Notebookcheck

Motorola Edge Plus Smartphone Review – High-End Again at Last

The challenger. Cheap no more! The Edge Plus is Motorola's attempt to compete with the best of the best the smartphone market has to offer. An assertive price and decent connectivity may look good on paper, however they are nothing out of the ordinary. But is it enough to go head to head with Samsung and Apple?
Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Finn D. Boerne),
Motorola Edge Plus

Back in May of 2020 we had the chance to review the Motorola Edge, a high-quality device somewhere in-between upper mid-range and high-end. The Motorola Edge Plus, or Edge+, is unambiguous about its ambitions, and regarded by Motorola as a true high-end flagship smartphone. At an asking price of more than $1,000 it has to compete against the best of the best the smartphone market has to offer.

Its weapons of choice are a camera with more than 100 MP, support for 5G, and a 90 Hz display with edge-to-edge display glass curving around its, well, edges – the hallmark of the Edge series. Let’s find out how well this new player performed in our review, shall we?

Motorola Edge Plus (Edge Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 8 x 2.4 - 2.8 GHz, Cortex-A77 / A55 (Kryo 585)
Graphics adapter
Memory
12288 MB 
Display
6.7 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 385 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, glossy: yes, HDR, 90 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash, 256 GB 
, 237 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm headphone jack, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Sensors: accelerometer, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, barometer, USB-C
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.1, 2G,3G,4G (B1/​B2/​B3/​B4/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B12/​B13/​B17/​B20/​B25/​B26/​B28/​B39/​B30/​B34/​B32/​B38/​B39/​B40/​B41/​B42/​B46/​B48/​B66/​B71), 5G (n2/​n5/​n41/​n66/​n71/​n77/​n78/​n260/​n26), LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 9.6 x 161.1 x 71.4 ( = 0.38 x 6.34 x 2.81 in)
Battery
5000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 108 MPix f/​1.8, phase detection AF, laser AF, OIS, dual LED flash, videos @3240p/​30fps (camera 1); 16.0MP, f/​2.2, wide-angle lens (camera 2); 8.0MP, f/​2.4, OIS, telephoto lens (camera 3)
Secondary Camera: 25 MPix f/​2.0, videos @1080p/​30fps
Additional features
Speakers: stereo speakers, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, fast charger, USB-C cable, headset, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, IP52-certified; LTE Cat 22/​18 (2450Mbps/​210Mbps), fanless
Weight
203 g ( = 7.16 oz / 0.45 pounds), Power Supply: 67 g ( = 2.36 oz / 0.15 pounds)
Price
1199 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Vergleichsgeräte

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
86 %
09/2020
Motorola Edge Plus
SD 865, Adreno 650
203 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.7"2340x1080
88 %
04/2020
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11
188 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.7"3200x1440
87 %
09/2019
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU
226 g64 GB SSD6.5"2688x1242
89 %
04/2020
Huawei P40 Pro
Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16
209 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.58"2640x1200
88 %
04/2020
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
208 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.67"2340x1080
88 %
04/2020
OnePlus 8 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
199 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.78"3168x1440

Case – Stylish, but not Waterproof

The Edge Plus looks very similar to its more affordable yet lesser equipped Motorola Edge sibling. It features the same edgeless curved display glass at the front and Gorilla Glass 5 at the rear wrapped tightly around an aluminum frame. The blue-gray rear cover is designed in a way that its surface scatters and reflects light creating very interesting reflection patterns.

At 203 g the Edge Plus is one of the heavier devices available, and it is most likely going to be too large for small hands thanks to its 6.7-inch display. When compressing the rear, the cover budged noticeably, and we could hear the air escape from the inside. For a device at this price point we would have expected more. Nevertheless, the device felt very good in hand and was very well made.

The case is IP52-certified, which is a lower ingress rating than most other smartphone manufacturers have to offer. It is not usable under water.

Motorola Edge Plus
Motorola Edge Plus
Motorola Edge Plus
Motorola Edge Plus
Motorola Edge Plus
Motorola Edge Plus
Motorola Edge Plus
Motorola Edge Plus

Size Comparison

165.3 mm / 6.51 inch 74.3 mm / 2.93 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 199 g0.4387 lbs162.6 mm / 6.4 inch 74.8 mm / 2.94 inch 8.96 mm / 0.3528 inch 208 g0.4586 lbs161.1 mm / 6.34 inch 71.4 mm / 2.81 inch 9.6 mm / 0.378 inch 203 g0.4475 lbs161.9 mm / 6.37 inch 73.7 mm / 2.9 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 188 g0.4145 lbs158.2 mm / 6.23 inch 72.6 mm / 2.86 inch 8.95 mm / 0.3524 inch 209 g0.4608 lbs158 mm / 6.22 inch 77.8 mm / 3.06 inch 8.1 mm / 0.3189 inch 226 g0.4982 lbs

Connectivity – Plenty of fast Storage

With its 12 GB of RAM and 256 GB of storage the Motorola Edge+ is definitely a high-end device, at least regarding sheer space. Its price has already dropped noticeably – initially, Motorola asked for much more than its current street price of around or slightly less than $1,000.

A card reader for optional storage expansion is not available. In return, it features a 90 Hz display, support for wireless charging, and modern wireless communication protocols such as 5G, Wi-Fi 6, NFC, and Bluetooth 5.1. We were unable to find any weak points regarding the Edge+’s overall connectivity except for maybe an IR blaster that some users might have found useful. Instead, the Edge+ continues to support the oldie-but-goodie 3.5-mm headphone jack for use with analog audio peripherals.

Bottom: speaker, USB-C port, microphone, SIM tray
Bottom: speaker, USB-C port, microphone, SIM tray
Top: 3.5-mm audio jack
Top: 3.5-mm audio jack
Right: volume rocker, power button
Right: volume rocker, power button
Left: no connectivity
Left: no connectivity

Software – No Bloatware from Motorola

Traditionally, Motorola smartphones are preloaded with a pure Vanilla version of Android, and the Edge+ is no exception. It comes with Android 10 and security patches as of last month, which can be considered fairly up to date.

If you detest bloatware, aka useless preloaded apps taking up precious disk space, you will find the Edge+ to be very pleasing. We found no bloatware whatsoever, just some of Motorola’s own apps for device-specific settings or help, but no trial versions, adware, or other potentially annoying applications at all.

Software Motorola Edge+
Software Motorola Edge+
Software Motorola Edge+

Communication and GPS – Fast Wi-Fi

When connected to our Netgear Nighthawk AX12 reference router, the Edge+ performed as fast as expected of a high-end device. Interestingly enough it turned out to be faster and more consistent transmitting data than receiving it. Signal strength is mediocre and was reduced to 25 % at a distance of 10 m (33 ft) with three walls in-between the smartphone and the Wi-Fi router. Other high-end smartphones offer much higher and more stable Wi-Fi reception.

Maximum speed when downloading data over 4G LTE is LTE Cat 22, and thus up to 2.45 Gbps. 5G is also supported, which adds an extra layer of long-term sustainability and future proofing. LTE signal strength was decent; however, we should note that other high-end smartphones often showed an extra bar or two on the signal strength indicator.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
883 (834min - 919max) MBit/s ∼100% +13%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
835 (808min - 847max) MBit/s ∼95% +7%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
831 (745min - 872max) MBit/s ∼94% +7%
Huawei P40 Pro
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
821 (388min - 998max) MBit/s ∼93% +5%
Motorola Edge Plus
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
780 (716min - 826max) MBit/s ∼88%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 64 GB SSD
580 (550min - 597max) MBit/s ∼66% -26%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=600)
282 MBit/s ∼32% -64%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40 Pro
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1544 (797min - 1619max) MBit/s ∼100% +71%
Motorola Edge Plus
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
905 (824min - 920max) MBit/s ∼59%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
876 (767min - 904max) MBit/s ∼57% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
863 (759min - 898max) MBit/s ∼56% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
816 (403min - 832max) MBit/s ∼53% -10%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 64 GB SSD
589 (461min - 625max) MBit/s ∼38% -35%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=600)
268 MBit/s ∼17% -70%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900910920Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø779 (716-826)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø905 (824-920)
GPS test outdoors
GPS test outdoors
Available satellite networks
Available satellite networks

Obtaining location lock outdoors takes fairly long. Once obtained, GPS accuracy was very good at just 3 m. Supported location services include GPS and GLONASS, with no other satellite networks showing in our test. SBAS is not supported either.

In both Google Maps and during our real-world test on our bicycle tour around the block the Motorola Edge+ did a very good job. Safe for one or two locations, where it recorded our track straight through a building, the overall accuracy of the recorded track was very high. We can thus safely say that the Motorola Edge+ is well-suited for navigational purposes with high accuracy expectations.

Tracking Motorola Edge Plus - overview
Tracking Motorola Edge Plus - overview
Tracking Motorola Edge Plus - turning point
Tracking Motorola Edge Plus - turning point
Tracking Motorola Edge Plus - bridge
Tracking Motorola Edge Plus - bridge
Tracking Garmin Edge 520 - overpass
Tracking Garmin Edge 520 - overpass
Tracking Garmin Edge 520 - turning point
Tracking Garmin Edge 520 - turning point
Tracking Garmin Edge 520 - bridge
Tracking Garmin Edge 520 - bridge

Telephony and Call Quality – Noticeable Ambient Noise

Following Motorola’s mantra of offering a pure Vanilla flavor of Android the telephony app remained unchanged from Google’s default app. Which is nothing to worry about, because the default app offers everything you might need in a neatly organized and clearly arranged design. As expected of a high-end device both VoLTE and VoWiFi are supported.

Unfortunately, when it comes to call quality the Edge+ performed even worse than the already questionable and mediocre Motorola Edge. Our conversational partners sounded very distant, and we could not help but notice substantial amounts of ambient noise. In addition, the Edge+’s microphone was not particularly sensitive to noise and only recorded when we raised our voice substantially. Otherwise, we were inaudible to our conversational partners on the other end of the line. The same basically applies to talking on speakerphone, with our conversational partners sounding somewhat clearer and better but our own voice continuing to require a certain level of volume and clarity in order to be recognized, recorded, and transmitted.

Cameras – Details out of focus

Front facing camera sample photo, normal light
Front facing camera sample photo, normal light
Front facing camera sample photo, low light
Front facing camera sample photo, low light

The main rear-facing camera array features a total of three lenses with the main camera offering a whopping 108 MP resolution. Since images this large are rarely ever required the camera uses 4x pixel binning to combine four pixels into one increasing light sensitivity significantly and resulting in images with a resolution of still fairly high 27 MP.

The main camera did very well in determining a decent white balance compromise. In comparison, photos taken with the OnePlus 8 Pro were noticeably cooler and those taken with the iPhone 11 Pro Max noticeably warmer. However, we found details and overall focus lacking, and other high-end smartphone cameras offered brighter and better exposed photos rich in detail in low-light conditions.

Zooming is supported in 0.1x steps, although ideal lighting conditions are required to make use of all three lenses. Otherwise, the camera software falls back on the main high-resolution camera’s digital zoom. In manual mode you get to actively select your lens of choice.

The ultra-wide-angle lens offers a 16 MP resolution, and its photos were somewhat dark when compared to other high-end smartphone cameras but offered an overall comparable level of detail. The 8 MP telephoto lens performed very well, particularly in extreme close-up macro situations.

Videos are recoded in 6K at 30 FPS or 1080p at 60 FPS. Both, the ultra-wide-angle and the telephoto lens only support up to 1080p at 30 FPS. The camera’s autofocus worked fast and reliable, as did the optical image stabilizer. Adjustments to sudden changes in light were performed fast and very subtle.

At the front, we find a 25 MP camera that could have offered higher details and more focus. In return, exposure was decent, and objects remained recognizable even in low light situations.

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Hauptobjektiv BlumeHauptobjektiv UmgebungHauptobjektiv Low LightUltraweitwinkel

Even under ideal lighting conditions we did not grow fond of the main camera’s representation of details. Contrast ratio was acceptable but varied significantly throughout the photo. Colors were too pale overall.

Details deteriorated even further in low light, and illumination was mediocre.

ColorChecker
23.2 ∆E
34.4 ∆E
31.7 ∆E
27.5 ∆E
34.6 ∆E
43.8 ∆E
31.3 ∆E
25.1 ∆E
25 ∆E
23.9 ∆E
38.9 ∆E
42 ∆E
23.3 ∆E
29.8 ∆E
19.6 ∆E
32.4 ∆E
29.2 ∆E
32.8 ∆E
32.7 ∆E
34.2 ∆E
37.1 ∆E
31.2 ∆E
22.8 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Motorola Edge Plus: 30.01 ∆E min: 13.46 - max: 43.82 ∆E
ColorChecker
14 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
12.4 ∆E
15.3 ∆E
9 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
10.7 ∆E
13.2 ∆E
10.1 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
6.4 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
11.6 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
2.3 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
12.9 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
10 ∆E
2 ∆E
ColorChecker Motorola Edge Plus: 9.04 ∆E min: 2.02 - max: 15.34 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty – Affordable Optional Power Supply

Inside the box we find a fast charger, a SIM tool, and a USB cable. The power supply is comparatively affordable and can be purchased retroactively for around $20, including cable.

Scope and length of warranty depends on country of purchase; our review unit came with a 24 months limited warranty.

Input Devices and Handling – Versatile Gesture Control

The Motorola Edge+’s touchscreen was very accurate all the way to its edges, and the 90 Hz display improved subjective smoothness and responsiveness quite significantly. The system reacted very quickly to our inputs, and scrolling was buttery smooth.

A fingerprint reader is hidden behind the display. It is located fairly far down, which takes quite some getting used to. It worked very fast and reliably.

As expected of Motorola there are several gestures and other ways of intelligent input to control the device. For example, you can flip the smartphone over in order to mute it or press and hold the volume rocker to skip forward or backwards through songs.

If desired, you can even enable a small menu offering various quick actions that can be accessed by touching the right display edge.

Keyboard in landscape mode
Keyboard in landscape mode
Keyboard in portrait mode
Keyboard in portrait mode

Display – Low Brightness for the Edge Plus

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

Its widened 19.5:9 FHD resolution is at the lower end of what is still acceptable for high-end smartphones. Given a smartphone display’s small size details remained crisp and fine, nevertheless. The AMOLED display supports HDR and feels very smooth thanks to its 90 Hz refresh rate.

We already noted a fairly dim maximum brightness when reviewing the Motorola Edge, and while the Edge+ offers more it also does play in a very different and more challenging league. Consequently, its average of 582 nits was barely good enough for second to last place.

609
cd/m²
598
cd/m²
561
cd/m²
595
cd/m²
549
cd/m²
567
cd/m²
600
cd/m²
569
cd/m²
589
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 609 cd/m² Average: 581.9 cd/m² Minimum: 3.56 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 549 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.16 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8
ΔE Greyscale 4.2 | 0.64-98 Ø6
99.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.301
Motorola Edge Plus
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.7
Samsung Galaxy S20+
AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.7
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
OLED, 2688x1242, 6.5
Huawei P40 Pro
OLED, 2640x1200, 6.58
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.67
OnePlus 8 Pro
AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.78
Screen
30%
41%
33%
48%
52%
Brightness middle
549
740
35%
790
44%
584
6%
753
37%
796
45%
Brightness
582
747
28%
790
36%
576
-1%
762
31%
779
34%
Brightness Distribution
90
94
4%
97
8%
95
6%
96
7%
94
4%
Black Level *
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.16
2.6
18%
1.4
56%
1.1
65%
0.9
72%
0.68
78%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
6.58
4.57
31%
3.4
48%
2.3
65%
1.6
76%
1.55
76%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.2
1.5
64%
1.9
55%
1.8
57%
1.5
64%
1.1
74%
Gamma
2.301 96%
2.269 97%
2.23 99%
2.16 102%
2.24 98%
2.237 98%
CCT
7280 89%
6284 103%
6466 101%
6355 102%
6415 101%
6310 103%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 328.9 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 328.9 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 328.9 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17520 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

Thanks to AMOLED technology the display offers true blacks, and thus an infinite contrast ratio on paper. In our reviews with a spectrophotometer and the CalMAN software we noticed a very minor blue tint and very accurate overall colors. And while all other high-end smartphones we compared the Edge+ to offered an even better color accuracy the difference was invisible to the naked eye.

Like all OLED panels the display uses PWM for brightness regulation, in this particular case at a frequency of 328.9 Hz. While fairly high we would still suggest trying it out before committing to it if you are known to be sensitive to display flicker.

CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN grayscake
CalMAN grayscake
CalMAN saturation
CalMAN saturation
CalMAN sRGB
CalMAN sRGB
CalMAN AdobeRGB
CalMAN AdobeRGB
CalMAN DCI P3
CalMAN DCI P3
CalMAN color accuracy - preset "natural"
CalMAN color accuracy - preset "natural"
CalMAN grayscale - preset "natural"
CalMAN grayscale - preset "natural"

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 3 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 5 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 7 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (38.7 ms).

Response times are short, a quality gamers will rejoice at.

Outdoor usability is limited due to its low maximum brightness, and the display is rendered unreadable in direct sunlight. Viewing angles are very good, and the image remains undistorted even at extremely acute angles.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Outdoors
Outdoors

Performance – Plenty of Power

At the time of writing, the Motorola Edge+ featured the second-fastest Qualcomm SoC available. The Snapdragon 865 offers 8 processor cores in three clusters running at up to 2.84 GHz, and it allowed the smartphone to not only score very high in our performance benchmarks but to also offer a very good overall system performance.

Looking at graphics performance we find the Motorola Edge+ to be at the top as well, which makes the device one of the fastest smartphones available at the time of writing.

Everyday snappiness benefited immensely not just from the smartphone’s high level of performance but also its 90 Hz display, which increased subjective performance and smoothness even further.

Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
OpenCL Score 5.2 (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3242 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3129 - 3310, n=7)
3208 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 5532, n=33)
2072 Points ∼64% -36%
Vulkan Score 5.2 (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3012 Points ∼94%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2893 - 3665, n=7)
3201 Points ∼100% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (72 - 4789, n=34)
1818 Points ∼57% -40%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3379 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
2899 Points ∼86% -14%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3165 Points ∼94% -6%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3338 Points ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3318 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3076 - 3449, n=15)
3303 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 3531, n=122)
1956 Points ∼58% -42%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
914 Points ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
944 Points ∼100% +3%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
779 Points ∼83% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
906 Points ∼96% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
909 Points ∼96% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (889 - 924, n=15)
910 Points ∼96% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=122)
556 Points ∼59% -39%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11774 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
10583 Points ∼90% -10%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
11341 Points ∼96% -4%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10952 Points ∼93% -7%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11153 Points ∼95% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9202 - 15299, n=16)
11346 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=525)
5982 Points ∼51% -49%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
16085 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
14760 Points ∼92% -8%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
14352 Points ∼89% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
13142 Points ∼82% -18%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13471 Points ∼84% -16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (10990 - 19989, n=15)
13843 Points ∼86% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=683)
6565 Points ∼41% -59%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4061 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3230 Points ∼80% -20%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4057 Points ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3830 Points ∼94% -6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3888 Points ∼96% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (1788 - 4061, n=13)
3621 Points ∼89% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4061, n=176)
2670 Points ∼66% -34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8333 Points ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8783 Points ∼100% +5%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6360 Points ∼72% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8173 Points ∼93% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8279 Points ∼94% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8064 - 9104, n=13)
8300 Points ∼95% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 9104, n=176)
3088 Points ∼35% -63%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6754 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6355 Points ∼94% -6%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5648 Points ∼84% -16%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6578 Points ∼97% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6618 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4604 - 6961, n=14)
6410 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6977, n=176)
2746 Points ∼41% -59%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5621 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4495 Points ∼78% -20%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5728 Points ∼100% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5277 Points ∼92% -6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5506 Points ∼96% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5187 - 5780, n=14)
5439 Points ∼95% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=528)
2235 Points ∼39% -60%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9555 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
9190 Points ∼96% -4%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6771 Points ∼71% -29%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9356 Points ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9379 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9157 - 9567, n=14)
9414 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 10043, n=528)
2173 Points ∼23% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8269 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
7459 Points ∼90% -10%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6508 Points ∼79% -21%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7986 Points ∼97% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8111 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7957 - 8269, n=15)
8095 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8386, n=529)
2026 Points ∼25% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5661 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4455 Points ∼78% -21%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5718 Points ∼100% +1%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4283 Points ∼75% -24%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5480 Points ∼96% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3956 - 5765, n=14)
5171 Points ∼90% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=560)
2150 Points ∼38% -62%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12993 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
9471 Points ∼73% -27%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7905 Points ∼61% -39%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12694 Points ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12665 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (12547 - 12993, n=14)
12729 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=560)
2926 Points ∼23% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
10089 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
7576 Points ∼75% -25%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7286 Points ∼72% -28%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8823 Points ∼87% -13%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9807 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8499 - 10090, n=14)
9593 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=560)
2454 Points ∼24% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5183 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4180 Points ∼81% -19%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
4038 Points ∼78% -22%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4971 Points ∼96% -4%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4895 Points ∼94% -6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4987 Points ∼96% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4582 - 5209, n=14)
4970 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=609)
2112 Points ∼41% -59%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8430 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8469 Points ∼100% 0%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
6088 Points ∼72% -28%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6465 Points ∼76% -23%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8299 Points ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8106 Points ∼96% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7854 - 9167, n=14)
8320 Points ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 9167, n=609)
1833 Points ∼22% -78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7400 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6896 Points ∼93% -7%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
5471 Points ∼74% -26%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6060 Points ∼82% -18%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7157 Points ∼97% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7117 Points ∼96% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (6943 - 7653, n=15)
7226 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7678, n=610)
1742 Points ∼24% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5162 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4124 Points ∼80% -20%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3839 Points ∼74% -26%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4975 Points ∼96% -4%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4729 Points ∼92% -8%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4928 Points ∼95% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3965 - 5274, n=14)
4860 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=652)
1982 Points ∼38% -62%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12611 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6392 Points ∼51% -49%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
11302 Points ∼90% -10%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7499 Points ∼59% -41%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12394 Points ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11371 Points ∼90% -10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11175 - 13305, n=14)
11928 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 13305, n=651)
2428 Points ∼19% -81%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9549 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
5696 Points ∼60% -40%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
7893 Points ∼83% -17%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6739 Points ∼71% -29%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9123 Points ∼96% -4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8811 Points ∼92% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8215 - 9611, n=14)
9005 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9611, n=654)
2080 Points ∼22% -78%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
35269 Points ∼75%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
27431 Points ∼59% -22%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
33898 Points ∼73% -4%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
46731 Points ∼100% +32%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
32384 Points ∼69% -8%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
32240 Points ∼69% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (17817 - 58293, n=14)
33439 Points ∼72% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 58293, n=796)
15601 Points ∼33% -56%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
154251 Points ∼75%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
48476 Points ∼24% -69%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
206190 Points ∼100% +34%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
82652 Points ∼40% -46%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
150281 Points ∼73% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
149017 Points ∼72% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (143643 - 154375, n=14)
147866 Points ∼72% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=794)
27343 Points ∼13% -82%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
88160 Points ∼91%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
41415 Points ∼43% -53%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
96826 Points ∼100% +10%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
70593 Points ∼73% -20%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
82937 Points ∼86% -6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
82562 Points ∼85% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (56045 - 112989, n=14)
82096 Points ∼85% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 117606, n=794)
21234 Points ∼22% -76%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
168 fps ∼59%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
199 fps ∼69% +18%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
287 fps ∼100% +71%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
152 fps ∼53% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
203 fps ∼71% +21%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
206 fps ∼72% +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (168 - 207, n=15)
202 fps ∼70% +20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=797)
46 fps ∼16% -73%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
90 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
60 fps ∼67% -33%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
59 fps ∼66% -34%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60 fps ∼67% -33%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
90 fps ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼67% -33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (60 - 138, n=15)
77.2 fps ∼86% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 138, n=806)
31.5 fps ∼35% -65%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
96 fps ∼61%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
126 fps ∼80% +31%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
157 fps ∼100% +64%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
118 fps ∼75% +23%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
122 fps ∼78% +27%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
126 fps ∼80% +31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (96 - 127, n=15)
122 fps ∼78% +27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=702)
27.3 fps ∼17% -72%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
84 fps ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
60 fps ∼68% -29%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼68% -29%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
59 fps ∼67% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
88 fps ∼100% +5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼68% -29%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (58 - 109, n=15)
72.8 fps ∼83% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=710)
22.8 fps ∼26% -73%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
67 fps ∼67%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
85 fps ∼85% +27%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
100 fps ∼100% +49%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
75 fps ∼75% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
86 fps ∼86% +28%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
88 fps ∼88% +31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (67 - 88, n=16)
84.5 fps ∼85% +26%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=565)
21.9 fps ∼22% -67%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
61 fps ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
59 fps ∼77% -3%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼78% -2%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
52 fps ∼68% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
77 fps ∼100% +26%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼78% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (43 - 79, n=16)
60.8 fps ∼79% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=567)
19.8 fps ∼26% -68%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
32 fps ∼70%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
33 fps ∼72% +3%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
46 fps ∼100% +44%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
23 fps ∼50% -28%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
30 fps ∼65% -6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
31 fps ∼67% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (18 - 32, n=16)
28.3 fps ∼62% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=321)
11.5 fps ∼25% -64%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼69%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
22 fps ∼76% +10%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
29 fps ∼100% +45%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
19 fps ∼66% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
20 fps ∼69% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (20 - 21, n=16)
20.1 fps ∼69% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=319)
8.16 fps ∼28% -59%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
43 fps ∼74%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
52 fps ∼90% +21%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
58 fps ∼100% +35%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
36 fps ∼62% -16%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
47 fps ∼81% +9%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
48 fps ∼83% +12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (28 - 53, n=16)
44.2 fps ∼76% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=325)
17.2 fps ∼30% -60%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
49 fps ∼65%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
58 fps ∼77% +18%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
75 fps ∼100% +53%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
50 fps ∼67% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
54 (20min) fps ∼72% +10%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
54 fps ∼72% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (27 - 55, n=16)
51.5 fps ∼69% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=324)
19.7 fps ∼26% -60%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
39 fps ∼62%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
51 fps ∼81% +31%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
63 fps ∼100% +62%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
44 fps ∼70% +13%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
50 fps ∼79% +28%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
51 fps ∼81% +31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (39 - 53, n=16)
50.1 fps ∼80% +28%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=490)
14.7 fps ∼23% -62%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
38 fps ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
45 fps ∼94% +18%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
48 fps ∼100% +26%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
31 fps ∼65% -18%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
45 fps ∼94% +18%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
45 fps ∼94% +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (25 - 48, n=16)
40.1 fps ∼84% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=494)
13 fps ∼27% -66%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
556199 Points ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
296746 Points ∼50% -47%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
496966 Points ∼83% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
595466 Points ∼100% +7%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
585231 Points ∼98% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (538107 - 607937, n=16)
578953 Points ∼97% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 622888, n=119)
325169 Points ∼55% -42%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1598 Points ∼92%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
1378 Points ∼79% -14%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
1745 Points ∼100% +9%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
1629 Points ∼93% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1514 Points ∼87% -5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1496 Points ∼86% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (1276 - 1650, n=15)
1467 Points ∼84% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=736)
827 Points ∼47% -48%
Graphics (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12073 Points ∼71%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
10803 Points ∼64% -11%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
16996 Points ∼100% +41%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
10138 Points ∼60% -16%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11567 Points ∼68% -4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11842 Points ∼70% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11399 - 12073, n=15)
11679 Points ∼69% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=736)
2556 Points ∼15% -79%
Memory (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7597 Points ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3775 Points ∼48% -50%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
2350 Points ∼30% -69%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6038 Points ∼76% -21%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7945 Points ∼100% +5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7240 Points ∼91% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5564 - 8874, n=15)
7314 Points ∼92% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8874, n=736)
1903 Points ∼24% -75%
System (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9744 Points ∼69%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
9281 Points ∼65% -5%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
14189 Points ∼100% +46%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
9782 Points ∼69% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10002 Points ∼70% +3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
10058 Points ∼71% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8421 - 10147, n=15)
9744 Points ∼69% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=736)
3504 Points ∼25% -64%
Overall (sort by value)
Motorola Edge Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6147 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20+
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4779 Points ∼78% -22%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
5607 Points ∼91% -9%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5589 Points ∼91% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6072 Points ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5993 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5264 - 6273, n=15)
5896 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6273, n=736)
1793 Points ∼29% -71%

When browsing the web, the device secured a top spot as well. Scrolling and loading images was buttery smooth, and complex web pages loaded quickly and without noticeable delay.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1)
129.096 Points ∼100% +81%
Motorola Edge Plus (Chrome 84)
71.364 Points ∼55%
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1)
69.956 Points ∼54% -2%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
64.958 Points ∼50% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (50.9 - 77, n=14)
64.1 Points ∼50% -10%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
63.374 Points ∼49% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S20+ (Chrome 80)
50.566 Points ∼39% -29%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 140, n=195)
41.1 Points ∼32% -42%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1)
301.91 Points ∼100% +161%
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1)
116.61 Points ∼39% +1%
Motorola Edge Plus (Chrome 84)
115.57 Points ∼38%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
115.43 Points ∼38% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
114.78 Points ∼38% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (79.1 - 126, n=14)
112 Points ∼37% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S20+ (Chrome 80)
89.329 Points ∼30% -23%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=626)
47.7 Points ∼16% -59%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1)
153 runs/min ∼100% +116%
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1)
71.8 runs/min ∼47% +2%
Motorola Edge Plus (Chome 84)
70.7 runs/min ∼46%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
68.6 runs/min ∼45% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chome 80)
67.7 runs/min ∼44% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (30.6 - 74.5, n=14)
64.1 runs/min ∼42% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S20+ (Chome 80)
62.8 runs/min ∼41% -11%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 158, n=177)
43 runs/min ∼28% -39%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1)
181 Points ∼100% +51%
Motorola Edge Plus (Chrome 84)
120 Points ∼66%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
104 Points ∼57% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (97 - 120, n=15)
104 Points ∼57% -13%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
101 Points ∼56% -16%
Samsung Galaxy S20+ (Chrome 80)
86 Points ∼48% -28%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=263)
70.1 Points ∼39% -42%
Huawei P40 Pro
Points ∼0% -100%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1)
49388 Points ∼100% +102%
Motorola Edge Plus (Chrome 84)
24467 Points ∼50%
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1)
23690 Points ∼48% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
23678 Points ∼48% -3%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
22834 Points ∼46% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (15745 - 24467, n=15)
21893 Points ∼44% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S20+ (Chrome 80)
18094 Points ∼37% -26%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=794)
7973 Points ∼16% -67%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (1854 - 59466, n=820)
9698 ms * ∼100% -387%
Samsung Galaxy S20+ (Chrome 80)
2488.3 ms * ∼26% -25%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
2021.2 ms * ∼21% -1%
Motorola Edge Plus (Chrome 84)
1993 ms * ∼21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (1860 - 2538, n=16)
1984 ms * ∼20% -0%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
1944.7 ms * ∼20% +2%
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1)
1913.7 ms * ∼20% +4%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1)
570.9 ms * ∼6% +71%

* ... smaller is better

The Edge+’s fast UFS 3.0 storage performed at a level comparable to its competitors and offered fast access and short application load times.

Motorola Edge PlusSamsung Galaxy S20+Huawei P40 ProXiaomi Mi 10 ProOnePlus 8 ProAverage 256 GB UFS 3.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-8%
-8%
7%
-8%
-17%
-80%
Random Write 4KB
235.7
229.8
-3%
271.83
15%
258.54
10%
197.7
-16%
183 (24.8 - 272, n=19)
-22%
36.9 (0.14 - 319, n=892)
-84%
Random Read 4KB
230.9
199.6
-14%
228.06
-1%
264.9
15%
208.3
-10%
206 (169 - 265, n=19)
-11%
60.1 (1.59 - 324, n=892)
-74%
Sequential Write 256KB
745.9
694.3
-7%
395.74
-47%
750.44
1%
730.4
-2%
536 (387 - 756, n=19)
-28%
130 (2.99 - 911, n=892)
-83%
Sequential Read 256KB
1721.4
1603.1
-7%
1774.68
3%
1738.65
1%
1627.3
-5%
1595 (1398 - 1789, n=19)
-7%
347 (12.1 - 1802, n=892)
-80%

Gaming – 60 FPS, Anyone?

High-end smartphones are more than just workhorses; they have to be gaming-capable as well, and the Motorola Edge+ delivers exceptionally well in this regard. In both, Asphalt 9 as well as PUBG Mobile, it managed to achieve framerates north of 60 FPS in high details with PUBG dropping to a still smooth 40 FPS in the highest possible details. Framerates were determined using GameBench.

Game controls via touchscreen and gyroscope worked well. That said whether or not you like the fact that on-screen buttons are at the bottom behind the curved part of the glass is a matter of taste.

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Asphalt 9
Asphalt 9
010203040506070Tooltip
; PUBG Mobile; Smooth; 1.0.0: Ø59.8 (56-61)
; PUBG Mobile; HD; 1.0.0: Ø39.9 (30-41)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; High Quality; 2.4.6a: Ø58.3 (45-61)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; Standard / low; 2.4.6a: Ø59.3 (50-61)

Emissions – Slower under Load

Temperature

Under sustained load temperatures rose to 44.9 °C, which is far from critical but can get uncomfortable on hot days. Sustained low-load use resulted in barely noticeable temperature increases.

According to GFXBench’s battery test the Motorola Edge+ had trouble maintaining its high level of performance under sustained load, and performance dropped by more than 20 % fairly quickly.

Max. Load
 44.3 °C
112 F
42.8 °C
109 F
40.3 °C
105 F
 
 44.8 °C
113 F
42.6 °C
109 F
40.3 °C
105 F
 
 44.9 °C
113 F
42.3 °C
108 F
40.4 °C
105 F
 
Maximum: 44.9 °C = 113 F
Average: 42.5 °C = 109 F
39.9 °C
104 F
41.7 °C
107 F
43.5 °C
110 F
39.9 °C
104 F
41.5 °C
107 F
42.4 °C
108 F
38.3 °C
101 F
40.5 °C
105 F
41.2 °C
106 F
Maximum: 43.5 °C = 110 F
Average: 41 °C = 106 F
Power Supply (max.)  42.9 °C = 109 F | Room Temperature 21.5 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 42.5 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.9 °C / 113 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 43.5 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.2 °C / 90 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
Heatmap front
Heatmap front
Heatmap rear
Heatmap rear

Speakers

Pink noise
Pink noise

There is a total of two speakers on the device. One at the bottom edge, the other doubles as earphone. This setup is basically identical to the more affordable Motorola Edge. However, the more expensive Edge+ offers a more linear representation of mids and highs and more pronounced deep mids making for a warmer soundscape. Voices remained distant, and the speakers were overwhelmed with epic movie scenes. Pop music sounded okay, classical music lacked differentiation between the various individual instruments.

All things considered the speakers are okay but certainly not the best in the realm of high-end smartphones. Using either Bluetooth or the 3.5-mm headphone jack will result in much clearer and better audio.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2041.540.22536.234.43127.331.14033.533.95033.433.66323.523.88022.620.11002224.212520.827.116017.944.220013.347.625012.248.531512.250.640012.455.150013.461.563013.468.480017.668.2100016.667.4125014.371160012.568.820001368.7250013.867.8315014.866.9400016.669.8500017.369.7630018.267.680001963.81000019.666.11250019.671.91600020.368.2SPL57.366.228.380.4N11.119.5147.7median 16.6median 67.4Delta2.78.741.348.937.543.22931.231.631.233.235.428.329.923.322.523.323.324.230.420.541.51948.217.652.216.954.416.256.816.463.318.36616.16614.770.914.274.314.776.113.976.214.376.414.975.314.875.315.371.414.967.31570.415.572.316.469.31672.475.372.427.585.63326.1160.9median 16median 69.329.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseMotorola Edge PlusSamsung Galaxy S20+
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Motorola Edge Plus audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 4% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 28% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Samsung Galaxy S20+ audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.7% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 15% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 42% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery life – Long-term Use

Power Consumption

While there are significantly more energy-efficient smartphones than the Motorola Edge+ the opposite is also true, and the device thus ended up somewhere in the middle. Only under load did it consume more energy than other high-end smartphones.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.1 / 0.2 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.2 / 1.8 / 2.3 Watt
Load midlight 5.8 / 10.9 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Motorola Edge Plus
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S20+
4500 mAh
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
3969 mAh
Huawei P40 Pro
4200 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
4500 mAh
OnePlus 8 Pro
4510 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
3%
3%
33%
36%
-41%
-2%
22%
Idle Minimum *
1.2
1
17%
0.92
23%
0.92
23%
0.61
49%
2.2
-83%
1.243 (0.53 - 2.2, n=16)
-4%
0.891 (0.2 - 3.4, n=897)
26%
Idle Average *
1.8
1.7
6%
2.9
-61%
1.41
22%
1.19
34%
3.3
-83%
2.12 (1.19 - 3.43, n=16)
-18%
1.756 (0.6 - 6.2, n=896)
2%
Idle Maximum *
2.3
2.3
-0%
2.94
-28%
1.47
36%
1.23
47%
3.7
-61%
2.4 (1.23 - 4, n=16)
-4%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=897)
11%
Load Average *
5.8
5.8
-0%
3.65
37%
3.35
42%
4.18
28%
5.9
-2%
5.36 (3.5 - 7.4, n=16)
8%
4.12 (0.8 - 10.8, n=891)
29%
Load Maximum *
10.9
11.8
-8%
6.18
43%
6.37
42%
8.53
22%
8.3
24%
9.9 (7.68 - 12.3, n=16)
9%
6.11 (1.2 - 14.2, n=891)
44%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Thanks to its 5,000 mAh battery the Edge+ was able to secure first place when it comes to raw battery capacity, and it lasted for 15:45 hours in our Wi-Fi test – first place among its competitors. It should easily last a full two workdays of browsing the web without needing to be recharged. Even if Apple’s iPhone 11 Pro Max managed to outrun the Edge+ in some scenarios overall battery life was still excellent.

There is, however, one downside. The included 18 W fast charger takes more than two hours to fully charge the device. Compare that to the significantly faster 30 W charger that the OnePlus 8 Pro comes with. Not only does it take shorter to fully charge the battery, it will also take much less time to achieve at least a few extra hours of battery life.

Wireless charging with up to 15 W is also supported, and honestly also expected of expensive smartphones.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
36h 56min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
15h 45min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
20h 43min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 49min
Motorola Edge Plus
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S20+
4500 mAh
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
3969 mAh
Huawei P40 Pro
4200 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
4500 mAh
OnePlus 8 Pro
4510 mAh
Battery Runtime
-18%
16%
-24%
-16%
-6%
Reader / Idle
2216
2041
-8%
2618
18%
1474
-33%
2133
-4%
2103
-5%
H.264
1243
978
-21%
1346
8%
1137
-9%
973
-22%
1023
-18%
WiFi v1.3
945
794
-16%
909
-4%
743
-21%
865
-8%
923
-2%
Load
289
218
-25%
408
41%
198
-31%
198
-31%
296
2%

Pros

+ wide range of LTE supported LTE frequencies
+ high system performance
+ accurate location services
+ 3.5-mm audio jack
+ 6K video recording
+ long battery life
+ no bloatware
+ fast Wi-Fi

Cons

- mediocre cellular signal strength
- details lack focus in photos
- mediocre speech quality
- relatively slow charging
- throttling under load
- not water proof
- slow GPS lock

Verdict – How well did it do?

In review: Motorola Edge Plus. Review unit provided by Motorola Germany
In review: Motorola Edge Plus. Review unit provided by Motorola Germany

If you charge more than $1,000 for a smartphone you have to deliver. Unfortunately, the Motorola Edge+ fails to do just that in too many areas. The camera offers a high resolution, but details lack focus and the main lens performed mediocre at best in low light. The case is stylish and modern but can be depressed and is not waterproof.

Charging is another area where its competitors offer more bang for the buck, call quality should have been better, and the speakers are not among the best of what high-end smartphones had to offer at the time of writing. The display is not as bright and color-accurate as it is on other smartphones in the Edge+’s price range, and the device tends to thermal throttle under sustained load.

Granted, its edgeless display and stylish backside make the Motorola Edge+ stand out to a certain degree, location services work great once location lock has been obtained, and Motorola pulled out all the stops regarding wireless communication, from 5G to Wi-Fi 6 to Bluetooth 5.1.

The Edge+ signifies Motorola’s return to the realm of high-end smartphones. Unfortunately, the device fails to justify its high asking price.

If you are looking for a smartphone with 3.5-mm headphone jack you will be happy to hear that Motorola continues to support the analog audio output. Another benefit is its pure and clean rendition of Android including somewhat up-to-date security patches.

The Motorola Edge+ may not be the high-end smartphone with the best price-performance ratio, particularly considering more affordable alternatives such as the OnePlus 8 Pro or the Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro. However, it manages to offer a very high level of performance, a unique design, and very good battery life.

Motorola Edge Plus - 09/09/2020 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
86%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
94%
Connectivity
48 / 70 → 68%
Weight
88%
Battery
91%
Display
86%
Games Performance
59 / 64 → 93%
Application Performance
84 / 86 → 98%
Temperature
84%
Noise
100%
Audio
70 / 90 → 78%
Camera
71%
Average
79%
86%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Motorola Edge Plus Smartphone Review – High-End Again at Last
Florian Schmitt, 2020-09-10 (Update: 2020-09-10)
Florian Schmitt
Editor of the original article: Florian Schmitt - Managing Editor Mobile
When I was 12, the first computer came into the house and immediately I started tinkering around, taking it apart, getting new parts and replacing them - after all, there always had to be enough power for the current games. When I came to Notebookcheck in 2009, I was passionate about testing gaming notebooks. Since 2012, my attention has been focused on smartphones, tablets and future technologies.