Motorola Moto G Fast vs Vivo Y9s
The Motorola Moto G Fast (2020) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, while the Vivo Y9s (2019) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 665. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo Y9s leads — 39/100 vs 25/100 (a 14-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo Y9s has the bigger battery (4500 mAh vs 4000); the main camera is 16 MP vs 48 MP.
Profile comparison
Category scores
Motorola Moto G Fast
Vivo Y9s
What makes Motorola Moto G Fast better?
- Overall rating 25/100
What makes Vivo Y9s better?
- Bigger battery: 4500 vs 4000 mAh
- Faster charging: 18W vs 10W
- Better main camera: 48MP vs 16MP
- Lighter: 186g vs 189g
- Better camera (39/100 vs 15/100)
- Longer battery life (33/100 vs 22/100)
- Better display (83/100 vs 39/100)
- Better portability (59/100 vs 54/100)
Comparison verdict
Comparing the Motorola Moto G Fast vs the Vivo Y9s, the Vivo Y9s scores 14 points higher (39/100 vs 25/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo Y9s leads (39/100 vs 15/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo Y9s leads (33/100 vs 22/100). In the "performance" category, both devices are on the same level — 24/100. In the "display" category, the Vivo Y9s significantly outperforms the Motorola Moto G Fast (83/100 vs 39/100). In the "camera" category, the Vivo Y9s notably outperforms the Motorola Moto G Fast (39/100 vs 15/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo Y9s is a bit better (33/100 vs 22/100). In the "portability" category, the Vivo Y9s is a bit better (59/100 vs 54/100).
Specs comparison
| Specification | Motorola Moto G Fast | Vivo Y9s | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Processor | Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 | Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 | |
| AnTuTu | 329457 | 329457 | |
| Geekbench Single | 321 | 321 | |
| Geekbench Multi | 1128 | 1128 | |
| Display | 6.4" IPS LCD | 6.4" Super AMOLED | |
| Resolution | 720x1560 | 1080x2340 | |
| Refresh rate | — | — | |
| Battery | 4000 mAh | 4500 mAh | |
| Charging | 10W | 18W | |
| Main camera | 16 MP | 48 MP | |
| Ultrawide | 8 MP | 8 MP | |
| Front camera | 8 MP | 32 MP | |
| RAM | 3GB | 8GB | |
| Storage | 32GB | 128GB | |
| OS | Android 10 | Android 9.0 (Pie); Funtouch 9 | |
| NFC | no | no | |
| Dimensions | 161.9×75.7×9.1 mm | 159.3×75.2×8.7 mm | |
| Weight | 189 g | 186 g | |
| Launch price | — | — |
Camera comparison
Motorola Moto G Fast
- Main: 16MP f/1.7
- Ultrawide: 8MP
- Front: 8MP
Vivo Y9s
- Main: 48MP f/1.8
- Ultrawide: 8MP
- Front: 32MP
Display comparison
Motorola Moto G Fast
- 6.4" IPS LCD
- Resolution: 720x1560
- Refresh rate: —
Vivo Y9s
- 6.4" Super AMOLED
- Resolution: 1080x2340
- Refresh rate: —
Battery and charging
Motorola Moto G Fast
- 4000 mAh
- Wired: 10W
- No wireless charging
Vivo Y9s
- 4500 mAh
- Wired: 18W
- No wireless charging
Overall performance score
We compared Motorola Moto G Fast and Vivo Y9s, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Equal performance based on benchmark results.
Benchmarks
Detailed category analysis
performance
In the "performance" category, both devices are on the same level — 24/100.
display
In the "display" category, the Vivo Y9s significantly outperforms the Motorola Moto G Fast (83/100 vs 39/100).
camera
In the "camera" category, the Vivo Y9s notably outperforms the Motorola Moto G Fast (39/100 vs 15/100).
battery
In the "battery" category, the Vivo Y9s is a bit better (33/100 vs 22/100).
portability
In the "portability" category, the Vivo Y9s is a bit better (59/100 vs 54/100).
Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Motorola Moto G Fast or the Vivo Y9s?
The Vivo Y9s is noticeably better than the Motorola Moto G Fast — the overall rating gap is 14 points.
What is the rating of the Motorola Moto G Fast and the Vivo Y9s?
The Motorola Moto G Fast has a MobileRank rating of 25/100, the Vivo Y9s — 39/100.
Which has the better camera: the Motorola Moto G Fast or the Vivo Y9s?
The Vivo Y9s leads on camera score (39/100 vs 15/100).
Should you choose the Motorola Moto G Fast over the Vivo Y9s?
Neither model stands out enough to recommend it for a specific use case: the clearest difference is display — better on the Vivo Y9s (83/100 vs 39/100).