Apple iPad (2025) VS Motorola Moto Pad 60 Neo

At first glance, the two tablets appear almost physically identical: both weigh in at essentially the same ~480–481 g and share the same 7 mm thickness, meaning neither has a tangible advantage in terms of hand-feel or portability. The real difference in their physical footprint lies in their proportions: the Apple iPad (2025) is taller and narrower (179.5 × 248.6 mm), lending itself to a more traditional landscape orientation, while the Moto Pad 60 Neo is shorter but slightly wider (166.2 × 254.6 mm), giving it a broader, more cinematic aspect ratio. The Moto Pad's lower overall volume (296.2 cm³ vs. 312.4 cm³) also suggests a marginally more compact chassis despite its wider build.

Where the two diverge meaningfully is in bundled accessories and durability. The Moto Pad 60 Neo ships with a stylus included — a practical, out-of-the-box advantage for note-taking, sketching, or precise input without any additional purchase. The iPad (2025) includes no stylus, meaning users who want pen input must budget separately for an Apple Pencil. On durability, the Moto Pad holds another edge: it offers water resistance, providing a meaningful layer of protection against splashes or light rain, while the iPad (2025) lists no water resistance — a notable omission for a device at this tier.

Overall, the Moto Pad 60 Neo has a clear design-category advantage. Both tablets are equal in weight and thinness, but the Moto Pad delivers more real-world value through its included stylus and water-resistant build — two features that directly affect everyday usability and peace of mind — without asking users to spend anything extra.

Both tablets use IPS LCD panels and are nearly identical in screen size — 10.9″ for the iPad (2025) versus 11″ for the Moto Pad 60 Neo — so neither holds a meaningful edge in raw screen real estate. The more telling differences emerge in resolution and refresh rate. The Moto Pad edges ahead with a 2560 × 1600 resolution at 274 ppi, compared to the iPad's 2360 × 1640 at 264 ppi. In practice, that 10 ppi gap is unlikely to be visible to the naked eye in everyday use, so sharpness is effectively a tie.

The most consequential display differentiator here is refresh rate. The Moto Pad 60 Neo's 90 Hz panel versus the iPad's 60 Hz translates directly into noticeably smoother scrolling, more fluid animations, and a more responsive feel when using the bundled stylus. For users who spend significant time reading, browsing, or sketching, that 50% increase in refresh rate is a tangible quality-of-life upgrade — not just a spec sheet number.

On the shared shortcomings side, neither tablet offers branded damage-resistant glass, an anti-reflection coating, or HDR10 support, so both are on equal footing in those areas. Taking the display category as a whole, the Moto Pad 60 Neo holds a modest but real advantage, driven primarily by its higher refresh rate — a spec that influences perceived smoothness far more than the marginal resolution difference between the two.

The performance gap between these two tablets is one of the widest in this comparison. The Apple iPad (2025) is powered by a 4 nm chip with peak CPU cores running at 3.46 GHz, while the Moto Pad 60 Neo relies on a 6 nm processor topping out at 2.4 GHz. The real-world significance of that architectural difference is laid bare by the Geekbench 6 scores: the iPad achieves a single-core score of 2321 versus the Moto Pad's 782, and a multi-core score of 5684 versus 2012. That means the iPad is roughly three times faster in single-threaded tasks — the type that governs app launch speed, UI responsiveness, and everyday snappiness — and nearly three times faster under sustained multi-core load.

Graphics and memory bandwidth tell a similar story. The iPad's GPU runs at 1398 MHz with a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, compared to the Moto Pad's 950 MHz GPU and a substantially lower 17.07 GB/s bandwidth. For gaming, video editing, or any GPU-accelerated workload, the iPad operates in a different league. On the memory side, the Moto Pad counters with 8 GB of RAM (expandable to 12 GB) versus the iPad's 6 GB, and adds a microSD slot for storage expansion — practical advantages for multitasking and managing large media libraries without relying solely on onboard storage. The iPad, however, offers up to 512 GB of built-in storage out of the box, which largely offsets the need for a card slot for most users.

The Apple iPad (2025) holds a commanding and unambiguous advantage in raw performance. The Moto Pad 60 Neo's higher RAM ceiling and expandable storage are useful practical features, but they do not close the gap for users who prioritize processing speed, graphics performance, or future-proofing against demanding software workloads.

Sensor resolution favors the iPad (2025) on both ends: its 12 MP main and 12 MP front camera outclass the Moto Pad 60 Neo's 8 MP rear and 5 MP front. Crucially, the iPad also includes a BSI (backside-illuminated) sensor, which captures more light per pixel and generally produces cleaner results in dim conditions — a hardware advantage the Moto Pad lacks. Add in slow-motion video recording and in-camera panoramas, both absent on the Moto Pad, and the iPad pulls ahead for users who want richer imaging capabilities from a tablet.

The Moto Pad 60 Neo fights back on manual controls and video utility. It offers manual ISO, white balance, and focus — none of which are available on the iPad — catering to users who want hands-on control over their shots. It also supports continuous autofocus during video recording and includes a video light and a rear flash, making it more capable in low-light video scenarios where the iPad, lacking any flash entirely, would struggle. For a user who shoots a lot of short clips in varied lighting, these additions carry real practical weight.

On balance, the Apple iPad (2025) holds the camera advantage for most users, thanks to its higher-resolution sensors, BSI technology, and broader shooting modes like slow-motion and panorama. The Moto Pad 60 Neo's manual controls and flash are genuine differentiators for a specific type of user, but the iPad's hardware foundation gives it a broader and more versatile imaging package overall.

The audio specs here are sparse, but the one meaningful differentiator is clear. Both tablets feature stereo speakers — a shared baseline that ensures a wider, more immersive soundstage compared to mono setups, suitable for media consumption and video calls. Neither includes a radio, so that's a non-factor.

Where they split is the 3.5 mm headphone jack: the Moto Pad 60 Neo retains it, while the iPad (2025) does not. For users who own wired headphones or earbuds — whether for privacy, lower latency, or simply avoiding the need to charge yet another accessory — this is a tangible everyday convenience. iPad users who want wired audio will need a USB-C adapter, adding friction and a potential extra cost.

Given the limited data available for this category, the Moto Pad 60 Neo has a functional edge solely by virtue of its headphone jack. The stereo speaker parity means neither wins on speaker output, but the Moto Pad's wired audio support gives it broader out-of-the-box compatibility with existing accessories.

Battery capacity is the sole differentiator in this category, and it favors the Apple iPad (2025) by a meaningful margin: 8500 mAh versus the Moto Pad 60 Neo's 7040 mAh — a roughly 21% larger reserve. In practical terms, that gap translates to noticeably more screen-on time between charges, whether for streaming, reading, or browsing. For users who rely on their tablet through long travel days or extended work sessions away from an outlet, that extra capacity is a real advantage.

The charging story, however, is equally underwhelming for both devices: neither supports fast charging or wireless charging. That means topping up either tablet will be a slow affair, and the iPad's larger battery will take even longer to fully replenish than the Moto Pad's. Users who prioritize quick turnaround times between charges will find both tablets limiting in this regard.

The Apple iPad (2025) takes this category on raw capacity alone, offering a larger energy reserve that should translate to longer usage between charges. The shared absence of fast and wireless charging keeps this from being a clean win — but when the only variable is how long the battery lasts, bigger unambiguously goes further.

Wireless connectivity is one of the clearer dividing lines here. The iPad (2025) supports Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax), while the Moto Pad 60 Neo tops out at Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac). Wi-Fi 6 delivers faster throughput and significantly better performance in congested environments — a meaningful real-world difference in busy homes, offices, or public spaces. The iPad also edges ahead on Bluetooth 5.3 versus 5.2, though that gap is minor in practice. More notably, the iPad includes a cellular module with an eSIM, keeping users connected on the go without relying on Wi-Fi, whereas the Moto Pad lacks a cellular module entirely.

The sensor suite further separates the two. The iPad carries a gyroscope, compass, and barometer — none of which are present on the Moto Pad — making it more capable for navigation, augmented reality applications, and environmental awareness tasks. The iPad also includes a fingerprint scanner for biometric security, which the Moto Pad omits entirely. On the software and privacy side, the iPad offers a notably broader set of protections including Mail Privacy Protection, cross-site tracking blocking, focus modes, and direct OS updates — all absent on the Moto Pad, where software updates depend on the manufacturer's release schedule.

The Moto Pad 60 Neo does hold some meaningful practical advantages: it supports multi-user accounts — useful for shared or family tablets — and offers theme customization and dynamic theming for users who value personalization. Still, when weighing connectivity, sensors, security, and long-term software support together, the Apple iPad (2025) holds a substantial overall advantage in this category.

This group contains just two data points, but both carry genuine technical weight. The iPad (2025) uses DDR5 memory, while the Moto Pad 60 Neo relies on DDR4. DDR5 offers higher bandwidth and greater power efficiency than its predecessor — which aligns with the iPad's substantially higher memory bandwidth figures seen in the Performance category, and contributes to the overall responsiveness of its memory subsystem.

The multithreading picture is reversed: the Moto Pad 60 Neo supports multithreading, while the iPad does not. Multithreading allows each physical CPU core to handle multiple tasks simultaneously, which can improve throughput on parallelizable workloads. That said, the iPad's raw single- and multi-core performance scores are so far ahead that the absence of multithreading does not translate into a real-world disadvantage in day-to-day use.

These two specs point in opposite directions, making this a genuine split: the iPad wins on memory generation, the Moto Pad on multithreading support. Given that DDR5 has a broader impact on overall system performance than multithreading alone, this category is best called a narrow edge to the iPad (2025) — but with too few data points to draw sweeping conclusions either way.