Apple iPad (2025) VS Motorola Moto Pad 60 Pro

The most striking physical difference between these two tablets is weight. The Apple iPad (2025) comes in at 481 g, while the Motorola Moto Pad 60 Pro weighs a notably heavier 620 g — a difference of 139 g that becomes very real during extended handheld use, reading sessions, or one-handed browsing. The iPad is also physically smaller across every dimension, resulting in a volume of 312 cm³ versus the Moto Pad's 381 cm³, making it the more pocketable and travel-friendly option. Thickness is essentially identical at 7 mm and 6.9 mm respectively, so neither has an edge in terms of slimness.

Where the Moto Pad 60 Pro fights back is in two meaningful value-adds. First, it ships with a stylus included, which the iPad does not — a real-world cost and convenience advantage if note-taking or sketching is part of your workflow. Second, the Moto Pad carries water resistance, while the iPad offers none, making it the safer choice around liquids or in less controlled environments.

Overall, neither device has a clean sweep. The iPad holds a clear edge in portability and ergonomics due to its significantly lower weight and smaller footprint. The Moto Pad 60 Pro counters with a bundled stylus and water resistance — practical extras that add real utility. Your preference will depend on whether you prioritize comfortable, lightweight handling or out-of-the-box versatility and durability.

Both tablets use IPS LCD panels, so color science and viewing angle technology are on equal footing. The real separation begins with screen size and refresh rate. The Moto Pad 60 Pro offers a larger 12.7″ canvas versus the iPad's 10.9″, which translates to more usable space for multitasking, reading, and media consumption. More importantly, the Moto Pad's 144Hz refresh rate versus the iPad's 60Hz is a significant experiential gap — scrolling, animations, and stylus input all feel noticeably smoother at higher refresh rates, a difference that is immediately perceptible in daily use.

Pixel density is effectively a wash: 264 ppi on the iPad versus 273 ppi on the Moto Pad is a 3% difference that is invisible to the naked eye at normal viewing distances. However, the Moto Pad pulls ahead on two practical display quality features — it includes an anti-reflection coating and HDR10 support, neither of which the iPad offers. Anti-reflection meaningfully improves outdoor usability and reduces eye strain under bright lighting, while HDR10 ensures compatible streaming content renders with greater contrast and color depth.

On display specs alone, the Moto Pad 60 Pro holds a clear advantage. Its larger screen, dramatically higher refresh rate, anti-reflection coating, and HDR10 support combine to deliver a more capable and more comfortable viewing experience across nearly every use case. The iPad's display is competent but lacks the feature depth of its rival in this comparison.

Raw compute performance decisively favors the Apple iPad (2025). Its A16 Bionic chip scores 2321 in Geekbench 6 single-core versus the Moto Pad 60 Pro's 1485 — a 56% lead that reflects real-world responsiveness in everyday tasks like app launches, UI interactions, and single-threaded workloads. The multi-core gap is smaller but still meaningful: 5684 versus 4610. Single-core performance in particular is the metric most directly tied to how snappy a device feels in daily use, and the iPad's A16 is a generational class above the Dimensity 8300 in this regard. The iPad's 24 MB L2 cache versus just 1 MB on the Moto Pad further reinforces this advantage — larger cache reduces latency for frequently accessed data, benefiting both app performance and sustained workloads.

The Moto Pad 60 Pro counters with a stronger memory subsystem on paper. It carries 12 GB of RAM (versus 6 GB), a higher memory bandwidth of 68.2 GB/s, and four memory channels compared to two — specs that theoretically support heavier multitasking and GPU-bound tasks. It also accepts expandable storage, while the iPad is capped at its built-in 512 GB. In practice, however, the iPad's superior CPU efficiency and cache architecture tend to manage RAM more effectively, so raw RAM quantity does not straightforwardly translate to a better experience.

For performance, the iPad holds the clear edge. The A16 Bionic's benchmark lead — particularly in single-core — points to a faster, more responsive experience across productivity, creative, and everyday tasks. The Moto Pad's memory advantages are real but situational, and do not offset the CPU deficit in most tablet use cases.

Tablet cameras are rarely a primary purchase driver, but the differences here are meaningful enough to matter in specific scenarios. Main sensor resolution is essentially tied — 12 MP on the iPad versus 13 MP on the Moto Pad 60 Pro — so neither has a pixel-count advantage worth discussing. The more telling split is in shooting philosophy. The iPad leans toward an automated, point-and-shoot experience, while the Moto Pad offers manual ISO, manual white balance, and manual focus controls, giving users who want creative control over their shots meaningfully more flexibility. The Moto Pad also includes continuous autofocus during video recording and a video light, both of which benefit anyone capturing footage in motion or low-light conditions — features the iPad simply lacks.

The front camera story flips the script. The iPad's 12 MP selfie camera substantially outresolves the Moto Pad's 8 MP front shooter — a relevant gap for video calls, which are arguably the most common use case for a tablet's front camera. The iPad also brings a BSI sensor on the main camera, which improves light capture efficiency, and supports panorama and burst/serial shot modes that the Moto Pad omits. The Moto Pad counters with a rear flash, useful in dark environments where the iPad would capture nothing at all.

This category ends in a genuine split depending on use case. The Moto Pad 60 Pro has the edge for rear camera versatility and manual video control, while the iPad wins clearly on front camera quality — the more practically important camera for most tablet users. Neither device dominates outright, but users who prioritize video calls should favor the iPad, while those wanting more hands-on camera control will find the Moto Pad more accommodating.

Audio hardware is an exact match across these two tablets. Both feature stereo speakers, omit a 3.5 mm headphone jack, and lack an FM radio — meaning wired headphone users will need a USB-C adapter regardless of which device they choose. Stereo speakers are the meaningful shared win here, ensuring that media playback and video calls produce a wider, more spatially convincing soundstage than a single mono driver would.

Based strictly on the provided specs, this category is a complete tie. There is no differentiator between the two products in audio hardware, and neither holds any advantage over the other.

Two differences define this category, and both favor the Motorola Moto Pad 60 Pro. Its 10,200 mAh battery holds a substantial 20% capacity advantage over the iPad's 8,500 mAh — a gap that, all else being equal, translates directly into longer time between charges. For a device used across a full day of streaming, browsing, or productivity work, that extra headroom is a practical comfort, especially during travel or away from a power source.

The charging side compounds the Moto Pad's lead. It supports fast charging, while the iPad does not — meaning that when the Moto Pad does need to be topped up, it gets back to usable levels faster. The iPad's absence of fast charging is a notable omission: a larger battery that charges slowly can still mean more downtime than a smaller battery that refills quickly. The Moto Pad avoids that trade-off entirely by offering both. Neither device supports wireless charging, so that is a shared limitation.

The Moto Pad 60 Pro holds a clear advantage in battery. Greater raw capacity combined with fast charging support makes it the stronger choice for users who prioritize endurance and minimal charging interruptions throughout the day.

Connectivity is where these two tablets diverge in ways that reflect genuinely different target audiences. The Apple iPad (2025) includes a cellular module with 5G support, a feature the Moto Pad 60 Pro entirely lacks — meaning the iPad can function independently of Wi-Fi wherever a mobile signal is available, while the Moto Pad is tethered to wireless networks. For users who travel frequently or work outside the home, this is a fundamental capability gap. The Moto Pad counters on the local connectivity front, however: it supports Wi-Fi 6E, which operates on the less congested 6 GHz band for faster and more reliable wireless speeds in dense environments, an upgrade the iPad misses. The Moto Pad's USB 3.2 port also significantly outpaces the iPad's USB 2, translating to dramatically faster wired data transfers — a meaningful advantage for users who move large files.

The software and ecosystem feature split is equally telling. The iPad delivers direct OS updates from Apple, ensuring timely access to new features and security patches — a reliable advantage the Moto Pad, which does not receive direct OS updates, cannot match. On privacy, the iPad adds Mail Privacy Protection and cross-site tracking blocking, offering a slightly more robust out-of-the-box privacy posture. The Moto Pad responds with multi-user support, dynamic theming, and an open-source foundation — making it better suited for shared households or users who want deeper system-level customization.

This category does not have a single winner — it hinges on priorities. The iPad holds the advantage for users who need cellular connectivity and value timely software support. The Moto Pad leads for those prioritizing faster local connectivity via Wi-Fi 6E, superior wired data transfer speeds, and shared-device flexibility. Power users who move large files will appreciate the Moto Pad's USB 3.2; road warriors and remote workers will find the iPad's 5G capability indispensable.

With only one data point available in this group, the comparison is straightforward: both the Apple iPad (2025) and the Motorola Moto Pad 60 Pro use DDR5 memory, the current mainstream standard that offers improved bandwidth and energy efficiency over its predecessor. This is a complete tie — neither device holds any advantage over the other based on the available data.