Based on recent reviews of Moto X Pure, it was claimed that this device from Motorola is already a good deal, however, some setbacks have been cited.

In its review, Arstechnica pointed out the buying the unit is not a bad decision after all since "Despite a handful of drawbacks and curious design decisions, the Moto X Pure Edition represents a great value for the money."

The tech review site noted that although some may not opt for it because of specs that could not be considered as "cutting edge," the unit boasts of several features which might not be found in other Android devices.

The Moto X Pure Edition, according to the site, is "the most recent version of Android without redundant apps or irritating skins, and an array of customization options that competitors don't offer."

Apart from good specs and the absence of "extraneous apps or heavy skins, among the other good attributes of this Motorola mobile phone variant are its "great build quality," affordability (as $400, the Moto X Pure Edition is less expensive than its competitors), quick charging feature "unlike the OnePlus Two," storage which can be expanded and any user can have it customized through the Moto Maker.

However, amid these competitive features are a number of not-so-good feedbacks, such as its "mediocre camera, again" and a battery life which was described as "only OK." Furthermore, it was revealed that with its price, it might have just affected its speed.

The site alleged that the absence of wireless charging and fingerprint reader could be attributed to the Moto X Pure Edition's price as well.

Meanwhile, Android Central disclosed that the camera of Samsung Galaxy S6 and Samsung Galaxy Note 5 is way better than the Motorola-produced device and "it shouldn't come as a big shock."

But it must be taken into consideration that the Moto X Pure Edition is $200 cheaper than the Motorola unit. With this, consumers were encouraged to closely examine if such amount is totally worth the camera.