxy Note5 worth $300 more than the Moto X Pure?

Yes - specs FTW!
No - the performance isn't that much better
Doesn't matter - I'm not buying an Android or any phone at full price

Related phones

Galaxy Note 5
  • Display 5.7" 1440 x 2560 pixels
  • Camera 16 MP / 5 MP front
  • Processor Samsung Exynos 7 Octa, Octa-core, 2100 MHz
  • Storage 64GB
  • Battery 3000 mAh(22h 3G talk time)
Moto X Style
  • Display 5.7" 1440 x 2560 pixels
  • Camera 21 MP / 5 MP front
  • Processor Qualcomm Snapdragon 808, Hexa-core, 1800 MHz
  • Storage 64GB + microSDXC
  • Battery 3000 mAh



1. SirYar

Posts: 351; Member since: Jul 02, 2014

Yes, the Note 5 is as powerhouse.

12. medicci37

Posts: 1361; Member since: Nov 19, 2011

A powerhouse battery to go with would have been awesome. & Still not much more of a powerhouse then the Galaxy 6 that was released almost 6 months ago. Not to mention all the features that Samsung has left out of the Note 5. Doesn't even have a ir blaster Wtf?

18. TerryTerius unregistered

I don't really understand this complaint, since it is inherently saying that the note 4 had bad battery life considering the SOT for the two of them is pretty close. I know note 5 battery life is pretty similar to the edge plus, and the edge plus gets me through aa work day with no issues. It's substantially better than its little brother. Thath being said, smartphones are plateauing. There won't really be these year over year technological leaps like we were seeing for the past 5 years. Progress isn't over, but smartphones are pretty mature by this point. The rate of advancement will probably decrease. iOS will likely have substantial change over time but that's largely because Apple withholds features to ensure there is always a compelling reason to upgrade. But who knows what the future brings and what the next breakthrough will be?

35. natypes

Posts: 1110; Member since: Feb 02, 2015

People think mAh is the ONLY battery life indicator. They don't know what they're talking about. I had an S6 and now a Note 5 and the battery on both is very good. Heavy use all day go home, put on fast charge for 15-20 minutes and you never, ever worry about S6. Note 5 can last me all day 5 hours SOT @75% brightness w/o needing a charge.

47. strudelz100

Posts: 646; Member since: Aug 20, 2014

I agree. The Galaxy S6 in my experience has very consistent battery life. 4.5 - 5 hours SOT.

50. Xperia14

Posts: 1208; Member since: Sep 01, 2015

I wouldn't call 5 hours of SOT very good... My Z2 can get 6-7 hours SOT in two days ;)

79. dazed1

Posts: 811; Member since: Jul 28, 2015

Z2 has junk display, and huge bezels.

92. natypes

Posts: 1110; Member since: Feb 02, 2015

So, what would you call the 6 hours on that mid range phone? I'd say that is excellent, which leaves plenty of room for 5 hours SoT to be very good.

84. sgtdisturbed47

Posts: 974; Member since: Feb 02, 2012

On my Note 5 I go all day and into the next without needing a charge. Note 5's camera, performance, and software capability (especially with the S Pen) make it a more serious device than the Moto X Pure. 21mp camera means nothing with a smaller aperture and poorer quality image. There won't be a better camera than Note 5/S6/Edge/Plus until Samsung releases the S7. They've paid a lot of attention to not only the camera sensor, but the lens and how the image is processed.

81. cheetah2k

Posts: 2324; Member since: Jan 16, 2011

Can you buy a Moto X Pure in Australia? No.. So the answer is simple and Motorola can kiss my a..... because they continue to focus on other regions of the world. So as far as I am concerned the Note 5 is plenty worth it.

13. TruPatriot

Posts: 110; Member since: May 27, 2013

The physical home button might be worth $300 more alone.

40. Romantico3pe

Posts: 180; Member since: Sep 14, 2015

That is one thing i hate about samsung along with amoled screen, they dont use on screen buttons because they burn, gooogle it

54. Xperia14

Posts: 1208; Member since: Sep 01, 2015

Why? On-screen buttons are a waste of screen space.

67. techloverNYC

Posts: 601; Member since: Nov 20, 2012

So true

91. Scott93274

Posts: 6042; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

I would rather have them on the screen and then hide when I'm reading a book or playing a game then have then off the screen and making the phone larger then it has to be by increasing the bezel.

55. kajam

Posts: 222; Member since: Jun 24, 2015

i hope samsung never use on screen buttons

56. Xperia14

Posts: 1208; Member since: Sep 01, 2015

Agreed. It's one of Samsung's trademarks as all its competitiors have space-wasting on-screen buttons. It also looks good too, besides being functional. Kudo's to Samsung for sticking with the physical buttons.

85. sgtdisturbed47

Posts: 974; Member since: Feb 02, 2012

What's wrong with their Amoled? I've owned the iPhone 6, 6 Plus, Note 4 and now Note 5, and in Basic screen mode, the colors are more accurate and the blacks are pure black. The latest Samsung Amoled screens have been ranked the highest of all smartphones. IPS with its cloudy reflective backlight that's always on even on a dark image is pass poor compared to Amoled. These aren't Galaxy S4 screens anymore.

89. osbert

Posts: 125; Member since: Jul 02, 2014

I use a 4 year old Galaxy Nexus. No burn on the amoled whatsoever.

90. Scott93274

Posts: 6042; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

I've gotten burn on my 2013 Moto X. It's not very noticeable unless you have the phone in immersive mode and the on screen buttons are hidden. Then you can very easily see the burn of the buttons as they're typically static on the display.

14. medicci37

Posts: 1361; Member since: Nov 19, 2011

Also, if Qualcomm had not dropped the ball with the 810 there wouldn't be any performance gap at all between the note & other flagships released around the same time

58. chenski

Posts: 789; Member since: Mar 22, 2015

There is not much difference in everyday use anyway

37. QWERTYphone

Posts: 654; Member since: Sep 22, 2014

NO. Samsung's prices are pathetic. Only a blind fan boi would support their ridiculous prices, especially without a removable battery and sd.

46. TerryTerius unregistered

I'm pretty sure that calling every single one of the tens of millions of people that buy Samsung flagships "fanboys" isn't exactly accurate. You continually call expensive phones ridiculous. I have to disagree with you on that for so many reasons. One plus is very open about the fact that they have razor thin profit margins. Motorola's can't possibly be that much better. I don't know why you refuse to accept that people may pick Samsung for the same reason you picked whatever you have. Personal preference. Your needs and desires are reflective of you and you alone. Just as no one else can speak for your needs/wants, you can't speak for theirs. Calling people stupid, morons, idiots, whatever because they're different from you is ridiculous dude. You can disagree without being disagreeable.

53. natypes

Posts: 1110; Member since: Feb 02, 2015

I wouldn't worry about him. He's the sd/removable battery troll. It's all he has to say over and over. There's not much to him really.

86. coldspring22

Posts: 349; Member since: Feb 28, 2015

No need to complain about Samsung. You can get Redmi Note 2 or Lenovo K3 Note instead of Galaxy Note 5. These phablets cost around $160 and have removable battery as well as SD card slot. And performance is nothing short of amazing for entry level phones. Also, you can get Note 4 (now discounted ithanks to Note 5 introduction) which still has removable battery and SD card slot

2. Mxyzptlk unregistered

You're talking about a beast compared to a midrange phone.

8. Mike.H

Posts: 32; Member since: Sep 16, 2015

Thank you for stating the obvious. No one is claiming otherwise. The question still stands if the "beast" is worth the extra money for what boils down to: slightly better screen/performance (which you likely won't notice unless you're doing a side-by-side comparison), and slightly better photos (again which you might not notice unless you're really looking).

15. Super.Vegito

Posts: 43; Member since: Aug 04, 2015

Thumbs up.

17. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Along with a fingerprint scanner, wireless charging, super fast storage, s-pen, Samsung Pay, much better camera, etc. It's not just stating the obvious. It's stating facts.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.
FCC OKs Cingular's purchase of AT&T Wireless