Honor GT Pro VS Motorola Razr 60 Ultra

The Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra both offer waterproof protection, but their IP ratings differ slightly. The Honor GT Pro has an IP68 rating, while the Motorola Razr 60 Ultra has an IPX8 rating. Both are designed to resist water, but the IP68 rating on the Honor GT Pro indicates it is protected against dust as well as being submersible in water, while the IPX8 rating on the Razr 60 Ultra focuses solely on water resistance without dust protection.

In terms of size, the Honor GT Pro is slightly larger and heavier. It weighs 212 g, with dimensions of 162.1 mm in height, 75.7 mm in width, and a thickness of 8.6 mm. On the other hand, the Motorola Razr 60 Ultra is more compact, weighing 199 g and measuring 171.5 mm in height, 74 mm in width, and a thinner 7.2 mm thickness. The Razr 60 Ultra also has a smaller volume of 91.3752 cm³ compared to the Honor GT Pro's 105.530342 cm³.

Another notable difference is that the Motorola Razr 60 Ultra is foldable, whereas the Honor GT Pro does not have this feature. Neither device is specifically built to be rugged, as both lack a rugged build designation.

Both the Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra feature OLED/AMOLED displays, offering vibrant colors and deep contrasts. However, the Razr 60 Ultra has a slightly larger 7″ screen, compared to the Honor GT Pro's 6.78″ display. Despite the size difference, the Honor GT Pro has a higher pixel density of 453 ppi, whereas the Razr 60 Ultra has 417 ppi, which means the GT Pro may offer a bit more sharpness in images and text.

The resolution on both devices is quite similar, with the Honor GT Pro sporting a 1224 x 2800 px display and the Razr 60 Ultra having a 1224 x 2912 px resolution. The Razr 60 Ultra's higher resolution is likely due to its larger screen size. Both displays offer a high refresh rate, with the Honor GT Pro reaching 144Hz and the Razr 60 Ultra reaching 165Hz, providing smoother scrolling and gaming experiences on both devices.

Both phones come with branded damage-resistant glass and support HDR10 and HDR10+, ensuring rich visual quality. However, the Razr 60 Ultra also supports Dolby Vision, which the Honor GT Pro does not. Additionally, the Razr 60 Ultra has a secondary screen, which the Honor GT Pro lacks. Both devices are touchscreen, with no differences in this feature.

The Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra are both equipped with the same Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite chipset and Adreno 830 GPU, with identical memory configurations of 16GB RAM and 1024GB internal storage. However, there are some differences in performance metrics. The Honor GT Pro has a slightly higher CPU speed with 2 x 4.47 GHz and 6 x 3.53 GHz cores, compared to the Razr 60 Ultra's 2 x 4.32 GHz and 6 x 3.53 GHz. This gives the Honor GT Pro a small edge in raw processing power. Additionally, the Honor GT Pro achieves a higher AnTuTu benchmark score of 2,920,000, compared to the Razr 60 Ultra's 1,831,212.

When it comes to Geekbench 6 scores, the Honor GT Pro again leads with a multi-core result of 10,059 and a single-core result of 3,234. In contrast, the Motorola Razr 60 Ultra scores 6,796 for multi-core and 1,753 for single-core, showing a clear performance difference in both tests. The Honor GT Pro also has a higher GPU clock speed at 1,200 MHz, compared to the Razr 60 Ultra's 1,100 MHz.

Both devices share the same key features, including integrated LTE, 3nm semiconductor size, support for 64-bit architecture, and high memory bandwidth of 85.1 GB/s. They also both use big.LITTLE technology, support multithreading, and have the same TDP of 8.2W. Both phones also feature identical GPU turbo speeds (1,100 MHz), OpenGL and OpenCL versions, and a maximum memory of 24GB. The L2 and L3 caches are identical at 12 MB and 8 MB respectively. Overall, while both phones are built on the same chipset, the Honor GT Pro seems to have the upper hand in terms of raw performance scores.

Both the Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra feature dual-lens main cameras with 50MP sensors. However, the wide apertures differ slightly; the Honor GT Pro has a 2 & 2 & 2.4f aperture for its three lenses, while the Razr 60 Ultra has a 2 & 1.8f aperture for its two lenses. Both phones offer optical zoom, but the Honor GT Pro supports a 3x optical zoom, while the Razr 60 Ultra has no optical zoom (0x). Both cameras also have phase-detection autofocus for photos and continuous autofocus during video recording.

The front cameras on both phones are 50MP with a 2f wide aperture. The Honor GT Pro, however, supports raw image capture, whereas the Razr 60 Ultra does not. The Honor GT Pro lacks a front-facing LED flash, while the Razr 60 Ultra doesn't include a dual-tone LED flash in the rear camera setup. Additionally, the Honor GT Pro supports more advanced manual control options such as manual exposure, manual ISO, and manual white balance for both the front and rear cameras. The Razr 60 Ultra also offers manual exposure, manual ISO, and manual white balance, but it does not support shooting raw images.

Both devices support features like slow-motion video recording and timelapse, but the Honor GT Pro records video at a higher resolution of 2160 x 60 fps, whereas the Razr 60 Ultra records video at 4320 x 30 fps. The Razr 60 Ultra also supports HDR10 and Dolby Vision recording, while the Honor GT Pro does not support Dolby Vision recording or HDR10 recording. Both phones can create panoramas in-camera, but neither shoots 360° panoramas. Overall, both devices offer high-quality camera setups with slight differences in video capabilities and features.

Both the Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra run Android 15 and offer similar operating system features, such as clipboard warnings, location privacy options, camera/microphone privacy options, theme customization, and blocking app tracking. They also both have on-device machine learning, notification permissions, media picker, dark mode, battery health check, extra dim mode, dynamic theming, app offloading, customizable notifications, Live Text, full-page screenshots, split screen support, picture-in-picture (PiP), and the ability to track the current position of a mobile device. Both devices also have voice commands, offline voice recognition, child lock, multi-user support, and widgets. They do not support Wi-Fi password sharing or direct OS updates, and neither offers Quick Start functionality.

The Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra share the same set of features, including the ability to play games while they download, manual exposure adjustments, and support for sharing intents. Both have a free and open-source OS and feature tracking the current position of the device. Additionally, both phones support split screen and offer similar controls for managing notifications. Neither device supports Dolby Vision or HDR10 recording on the camera side, but they offer strong customization options for themes, notifications, and other visual settings.

There are no significant differences in the operating system features between the two phones, as all listed specifications match between the Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra. Both phones have robust privacy controls, multitasking features, and comprehensive privacy and accessibility options.

The Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra differ in battery power, with the Honor GT Pro featuring a larger 7200 mAh battery, compared to the Razr 60 Ultra's 4700 mAh. Both devices have rechargeable, non-removable batteries and include a battery level indicator. The Honor GT Pro supports fast charging at a higher rate of 90W, while the Razr 60 Ultra supports fast charging at 68W.

One key difference is that the Motorola Razr 60 Ultra offers wireless charging, which the Honor GT Pro lacks. However, both phones support fast charging, with the Honor GT Pro offering a faster charging speed. Neither phone features a removable battery.

Overall, the Honor GT Pro provides a larger battery and faster charging speed, while the Motorola Razr 60 Ultra offers the convenience of wireless charging, a feature absent on the Honor GT Pro.

Both the Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra lack a 3.5 mm audio jack, but they both come equipped with stereo speakers. When it comes to audio codecs, both devices support aptX, aptX HD, and aptX Adaptive. However, the Honor GT Pro does not support aptX Lossless, while the Motorola Razr 60 Ultra does include this codec for higher-quality wireless audio.

Neither device features LDAC support or a built-in radio. Overall, both phones offer high-quality wireless audio capabilities with aptX and aptX HD support, but the Motorola Razr 60 Ultra has an additional advantage with aptX Lossless, providing a potentially superior audio experience for compatible devices.

Both the Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra support 5G connectivity, Wi-Fi 6, and USB Type-C ports. The Honor GT Pro supports a broader range of Wi-Fi versions, including Wi-Fi 4, Wi-Fi 5, Wi-Fi 6, and Wi-Fi 7, while the Razr 60 Ultra supports Wi-Fi 4, Wi-Fi 5, Wi-Fi 6E, and Wi-Fi 7. Both phones have Bluetooth 5.4, NFC, and offer similar download (10,000 MBits/s) and upload (3,500 MBits/s) speeds. The Honor GT Pro uses two SIM cards, while the Razr 60 Ultra uses one SIM card and one eSIM.

Regarding sensors, both phones feature a gyroscope, accelerometer, GPS, and compass. The Honor GT Pro includes an infrared sensor, which the Razr 60 Ultra lacks. On the other hand, the Razr 60 Ultra has a barometer, which the Honor GT Pro does not provide. Both phones support Galileo, have a fingerprint scanner, and are equipped with a cellular module.

Neither phone supports emergency SOS via satellite, crash detection, DLNA certification, motion tracking, optical tracking, or a built-in projector. Additionally, neither device includes a stylus, 3D facial recognition, or an iris scanner. Both devices are similarly equipped with essential connectivity and sensor features, with the main differences being the additional eSIM support and barometer on the Razr 60 Ultra and the infrared sensor on the Honor GT Pro.

Both the Honor GT Pro and Motorola Razr 60 Ultra include a video light, which can be useful for photography and video recording in low light conditions. Neither device features sapphire glass, a curved display, or an e-paper display. The display characteristics of both phones are similar in this regard, with no distinguishing features in terms of these specific display technologies.

In summary, both phones have a video light, but share the absence of sapphire glass, curved displays, and e-paper displays, making their miscellaneous features very comparable.