Verdict on the Motorola Razr 70
The Motorola Razr 70 is just a minor update. It is still a very stylish and unusual foldable with which you can attract a lot of attention. Our test device in particular looks very classy: it comes with a back that looks like it is made of small mother-of-pearl flakes.
On the other hand, the price has also risen without there being any significant equipment upgrades: a few percent more AI performance here, a slightly higher-resolution camera there. The memory has also become a little faster and the battery lasts longer, but still doesn't cut a very good figure compared to other clamshell foldables.
The Motorola Razr 70 (Razr 2026) offers an interesting concept, looks very attractive and has interesting usage scenarios, for example as a camcorder. However, the competition from Samsung or Xiaomi offers significantly better performance and longer runtimes.
And then there is last year's model, the Razr 60, which is hardly any worse and costs just over half as much. So you should take a close look at the alternatives before buying the Razr 70 if you want the best value for money.
Pros
Cons
Price and availability
The Motorola Razr 2026 is available at various internet dealers, e.g. at amazon.com for around US$ 800.
Table of Contents
- Verdict on the Motorola Razr 70
- Specifications
- Case and equipment - Folds with style
- Communication and operation - Barely noticeable crease
- Software and sustainability - Updates for a short period only
- Cameras - Small update
- Display - Fast, but with PWM
- Performance, emissions and battery life - underwhelming
- Notebookcheck overall rating
- Possible alternatives in comparison
Specifications
Case and equipment - Folds with style
The Motorola Razr has always been unusual: In former times a clamshell phone with a super-flat design, now a clamshell foldable smartphone that still shows all the important information on the external display.
And then there are the unusual materials used for the casing: Sporting Green is available in Pantone colors with a synthetic leather-like texture, while the grey Hematite is more reminiscent of fabric. Our test device comes in Bright White, is made of acetate plastic and looks as if tiny mother-of-pearl flakes have been placed on the smartphone, which also refract the light differently.
The material transitions are clean and the workmanship is good. However, when our test device is opened and twisted, there are distinct creaking noises and a slight shifting within the hinge.
The phone is not waterproof and should not be exposed to dirty environments.
256 GB of mass storage and 8 GB of RAM remain the only memory variant. The USB 2.0 port has not been improved either.
Communication and operation - Barely noticeable crease
Due to their complex technology, flip phones often have to accept limitations in terms of features. For example, the Razr 70 only has WiFi 6E as the fastest Wi-Fi standard. The speeds are quite solid and just about sufficient for a gigabit internet connection.
The 5G modem has a large number of frequencies so that you can easily access the mobile network even when traveling. Reception is good in spot checks during our test.
The 120 Hz screen inside can be operated reliably and the crease on the hinge is barely noticeable or visible. This remains the case even after 2 weeks of testing. The external display also responds reliably.
The fingerprint sensor is integrated in the standby button and unlocks the phone very reliably. Unlocking using facial recognition is possible via the cameras on the inside and outside.
| Networking | |
| Motorola Razr 70 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Motorola Razr 60 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Xiaomi Mix Flip 2 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Average 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Average of class Smartphone | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
Software and sustainability - Updates for a short period only
Android 16 is pre-installed on the phone. Motorola promises only four years of updates for its flip phone and three major Android updates.
According to the manufacturer, updates are to take place every two months, which we cannot confirm at the time of testing due to the status of the security patches from March 2026.
The packaging is plastic-free, otherwise sustainability information on the Razr 70 is scarce.
Cameras - Small update
The wide-angle camera has been upgraded and has a resolution of 50 megapixels. It takes decent snapshots, but is quite blurred in detail.
The main camera also has a resolution of 50 megapixels. The image quality is at a decent level, but cannot keep up with conventional high-end phones.
The inner camera has a resolution of 32 megapixels. The images could do with a little more dynamic range and contrast.
A practical feature of the Razr 70 is that you can also set it up and thus get by without a tripod or simply use the main camera for selfies thanks to the second display.
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.
Hauptkamera PflanzeHauptkamera UmgebungHauptkamera Low LightUltraweitwinkel
Display - Fast, but with PWM
Both the inner main display and the outer display are bright, so there is nothing to stop it being used outdoors or in bright environments. The color reproduction of the inner display is very accurate, while the outer display is slightly less accurate.
We measured PWM flickering with a frequency of 67 Hz on the main display, so sensitive people should definitely try out the display before buying.
Main display
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 1347 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 1.2 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.73}
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 1.8 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø4.98}
99.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.2
CCT: 6248 K
Outer display
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 1154 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 2.99 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.73}
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 5 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø4.98}
97.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.084
CCT: 6466 K
| Motorola Razr 70 AMOLED, 2640x1080, 6.9" | Motorola Razr 60 P-OLED, 2640x1080, 6.9" | Xiaomi Mix Flip 2 AMOLED, 2912x1224, 6.9" | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 AMOLED, 2520x1080, 6.9" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 0% | -35% | -20% | |
| Brightness middle (cd/m²) | 1331 | 1185 -11% | 1077 -19% | 1349 1% |
| Brightness (cd/m²) | 1318 | 1178 -11% | 1036 -21% | 1354 3% |
| Brightness Distribution (%) | 96 | 94 -2% | 95 -1% | 98 2% |
| Black Level * (cd/m²) | ||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.2 | 1.31 -9% | 2.11 -76% | 2.2 -83% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.18 | 1.78 18% | 3.62 -66% | 3.3 -51% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.8 | 1.5 17% | 2.3 -28% | 1.6 11% |
| Gamma | 2.2 100% | 2.133 103% | 2.155 102% | 2.06 107% |
| CCT | 6248 104% | 6382 102% | 6275 104% | 6484 100% |
* ... smaller is better
| Display / APL18 Peak Brightness | |
| Motorola Razr 70 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 | |
| Display / HDR Peak Brightness | |
| Motorola Razr 70 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 | |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 67 Hz Amplitude: 14 % |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 67 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 67 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use. In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 7822 (minimum: 1.31 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Measurement series with fixed zoom level and different brightness settings (The amplitude curve at minimum brightness looks flat, but this is due to the scaling. The info box shows the enlarged version of the amplitude at minimum brightness)
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 1 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 1.2 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 12 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (19.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 1.5 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 42.5 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 73 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (31.1 ms). | ||
Performance, emissions and battery life - underwhelming
The MediaTek Dimensity 7450X offers a few more percent of AI performance, but otherwise it is the same as the 7400X from the Razr 60. The performance is quite low compared to foldables from Samsung or Xiaomi. Smooth everyday operation is usually possible, but as soon as it comes to more demanding tasks, the phone seems overwhelmed.
At least the memory has been upgraded with UFS 3.1 flash. It is is not as fast as the competition, but still a significant upgrade compared to its predecessor.
The phone can heat up under prolonged load, but does not reach unpleasant temperatures. The SoC also does not throttle.
The small speaker on the bottom edge is supported by the earpiece. The system sounds quite decent, but the maximum volume could be higher. There are many wireless audio codecs for connecting headphones or speakers.
The battery has grown by 300 mAh to 4,800 mAh. The phone does not achieve really good runtimes in our WLAN test. However, 14:19 hours is enough for a working day. The phone can be charged with up to 30 watts via cable or up to 15 watts wirelessly.
| Jetstream 2 - 2.0 Total | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 | |
| Average of class Smartphone (59.7 - 423, n=131, last 2 years) | |
| Motorola Razr 70 | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 7450X (n=1) | |
| Motorola Razr 70 | Motorola Razr 60 | Xiaomi Mix Flip 2 | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 | Average 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -20% | 120% | 65% | 3% | 29% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB (MB/s) | 1689.2 | 1020.1 -40% | 4083.53 142% | 4044.67 139% | 1767 ? 5% | 2238 ? 32% |
| Sequential Write 256KB (MB/s) | 1188.1 | 918.4 -23% | 3894.12 228% | 2981.82 151% | 1224 ? 3% | 1919 ? 62% |
| Random Read 4KB (MB/s) | 296.7 | 266.2 -10% | 403.94 36% | 366.98 24% | 289 ? -3% | 307 ? 3% |
| Random Write 4KB (MB/s) | 307.6 | 282.9 -8% | 534.73 74% | 143.67 -53% | 325 ? 6% | 360 ? 17% |
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43.7 °C / 111 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 21.9 to 247 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.9 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.5 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
3DMark Stress Tests
| 3DMark | |
| Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
| Motorola Razr 70 | |
| Motorola Razr 60 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 | |
| Wild Life Extreme Stress Test | |
| Motorola Razr 60 | |
| Motorola Razr 70 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Flip 2 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 | |
| Solar Bay Stress Test Stability | |
| Xiaomi Mix Flip 2 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 | |
| Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability | |
| Motorola Razr 70 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 | |
Motorola Razr 70 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 41% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 34%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Motorola Razr 60 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 35% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 56% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 34%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 54% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 38% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
| Motorola Razr 70 4800 mAh | Motorola Razr 60 4500 mAh | Xiaomi Mix Flip 2 5165 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 4300 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery runtime | ||||
| WiFi v1.3 (h) | 14.3 | 13.6 -5% | 20 40% | 18.9 32% |
Notebookcheck overall rating
Although the Razr 70 has made little progress, it is still a very pretty foldable with an unusual flair.
If you can get the predecessors at a reasonable price, you will only have to live with small compromises.
Motorola Razr 70
- 05/28/2026 v8
Florian Schmitt
Total Sustainability Score: Possible alternatives in comparison
Image | Model / Review | Price | Weight | Drive | Display |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 78%  | Motorola Razr 70 MediaTek Dimensity 7450X ⎘ ARM Mali-G615 MP2 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB UFS 3.1 | Amazon: List Price: 869€ | 188 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.90" 2640x1080 413 PPI AMOLED |
2. 77.5%  | Motorola Razr 60 MediaTek Dimensity 7400X ⎘ ARM Mali-G615 MP2 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB UFS 2.2 | Amazon: List Price: 799€ | 188 g | 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash | 6.90" 2640x1080 413 PPI P-OLED |
3. 85.9%  | Xiaomi Mix Flip 2 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 830 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 512 GB UFS 4.x | Amazon: 1. $484.97 Motorola Razr Ultra 2025 | U... 2. $599.99 Google Pixel Fold - Unlocked... 3. $1,177.48 Google Pixel 10 Pro Fold - U... List Price: 970€ | 199 g | 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6.86" 2912x1224 460 PPI AMOLED |
4. 86.2%  | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 Samsung Exynos 2500 ⎘ Samsung Xclipse 950 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 256 GB UFS 4.x | Amazon: List Price: 1199€ | 188 g | 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 6.90" 2520x1080 397 PPI AMOLED |
Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was freely purchased by the author at his/her own expense. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.
Add as a preferred source on Google
