Samsung Galaxy M36 vs Motorola Edge 40 Neo: A Detailed Comparison
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing convenience and speed, the Motorola Edge 40 Neo is the better choice. Its 68W charging, capable of adding 50% charge in just 15 minutes, significantly outweighs the Galaxy M36’s slower 25W charging. While the M36 offers a capable processor, the Edge 40 Neo’s battery endurance and charging speed provide a more compelling daily experience.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Samsung Galaxy M36 | Motorola Edge 40 Neo |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 48, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 38, 40, 41, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2025, June 27 | 2023, September 14 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, July 12 | Available. Released 2023, September 14 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front (Gorilla Glass Victus+), plastic frame, glass back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 164.4 x 77.9 x 7.7 mm (6.47 x 3.07 x 0.30 in) | 159.6 x 72 x 7.9 mm (6.28 x 2.83 x 0.31 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM + eSIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 197 g (6.95 oz) | 170 g or 172 g (6.00 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass Victus+ | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~385 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~402 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.7 inches, 110.2 cm2 (~86.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.55 inches, 103.6 cm2 (~90.1% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | Super AMOLED, 120Hz | P-OLED, 1B colors, 144Hz, HDR10+, 1300 nits (peak) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.5 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Exynos 1380 (5 nm) | MediaTek Dimensity 7030 (6 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G68 MP5 | Mali-G610 MC3 |
| OS | Android 15, up to 6 major Android upgrades, One UI 7 | Android 13, up to 2 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | No |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/1.55", 1.0µm, multi-directional PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.0", 1.12µm, PDAF |
| Features | LED flash, panorama, HDR | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Triple | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/1.96", PDAF, OIS 8 MP, f/2.2, 123˚, (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm 2 MP (macro) | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps, 720p@480fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/3.06", 1.12µm | 32 MP, f/2.4, (wide), 1/3.0", 0.7µm |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.3, A2DP, LE | 5.4, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, tri-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 25W wired | 68W wired, 50% in 15 min |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Orange Haze, Velvet Black, Serene Green | Black, Soothing Sea, Caneel Bay, Peach Fuzz |
| Models | SM-M366B, SM-M366B/DS | XT2307-1 |
| Price | ₹ 14,999 | $ 299.00 / € 168.73 / ₹ 19,900 |
| SAR | 0.46 W/kg (head) | - |
| SAR EU | 0.38 W/kg (head) 1.01 W/kg (body) | - |
Samsung Galaxy M36
- Potentially more sustained CPU performance due to core count.
- Samsung’s established software ecosystem.
- Likely good color accuracy on the display.
- Significantly slower 25W charging.
- Less efficient chipset (5nm vs 6nm).
- Display likely less bright than the Edge 40 Neo.
Motorola Edge 40 Neo
- Incredibly fast 68W charging.
- Excellent battery life (10:28h active use).
- Brighter display (1073 nits).
- More efficient chipset (6nm).
- Fewer high-performance CPU cores.
- Camera details are limited.
- Motorola’s software update track record is less consistent than Samsung’s.
Display Comparison
The Motorola Edge 40 Neo boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1073 nits. This is a substantial advantage over what we'd expect from the M36, making the Edge 40 Neo far more usable outdoors in direct sunlight. While the M36’s display specs are not provided, Samsung typically employs AMOLED panels with good color accuracy, but likely won’t match the Neo’s peak brightness. The Edge 40 Neo’s brightness also suggests a more modern panel technology, potentially with improved efficiency.
Camera Comparison
Detailed camera analysis is limited by the provided data. However, the Motorola Edge 40 Neo’s camera system is marketed as 'Photo / Video', suggesting a balanced approach. The absence of sensor size or aperture information for either device makes a direct comparison difficult. It’s reasonable to assume Motorola will focus on computational photography to enhance image quality, while Samsung’s image processing tends towards vibrant, saturated colors. The M36 likely includes a variety of lenses, but without specifics, it’s difficult to assess their utility.
Performance
Both phones utilize octa-core CPUs based on the ARM Cortex-A78 architecture, but differ in their chipsets and manufacturing processes. The Motorola Edge 40 Neo’s MediaTek Dimensity 7030, built on a 6nm process, generally offers better power efficiency than the Samsung Galaxy M36’s Exynos 1380 (5nm). While the M36 has 4x Cortex-A78 cores clocked at 2.4 GHz versus the Neo’s 2x at 2.5 GHz, the 6nm process of the Dimensity 7030 likely translates to better sustained performance under load and reduced thermal throttling. The Edge 40 Neo’s GPU is also likely to be more capable, offering a smoother experience in graphically demanding games.
Battery Life
The Motorola Edge 40 Neo shines in battery and charging. Its 10:28 hour active use score demonstrates excellent endurance, and the 80-hour endurance rating (though a less precise metric) reinforces this. Crucially, the 68W wired charging is a game-changer, delivering a 50% charge in just 15 minutes. The Samsung Galaxy M36’s 25W charging is considerably slower, requiring significantly longer to reach a full charge. While the M36’s battery capacity isn’t specified, the Edge 40 Neo’s combination of efficiency and fast charging provides a clear advantage for users who need to quickly top up their device.
Buying Guide
Buy the Samsung Galaxy M36 if you need a reliable workhorse with a focus on sustained performance for everyday tasks and aren't overly concerned with rapid charging. Buy the Motorola Edge 40 Neo if you prioritize a stylish design, long battery life, and the convenience of incredibly fast charging – ideal for users constantly on the go.