A Nexus-style Pixel smartphone: Google Pixel 3a Review
In addition to the mandatory high-end Pixel phones from the end of last year, Google has now, for the first time, produced a mid-range smartphone series. The Pixel 3a offers the same camera module as its older brother, 4 GB of RAM, an OLED panel, stereo speakers and a 3000-mAh battery, which is recharged with a fast 18-watt AC adapter. Music fans will be happy to hear that the Pixel 3a is also equipped with a 3.5-mm audio jack.
Users will have to make some sacrifices, however, such as having a plastic case without IP certifications and managing with the poor choice of processors. The Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 in the Pixel 3a is significantly weaker than the Snapdragon 845 in its older brother. The affordable mid-range smartphone lacks a wireless charging function and Google has also decided to leave out the unlimited original-quality photo upload feature.
Currently, the Pixel 3a is available for $400. This positions the mid-range phone in a highly competitive environment with a lot of alternative options. We have included the following possible competitors into our review: Samsung Galaxy A70, Sony Xperia 10, Huawei P30 Lite and Xiaomi Mi 9 SE.
Case - Google phone with a polycarbonate unibody design
The polycarbonate unibody case of the Pixel 3a is available in black ("Just Black") or white ("Clearly White"). Unlike Google's high-end smartphone, today's mid-range test unit is equipped with Dragontrail glass from Asahi rather than Gorilla Glass 5. The scratch-resistant front cover of the Pixel 3a is slightly curved and transitions into the plastic frame smoothly. The edges around the 5.6-inch OLED screen are rather wide for a mid-range device from 2019, which leads to a screen-to-body ratio of just 75 percent.
Nonetheless, the Pixel 3a is a compact smartphone that is easy to hold. The plastic on its back does not look particularly elegant, but it does not feel cheap either. The volume rocker and power button are of good quality. They sit tight and have good pressure points. Overall workmanship is good as well.
Connectivity - cloud support, but no SD card reader
The internal eMMC storage has a capacity of 64 GB, of which users have around 50 GB available after the initial set-up. Users who need more storage capacity will have to make do with the unlimited reduced-quality cloud storage as the Pixel 3a is not equipped with a microSD card reader. You can connect peripherals such as USB sticks via the OTG adapter.
The device also has a fingerprint scanner on its back, Active Edge and a Dual-SIM function via eSIM as well as an Always On display for notifications. Content can be shared via Wi-Fi Direct, or rather Miracast. DRM-protected content can be shared in HD resolution as the Pixel has an L1 DRM Widevine certification. The 3000-mAh battery can be recharged via the Type-C port on the bottom of the Pixel 3a. Data can also be transferred via the USB port at USB 2.0 speeds.
Software - Pixel 3a with Android 9
The Pixel 3a comes with Google's operating system, Android 9.0 Pie. The security patches are dated June 2019 at the time of writing (July 2019). As usual for Pixel smartphones, the 3a is based on Stock Android. In exchange for this simple user interface, buyers will receive Android updates for at least three years.
Communication and GPS - Pixel phone has fast Wi-Fi thanks to MIMO
The Pixel smartphone supports LTE category 10 mobile internet speeds. The Dual-SIM function requires the use of an eSIM, which will only be available after the future update to Android Q. It is unusual for a smartphone of this price range to offer this many frequency bands. The Pixel 3a can make use of a total of 20 LTE bands and should offer good coverage in the US.
The Wi-Fi module supports the IEEE 802.11 standards a/b/g/n and ac in both the 2.5-GHz and 5-GHz bands. The transfer rates to our reference router Linksys EA 8500 are very good for a mid-range smartphone thanks to its MIMO technology and reach 637 Mbit/s and 541 Mbit/s. The attenuation at close proximity to the router (Telekom Speedport, W921V) is fine too at -43 dBm.
The NFC chip enables wireless communication with peripherals. The Google phone also supports Bluetooth 5.0.
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Average of class Smartphone (last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite |
The Pixel 3a can use the satellite systems GPS, Galileo, GLONASS and BeiDou as well as the satellite-based augmentation system SBAS to locate its position. This occurs within about a minute and with a precision of around 4 meters (~13 ft) both indoors and outside.
In order to test how well our test unit does at navigating, we recorded a route together with the bicycle navigation system Garmin Edge 500. The data recorded by these two devices is very similar with a difference of just 70 meters (~76 yd) on a 9-km (~5.6 mi) route.
Telephone and Voice Quality - Pixel 3a with VoLTE and Wi-Fi Calling
The Pixel 3a supports VoLTE (Voice over LTE), which enables voice calls via the 4G network, and Wi-Fi Calling, with which you can make phone calls via Wi-Fi. We did not encounter any reception issues and voices were transmitted clearly via the earpiece. The quality of the microphone seemed perfectly fine.
Cameras - Google smartphone with Sony IMX363
Unlike the old Nexus series, the Pixel's mid-range models are focused on photography. The Sony IMX363 CMOS sensor on the back of the device has a resolution of 12 MP (4032 x 3024 pixels). The Pixel 3a takes very good photos in good lighting. Its high contrast ensures photos with good dynamics, and the camera focusses quite well thanks to dual pixel auto focus. The wide aperture of f/1.8 enables bright photos in dark surroundings. The night mode is particularly helpful when taking photos of dark objects, ensuring high details and good sharpness. The software-generated variable depth of field, which enables a Bokeh effect, works very well usually. The missing Visual Core in the Pixel 3a, however, means that the image is processed a lot slower than on the high-end Pixel devices.
Selfies taken with the 8-MP front camera also have a high contrast and are nicely sharp. While the sharpness and amount of details can't quite keep up with the main camera's quality, the photos taken with the Google Pixel 3a are still better than those taken with some other high-end smartphones. We recently tested the Sony Xperia 1, for example, whose front camera cannot keep up with the selfie quality of our Pixel test unit. This is as good as it currently gets in the mid-range segment.
Videos can be recorded at 30 FPS in UHD resolution. You can even reach 120 FPS if you limit the resolution to 1080 pixels. The front camera records videos at a maximum of 1080 pixels but only manages 30 FPS.
Please Note: You can see more photos taken with the Google Pixel 3a in our detailed mid-range camera comparison which will be published shortly.
Accessories and Warranty- 18-watt AC adapter
The device comes with a modular 18-watt AC adapter, a suitable USB cable, a SIM tool, a quick start guide and headphones.
The Pixel 3a has a warranty of 24 months.
Input Devices & Handling - great feedback through vibration
The capacitive multi-touch screen on the Pixel 3a is very appealing and works precisely and smoothly. It recognizes inputs with up to 10 fingers simultaneously. The Google Pixel 3a also supports Active Edge technology, which can be used to start Google Assistant, for example.
We do not often mention the manufacturer's choice of vibration motor although it can have a reasonable impact on everyday use. The Pixel 3a is equipped with a very good vibration motor for a mid-range phone. While it cannot keep up with Apple's Taptic Engine or the motor in the Google Pixel 3, its mechanical feedback is comparably punchy and precise.
The fingerprint reader on the back of this mid-range smartphone works well in everyday use, although it's a little on the slow side. The device does not offer biometric identification to unlock the device using your face.
Display - Pixel with a P OLED panel
The 5.6-inch P OLED display of the Pixel 3a has a resolution of 2240x1080 pixels and an aspect ratio of 18.5:9. The display is sharp thanks to the pixel density of 441 PPI. The brightness of the panel is not particularly bright at a maximum of 411 cd/m², but the brightness distribution is uniform. If you turn off the ambient light sensor, which automatically adapts the display brightness to the surroundings, the maximum luminosity is quite similar at 408 cd/m². The same can be said for the realistic APL50 test, which simulates an even distribution of light and dark areas on the screen. We measured a brightness of 464 cd/m² here.
Google uses pulse-width modulation (PWM) to regulate the Pixel's screen brightness. The frequency of the flickering is quite low at between 88.65 and 271.7 Hz. Subjectively, we did not notice any bothersome flickering, but PWM can be an issue for sensitive users, causing headaches or dizziness at low frequencies.
|
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 403 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.1 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 2 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.22
Google Pixel 3a P-OLED, 2220x1080, 5.60 | Xiaomi Mi 9 SE AMOLED, 2340x1080, 5.97 | Huawei P30 Lite IPS LCD, 2312x1080, 6.15 | Sony Xperia 10 IPS-LCD, 2520x1080, 6.00 | Samsung Galaxy A70 Super AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.70 | Google Pixel 3 OLED, 2160x1080, 5.50 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | 31% | 20% | -6% | 9% | 30% | |
Brightness middle | 403 | 583 45% | 451 12% | 547 36% | 554 37% | 393 -2% |
Brightness | 411 | 577 40% | 430 5% | 525 28% | 552 34% | 398 -3% |
Brightness Distribution | 96 | 97 1% | 90 -6% | 93 -3% | 98 2% | 91 -5% |
Black Level * | 0.55 | 0.36 | ||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.1 | 1.6 69% | 1.4 73% | 4.6 10% | 3.3 35% | 1.4 73% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 11 | 3.9 65% | 4.4 60% | 12.1 -10% | 9.2 16% | 2.5 77% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2 | 2.7 -35% | 2.5 -25% | 3.9 -95% | 3.4 -70% | 1.2 40% |
Gamma | 2.22 99% | 2.27 97% | 2.22 99% | 2.17 101% | 2.08 106% | 2.19 100% |
CCT | 6589 99% | 6267 104% | 6422 101% | 7158 91% | 6606 98% | 6597 99% |
Contrast | 820 | 1519 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 271.1 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 271.1 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 271.1 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: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18110 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. |
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
3.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2 ms rise | |
↘ 1.6 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. » 10 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.6 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
4.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2.4 ms rise | |
↘ 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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 10 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.9 ms). |
As organic panels can display "absolute" black even at maximum brightness, the contrast ratio in theory approaches infinity. We measured a relatively high average Delta-E deviation to the sRGB color space of 5.1 (colors). Ideally, this value would be below 3. The color temperature is very close to the ideal at 6589 K instead of 6500 K. We did not notice a color cast on the display.
The organic display of the Pixel 3a has stable viewing angles and colors do not invert even at very wide angles. It is possible to read the display even on a sunny summer day, thanks to the high contrast. However, it can become rather difficult to read the panel clearly under direct sunlight due to the low luminosity of our panel.
Performance - Pixel 3a with a Snapdragon 670
The Snapdragon 670 (SDM670) is a Qualcomm SoC from 2018. It is the successor of the Snapdragon 660 and offers 8 Kryo 360 cores (custom design, supports 64 Bit). The two performance cores Kryo 360 Gold clock at up to 2 GHz while the six efficient cores Kryo 360 Silver have a clock rate of up to 1.7 GHz. Apart from these CPU cores the Snapdragon 670 also includes an Adreno 616 graphics chip.
The device's system performance is very good thanks to its light user interface. We did encounter occasional judders and delays despite the very well adapted software, however. Our synthetic benchmarks position the performance of the Snapdragon 670 in the center of our comparison field. As expected, the Pixel 3a with its 4 GB of RAM is a little slower than the Snapdragon 675 in the Galaxy A70. Our test unit does better under graphic load, thanks to its Adreno 616 and positions itself just below the Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Geekbench 4.4 | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (1616 - 1712, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (800 - 9574, n=90, last 2 years) | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (5164 - 5742, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2630 - 26990, n=90, last 2 years) | |
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (6090 - 6479, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2053 - 18432, n=70, last 2 years) |
PCMark for Android | |
Work performance score (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (7988 - 9458, n=4) | |
Average of class Smartphone (10884 - 19297, n=2, last 2 years) | |
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (6633 - 7387, n=4) | |
Average of class Smartphone (9101 - 12871, n=4, last 2 years) |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (32 - 53, n=4) | |
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 165, n=177, last 2 years) | |
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (46 - 58, n=4) | |
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 791, n=177, last 2 years) |
GFXBench 3.0 | |
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (17 - 28, n=4) | |
Average of class Smartphone (6.8 - 165, n=178, last 2 years) | |
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (29 - 29, n=4) | |
Average of class Smartphone (9.2 - 363, n=178, last 2 years) |
GFXBench 3.1 | |
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (6.9 - 19, n=4) | |
Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 158, n=178, last 2 years) | |
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (19 - 20, n=4) | |
Average of class Smartphone (6.2 - 279, n=178, last 2 years) |
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 | |
Google Pixel 3 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (153450 - 158868, n=3) |
The browser speed is decent and we did not encounter any issues while loading elaborate pages. Scrolling is also smooth for the most part, although objectively it cannot quite keep up with its competition here. Only the Sony Xperia 10 and the Huawei P30 Lite get lower results in our browser benchmarks.
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 351, n=167, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 (Chrome 74.0.3729.157) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (32.1 - 33.6, n=4) | |
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74) | |
Sony Xperia 10 (Chrome Version 73) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (4633 - 89112, n=202, last 2 years) | |
Google Pixel 3 (Chrome 70) | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 (Chrome 74.0.3729.157) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (10245 - 11312, n=4) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74) | |
Sony Xperia 10 (Chrome Version 73) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Sony Xperia 10 (Chrome Version 73) | |
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74) | |
Google Pixel 3a | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 (3361 - 3655, n=4) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73) | |
Samsung Galaxy A70 (Chrome 74.0.3729.157) | |
Google Pixel 3 (Chrome 70) | |
Average of class Smartphone (388 - 9999, n=165, last 2 years) |
* ... smaller is better
The speed of the eMMC flash storage in the Pixel 3a is very similar to that of its competition; the speeds we measured with our AndroBench 5 benchmark are average and very decent.
Google Pixel 3a | Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | Huawei P30 Lite | Sony Xperia 10 | Samsung Galaxy A70 | Google Pixel 3 | Average 64 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | 11% | -10% | -30% | 7% | 74% | -29% | 290% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 302 | 492.5 63% | 293.2 -3% | 273.8 -9% | 508 68% | 766 154% | 273 ? -10% | 1468 ? 386% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 253.9 | 190.1 -25% | 158.6 -38% | 232.9 -8% | 194 -24% | 181.8 -28% | 176.8 ? -30% | 1078 ? 325% |
Random Read 4KB | 63.6 | 115.8 82% | 71.6 13% | 53.1 -17% | 103.8 63% | 149.8 136% | 59.1 ? -7% | 242 ? 281% |
Random Write 4KB | 99.9 | 21.86 -78% | 87.3 -13% | 14.39 -86% | 21.95 -78% | 133.8 34% | 31.7 ? -68% | 266 ? 166% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 76.8 ? | 83.2 ? | 76.2 ? | 77.4 ? | ||||
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 67.8 ? | 63.8 ? | 58.8 ? | 58.3 ? |
Games - a Qualcomm Adreno 616
The Qualcomm Adreno 616 supports modern APIs such as Vulkan, OpenGL ES 3.2 and DirectX 12. The GPU is manufactured using the 14-nm process and can be considered a powerful graphics card. The Pixel 3a can display demanding games such as "PUBG Mobile" smoothly at high details. The racing game "Asphalt 9 Legends" is also displayed smoothly at maximum quality settings. However, we did occasionally note small drops in the frame rate on both games.
The sensors and capacitive touchscreen in this Google smartphone are reliable and responsive.
Emissions - Pixel phone with stereo speakers
Temperature
The surface temperatures are within the normal range, although the Pixel 3a has a rather uneven temperature distribution.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37.4 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 36.5 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.9 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
Speakers
Thanks to one speaker in the earpiece and one on the bottom of the phone, the Pixel 3a can produce stereo sound when playing music or videos. Together, these speakers offer very good sound quality for this price range and reach a maximum volume of 83 dB(A).
While the speaker placed above the display is significantly quieter and more focused on highs, the speaker on the bottom of the phone is louder and stronger. The sound that these two speakers produce is very linear.
If you want to use your own headphones, you can: The Pixel 3a is equipped with a 3.5-mm audio jack, which works very well.
Google Pixel 3a audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 5% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 91% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 23% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Google Pixel 3 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 8% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 86% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 27% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 64% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Battery Life - Pixel 3a with small battery, but good battery life
Power Consumption
The power management of the Pixel 3a is great compared to its competition. It is particularly efficient under load.
Off / Standby | 0.01 / 0.22 Watt |
Idle | 0.61 / 1.56 / 1.6 Watt |
Load |
2.67 / 4.33 Watt |
Google Pixel 3a 3000 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 9 SE 3070 mAh | Huawei P30 Lite 3340 mAh | Sony Xperia 10 2870 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A70 4500 mAh | Google Pixel 3 2915 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 7% | -60% | -28% | -19% | -62% | -67% | -48% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.61 | 0.53 13% | 0.91 -49% | 0.72 -18% | 0.66 -8% | 1.21 -98% | 1.18 ? -93% | 0.894 ? -47% |
Idle Average * | 1.56 | 1.18 24% | 2.41 -54% | 2.16 -38% | 1.69 -8% | 2.01 -29% | 2.89 ? -85% | 1.452 ? 7% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.6 | 1.2 25% | 2.43 -52% | 2.17 -36% | 1.8 -13% | 2.05 -28% | 2.94 ? -84% | 1.632 ? -2% |
Load Average * | 2.67 | 3.04 -14% | 4.57 -71% | 3.32 -24% | 3.42 -28% | 4.06 -52% | 3.82 ? -43% | 5.55 ? -108% |
Load Maximum * | 4.33 | 4.83 -12% | 7.57 -75% | 5.34 -23% | 5.88 -36% | 8.79 -103% | 5.65 ? -30% | 8.23 ? -90% |
* ... smaller is better
Battery Life
In order for the Pixel 3a to keep going on long days, the manufacturer has equipped it with a 3000-mAh battery. Our test unit has good runtimes despite the small battery capacity, thanks to the efficient Snapdragon SoC and OLED display. The Pixel 3a managed to keep going for over 10 hours in our realistic Wi-Fi test with the display brightness set to 150 cd/m².
Google Pixel 3a 3000 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 9 SE 3070 mAh | Huawei P30 Lite 3340 mAh | Sony Xperia 10 2870 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A70 4500 mAh | Google Pixel 3 2915 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | ||||||
WiFi v1.3 | 612 | 510 -17% | 515 -16% | 541 -12% | 736 20% | 471 -23% |
Pros
Cons
Verdict - Google can also do mid-range
Google's previous high-end smartphones with their wide bezels have made it clear that the manufacturer is not particularly up to date in terms of design language. The same was to be expected from this mid-range Pixel smartphone. Barring that, the industry leader among search engines has shown that it is also capable of producing very good mid-range smartphones, both in terms of technology and in terms of software.
Lovers of compact smartphones will find that the Pixel 3a is one of the best smartphones available at the moment.
Despite its rather old-school design, the Pixel 3a is a very compact device that is nice to handle thanks to its plastic back cover. While the Pixel looks rather bland on paper, its everyday performance is very pleasing. The results the Pixel manages to get out of its two single cameras on the front and back are impressive. We were also impressed by the very good speaker and vibration motor that set the Pixel 3a apart from its competition.
The high price of $400 makes the Snapdragon 670 smartphone look quite unattractive on paper and could even be considered a dangerous move. The Pixel 3a would have done well with a Snapdragon 700 chip: The mid-range smartphone has some performance weaknesses despite its well-optimized software. We cannot quite understand why Google did not include an SD card slot on this mid-range device with only 64 GB of internal storage.
Google Pixel 3a
-
09/03/2022 v7
Marcus Herbrich