Notebookcheck

Google Pixel 4 Review: no longer at the smartphone forefront

Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Finn D. Boerne), 11/26/2019

Short-winded. The Pixel 4 features almost no real updates save for a touchless gesture control feature and a 90 Hz panel. Otherwise, the device can be considered mostly a facelift. Unfortunately, it no longer features a fingerprint reader and the battery has decreased in capacity. Let's find out whether this new recipe actually works.

At first glance Google’s Pixel 4 does not seem to have changed much. Compared to its Pixel 3 predecessor the display grew to 5.7 inches and is now slightly larger yet still comparatively small. Narrow bezels remain nowhere to be seen, which is mostly due to the sensors mounted above the display.

The main difference is the Pixel 4’s array of NIR sensors used for facial recognition at the front. In addition, the panel has been upgraded to one with a 90 Hz refresh rate, and last but not least the camera’s telephoto lens has also been upgraded and now features a powerful digital zoom.

Since storage capacity remained unupgradable you will have to consider future storage requirements at the time of purchase. In the United States, the 64 GB SKU starts at $799 but is currently available for $599 as part of a Black Friday deal. The 128 GB model starts at $899 and just like the 64 GB SKU it is currently available for $200 less. Both deals expire December 2. At these prices, the Pixel 4 is no longer at the high-end of the market, and thus it competes more with the likes of a OnePlus 7T ProGalaxy S10e, or ZenFone 6.

Google Pixel 4 (Pixel 4 Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Pixel, Neural Core, Titan M security chip
Graphics adapter
Memory
6144 MB 
, LPDDR4x
Display
5.7 inch 19:9, 2280 x 1080 pixel 443 PPI, capacitive 10-point multi-touch touchscreen, OLED, Smooth Display (up to 90 Hz), Gorilla Glass 5, glossy: yes, HDR
Storage
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, , 51.45 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, Audio Connections: USB-C, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Active edge, proximity sensor, accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM/GPRS/Edge (850, 900, 1,800 und 1,900 MHz), UMTS/HSPA+ (Band 1, 2, 4, 5, and 8), LTE Cat. 18 (Band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17,20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66, and 71), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.2 x 147.1 x 68.8 ( = 0.32 x 5.79 x 2.71 in)
Battery
2800 mAh Lithium-Ion
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 12.2 MPix (1,4 μm, dual-pixel phase autofocus, OIS, EIS, f/1.7, UHD video, angle of coverage: 77 °) + 16 MPix (1,0 μm, phase autofocus, OIS, EIS, f/2.4, angle of coverage: 52 °)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix (1,22 μm, f/2.0, fix focus, angle of coverage: 90 °, FHD video) + 2 NIR cameras (dot projector, emitter)
Additional features
Keyboard: on-screen, charger, USB cable, OTG dongle, quick start guide, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, Head SAR: 1.19 W/kg, body SAR: 1.39 W/kg, IP68 certified, 3 microphones, Nano- and eSIM, , fanless, waterproof
Weight
162 g ( = 5.71 oz / 0.36 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
749 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Test group

RatingDateModelWeightDriveSizeResolutionBest Price
86%11/2019Google Pixel 4
855, Adreno 640
162 g64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash5.7"2280x1080
87%09/2019Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU
194 g64 GB SSD6.1"1792x828
85%03/2019Samsung Galaxy S10e
9820, Mali-G76 MP12
150 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash5.8"2280x1080
86%03/2019Xiaomi Mi 9
855, Adreno 640
173 g64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.39"2340x1080
86%10/2019OnePlus 7T
855+, Adreno 640
190 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.55"2400x1080
88%03/2019Huawei P30 Pro
Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10
192 g256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.47"2340x1080
84%11/2018Google Pixel 3
845, Adreno 630
148 g64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash5.5"2160x1080

Case

The Pixel 4 is available in three colors: Just Black, Clearly White, and Oh So Orange. Oddly enough the latter is not really orange but rather coral, similar to last year’s iPhone XR. The white and orange models are equipped with a matte rear glass surface, the black SKU with a glossy one. The camera cut-out measures almost exactly 1 x 1 inch (24.9 x 24.9 mm) and protrudes by around 1 mm (0.04 inches).

Build quality is superb, as expected. The device feels very solid and completely ignored all of our warping and twisting attempts. All gaps are consistent; however, the gap between the panel glass and the frame is larger than expected and tends to accumulate dirt and grime. The case itself is IP68-certified and thus protected against dust and water ingress.

The battery is not replaceable and sits perfectly flush inside the case. The SIM tray is made of metal covered by plastic and takes a single nano SIM card.

Size Comparison

160.94 mm / 6.34 inch 74.44 mm / 2.93 inch 8.13 mm / 0.3201 inch 190 g0.4189 lbs158.01 mm / 6.22 inch 73.37 mm / 2.89 inch 8.41 mm / 0.3311 inch 192 g0.4233 lbs157.5 mm / 6.2 inch 74.67 mm / 2.94 inch 7.61 mm / 0.2996 inch 173 g0.3814 lbs150.9 mm / 5.94 inch 75.7 mm / 2.98 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 194 g0.4277 lbs147.1 mm / 5.79 inch 68.8 mm / 2.71 inch 8.2 mm / 0.3228 inch 162 g0.3571 lbs145.6 mm / 5.73 inch 68.2 mm / 2.69 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 148 g0.3263 lbs142.2 mm / 5.6 inch 69.9 mm / 2.75 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 150 g0.3307 lbs

Connectivity

Due to its new facial recognition feature, Google decided to forego the previously included fingerprint reader. The USB 3.1 Type-C port supports both OTG and Power Delivery; however, it does not carry a DisplayPort signal.

The device supports NFC and Bluetooth 5.0 but lacks an FM radio, an IR blaster, and a headphone jack.

Top
Top
Left: SIM tray
Left: SIM tray
Right: power button, volume rocker
Right: power button, volume rocker
Bottom: speaker, USB, microphone
Bottom: speaker, USB, microphone

Software

The Google Pixel 4 runs Android 10 out of the box and is going to receive operating system and security updates for three years until October 2022. Unfortunately, Google dropped the previously available free Google Drive storage for photos that used to come with every Pixel purchase.

Like all other Pixel smartphones, the Pixel 4 is going to be the first to receive Google’s latest software features. For example, it already supports the brand-new recording feature that not only records your voice but also automatically creates a transcript. Given that the voice recognition feature works offline and takes place entirely on the phone itself this feature does not even require internet access, and it worked remarkably well in our test. At the time of writing it was limited to English only. Once transcribed you can proceed and search your text for keywords.

User account management is not available.

Communication and GPS

The Pixel 4 supports IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n/ac in both the 2.4 as well as the 5 GHz bands, but it does not support the brand-new Wi-Fi 6 standard. In our tests, the Pixel 4 featured good range and signal quality, and it was fairly fast when benchmarked while connected to our Linksys EA8500 reference router. That said, the transfer rates fluctuated slightly.

Its cellular modem supports LTE Cat. 18 and thus a very wide range of frequencies, which should work just as great abroad as it does at home. All required bands for Russia, China, Europe, and North America are supported.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 9
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
678 (min: 549, max: 725) MBit/s ∼100% +29%
Huawei P30 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
661 (min: 624, max: 683) MBit/s ∼97% +26%
Google Pixel 3
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
659 (min: 610, max: 698) MBit/s ∼97% +25%
Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 64 GB SSD
563 (min: 490, max: 597) MBit/s ∼83% +7%
Google Pixel 4
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
526 (min: 413, max: 655) MBit/s ∼78%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Mali-G76 MP12, 9820, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
520 (min: 445, max: 571) MBit/s ∼77% -1%
OnePlus 7T
Adreno 640, 855+, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
430 (min: 374, max: 485) MBit/s ∼63% -18%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=459)
230 MBit/s ∼34% -56%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P30 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
670 (min: 542, max: 717) MBit/s ∼100% +13%
Google Pixel 3
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
591 (min: 461, max: 651) MBit/s ∼88% 0%
Google Pixel 4
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
591 (min: 564, max: 609) MBit/s ∼88%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
534 (min: 430, max: 578) MBit/s ∼80% -10%
Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 64 GB SSD
529 (min: 204, max: 603) MBit/s ∼79% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Mali-G76 MP12, 9820, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
468 (min: 351, max: 489) MBit/s ∼70% -21%
OnePlus 7T
Adreno 640, 855+, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
422 (min: 238, max: 447) MBit/s ∼63% -29%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=459)
219 MBit/s ∼33% -63%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø526 (413-655)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø591 (564-609)
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test outdoors
GNSS

GPS lock was obtained fairly quickly outdoors as well as indoors, and the location services supported by the Pixel 4 include GPS, Glonass, BeiDou, QZSS, and Galileo. Neither SBAS nor dual-band is supported.

We test every smartphone on a quick bike tour around the block and compare it to a professional Garmin Edge 500 satnav. Overall, the Pixel 4 did very well, and its recorded track was just off by 30 m (98 ft) when compared to the Garmin’s. This was mostly due to the Pixel 4 being off-track every now and then.

Garmin Edge 500 - overview
Garmin Edge 500 - overview
Garmin Edge 500 - around the lake
Garmin Edge 500 - around the lake
Garmin Edge 500 - turning point
Garmin Edge 500 - turning point
Google Pixel 4 - overview
Google Pixel 4 - overview
Google Pixel 4 - around the lake
Google Pixel 4 - around the lake
Google Pixel 4 - turning point
Google Pixel 4 - turning point

Telephony and Call Quality

The telephony app remained largely unchanged. It remains simple and well structured, and it supports SIP account configuration, a feature most interesting for business users.

Call quality was great albeit with a slight echo when talking on speakerphone. Recording phone calls is not supported, and the recorder app cannot be started during a phone call.

The Pixel 4 supports VoLTE and Wi-Fi calling. Dual SIM capabilities are supported via eSIM.

Cameras

Pixel 4 selfie

The front-facing camera features an 8 MP sensor with a 90-degree angle of coverage, and it records videos in FHD. Spec-wise this camera is not going to win any awards; however, the software is what turns it into a great shooter. Selfies turn out very well with well-balanced colors and a harmonious dynamic range. Low-light photos turn out well thanks to the included optional night mode.

The main camera received an extra telephoto lens when compared to its predecessor, and it now supports a 2x optical zoom. Google also promises a highly optimized digital zoom that is supposed to work practically lossless. When compared with its competitors the Pixel 4’s zoom worked great but was unable to keep up with the Huawei P30 Pro, which has a zoom level that was not just higher but also of a much better quality.

Pixel 4: wide angle
Pixel 4: 2x optical zoom
Pixel 4: 8x digital zoom
Galaxy S10+: 8x digital zoom
iPhone 11 Pro: 8x digital zoom
Huawei P30 Pro: 8x digital zoom

Overall image quality was very good and low-light photos taken at night turned out very well thanks to the included night mode. Photos were high in contrast with rich colors and a comparatively wide dynamic range.

Videos also turned out very well. Unfortunately, the Pixel 4 can only record 4K UHD at 30 FPS. In addition, the camera tends to increase the level of noise significantly in low-light situations.

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.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images

When tested in the lab the Pixel 4 performed as well as expected after our first real-world impressions. Our test chart showed neither excessively over-sharpened outlines nor color gradients, and fonts were captured very well. We did notice a slight decrease in contrast ratio towards the bottom edge.

Color representation was also decent. White balance was very pleasing albeit a bit warmer than expected, and colors were slightly too dark.

ColorChecker Photo
29.1 ∆E
49.4 ∆E
38 ∆E
34.8 ∆E
42.9 ∆E
59.2 ∆E
48.7 ∆E
33 ∆E
35 ∆E
29.4 ∆E
58.8 ∆E
60.4 ∆E
29.8 ∆E
45.7 ∆E
31.8 ∆E
65.5 ∆E
39.2 ∆E
41.8 ∆E
73.3 ∆E
66.9 ∆E
50 ∆E
36.4 ∆E
24.4 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel 4: 43.22 ∆E min: 13.91 - max: 73.33 ∆E
ColorChecker Photo
15.8 ∆E
4 ∆E
9.2 ∆E
17.7 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
3.7 ∆E
4.3 ∆E
8.3 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
8 ∆E
4.3 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
12.2 ∆E
6.7 ∆E
1.9 ∆E
2.7 ∆E
12.8 ∆E
9.3 ∆E
3.7 ∆E
2.5 ∆E
1.4 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel 4: 6.83 ∆E min: 1.37 - max: 17.67 ∆E
Test chart @ 2.500 Lux
Test chart @ 1 Lux
Test chart @ 1Lux with night mode

Accessories and Warranty

Included in the box you will find a modular 18 W power supply, a USB cable, an OTG dongle, as well as some technical documentation. A headset is not included.

As is often the case, devices sold in the US are limited to just one year of manufacturer warranty while devices sold in Europe come with two years of full warranty by default. An optional warranty extension for $149 extra is required to get the same level of warranty coverage as European customers.

Input Devices and Handling

Just like the Pixel 3, the Pixel 4 supports Active Edge technology. Specifically, this means that you can mute the phone or launch the Google Assistant by pressing on the edge of the screen. This feature has not been further refined by Google.

New features include the NIR lenses next to the front-facing camera which are used for facial recognition and work similarly to the iPhone's Face ID feature. In general, this feature is a great idea, and it worked very reliably and fast. Unfortunately, unlike Apple’s Face ID the Pixel phone does not differentiate between closed and open eyes, and it does not even require the user to look at the phone at all. However, Google has already announced further improvements and refinement.

A second feature brought to you by aforementioned array of NIR cameras is support for touchless gestures. So far, the set of gestures is very limited, and you can control some apps such as the alarm clock or various music apps, such as the included music app or others like Spotify. Compared with the LG G8s ThinQ, gesture recognition worked much better.

Display

Subpixel array

The 5.7-inch OLED display runs at a native resolution of 2280x1080 (which makes for a high pixel density) and is one of the smaller panels available today. The display supports a refresh rate of up to 90 Hz. We cannot confirm claims that this support is not available at lower levels of brightness as we were able to detect the increased PWM frequency range typical for 90 Hz panels regardless of display brightness. That said, PWM frequencies fluctuated significantly between 176.1 and 367.6 Hz and are thus low enough to potentially cause eye strain and headaches in sensitive users.

Brightness distribution was very flat and homogenous. The maximum brightness determined during the APL50 test (455 nits) was practically identical to a full-screen measurement. Due to the underlying OLED technology the display’s black level is zero and the resulting contrast ratio thus infinite. Unfortunately, the display does not support short-term brightness boosts with enabled ambient light sensor.

In return, it supports an always-on feature, a night mode, and automatic ambient-light based color temperature adjustment.

432
cd/m²
433
cd/m²
450
cd/m²
434
cd/m²
447
cd/m²
453
cd/m²
423
cd/m²
438
cd/m²
445
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 453 cd/m² Average: 439.4 cd/m² Minimum: 2.07 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 93 %
Center on Battery: 447 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.8 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 1.3 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
95.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.22
Google Pixel 4
OLED, 2280x1080, 5.7
Apple iPhone 11
IPS, 1792x828, 6.1
Samsung Galaxy S10e
AMOLED, 2280x1080, 5.8
Xiaomi Mi 9
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.39
OnePlus 7T
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.55
Huawei P30 Pro
OLED, 2340x1080, 6.47
Google Pixel 3
OLED, 2160x1080, 5.5
Screen
8%
-58%
-1%
-117%
-48%
-28%
Brightness middle
447
679
52%
426
-5%
593
33%
693
55%
597
34%
393
-12%
Brightness
439
671
53%
427
-3%
587
34%
703
60%
608
38%
398
-9%
Brightness Distribution
93
93
0%
96
3%
94
1%
96
3%
89
-4%
91
-2%
Black Level *
0.68
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
0.8
0.8
-0%
2.14
-168%
0.9
-13%
3.42
-328%
2.2
-175%
1.4
-75%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
1.4
2.4
-71%
3.29
-135%
2
-43%
6.12
-337%
3.6
-157%
2.5
-79%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.3
1.1
15%
1.8
-38%
1.5
-15%
3.3
-154%
1.6
-23%
1.2
8%
Gamma
2.22 99%
2.24 98%
2.111 104%
2.27 97%
2.265 97%
2.23 99%
2.19 100%
CCT
6213 105%
6610 98%
6329 103%
6548 99%
6799 96%
6268 104%
6597 99%
Contrast
999

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 367.6 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 367.6 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 367.6 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: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9338 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

We determine color accuracy by testing each display with a spectrophotometer and the CalMAN software suite. The Pixel 4 showed a very good white balance as well as very accurate grayscale. Color accuracy depends on selected color mode. In Natural the colors were extraordinarily accurate while saturation was slightly increased in Adaptive. Enhanced mode increased saturation even further.

The supported color space is larger than sRGB, however there is no official AdobeRGB or DCI-P3 support.

Grayscale (profile: Adaptive; target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (profile: Adaptive; target color space: sRGB)
Colors (profile: Adaptive; target color space: sRGB)
Colors (profile: Adaptive; target color space: sRGB)
Color space (profile: Adaptive; target color space: sRGB)
Color space (profile: Adaptive; target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (profile: Adaptive; target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (profile: Adaptive; target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (profile: Natural; target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (profile: Natural; target color space: sRGB)
Colors (profile: Natural; target color space: sRGB)
Colors (profile: Natural; target color space: sRGB)
Color space (profile: Natural; target color space: sRGB)
Color space (profile: Natural; target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (profile: Natural; target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (profile: Natural; target color space: sRGB)

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.2 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.2 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.4 ms).

The Pixel 4 was very well usable outdoors as long as it did not get too bright. On sunny days we were forced to shade the display in order to minimize reflections, which were visible at all times. 

Outside in the sun
Outside in the shade

Viewing angles were as wide as expected of an OLED panel. Brightness never faded, even at extreme angles, and the color bloom typical for OLED displays was practically non-existent. 

Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance

The Pixel 4 features a Snapdragon 855 instead of the newer Plus model of this chipset, a total of 6 GB of RAM, and an Adreno 640.

In our benchmarks, it performed very well overall but remained slightly slower than other smartphones based on the same SoC. Only in the system performance benchmark did it outperform the entire competition by a long shot. In day-to-day use the operating system felt very smooth.

Geekbench 5
Vulkan Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2081 Points ∼94%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1849 Points ∼84% -11%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
2204 Points ∼100% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (1849 - 2154, n=7)
2032 Points ∼92% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (183 - 3222, n=30)
1539 Points ∼70% -26%
OpenCL Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2241 Points ∼64%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
2707 Points ∼77%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
3494 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2218 - 2395, n=7)
2302 Points ∼66%
Average of class Smartphone
  (183 - 4593, n=36)
2015 Points ∼58%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2494 Points ∼72%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3463 Points ∼100% +39%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2852 Points ∼82% +14%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
2753 Points ∼79% +10%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
2544 Points ∼73% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2441 - 2852, n=8)
2616 Points ∼76% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (807 - 3575, n=47)
1995 Points ∼58% -20%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
725 Points ∼54%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
1343 Points ∼100% +85%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
750 Points ∼56% +3%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
783 Points ∼58% +8%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
698 Points ∼52% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (725 - 750, n=8)
742 Points ∼55% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (155 - 1344, n=47)
575 Points ∼43% -21%
Geekbench 4.4
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
10170 Points ∼75%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7482 Points ∼55%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8317 Points ∼61%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
8574 Points ∼63%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
13620 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (7372 - 8024, n=11)
7603 Points ∼56%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=328)
4681 Points ∼34%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
10553 Points ∼93%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10999 Points ∼97%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
11388 Points ∼100%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
9880 Points ∼87%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
7754 Points ∼68%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (10187 - 11388, n=13)
10960 Points ∼96%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 11598, n=387)
4727 Points ∼42%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
4506 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3523 Points ∼78%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
3705 Points ∼82%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
3306 Points ∼73%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
2355 Points ∼52%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3406 - 3537, n=13)
3486 Points ∼77%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4824, n=387)
1429 Points ∼32%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10254 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
7966 Points ∼78% -22%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9035 Points ∼88% -12%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8702 Points ∼85% -15%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
9135 Points ∼89% -11%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
9063 Points ∼88% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8342 - 11440, n=17)
9650 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11690, n=399)
5379 Points ∼52% -48%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
12190 Points ∼94%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
10008 Points ∼77% -18%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10985 Points ∼85% -10%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10286 Points ∼79% -16%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
12996 Points ∼100% +7%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
11744 Points ∼90% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (10330 - 14439, n=17)
12152 Points ∼94% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 15193, n=566)
5844 Points ∼45% -52%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3044 Points ∼87%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3288 Points ∼94% +8%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
3489 Points ∼100% +15%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
3183 Points ∼91% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2104 - 3365, n=17)
3013 Points ∼86% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=76)
2691 Points ∼77% -12%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5228 Points ∼79%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5723 Points ∼86% +9%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6640 Points ∼100% +27%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4688 Points ∼71% -10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (4236 - 5884, n=17)
5596 Points ∼84% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=76)
2807 Points ∼42% -46%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4509 Points ∼82%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4914 Points ∼89% +9%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5530 Points ∼100% +23%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4242 Points ∼77% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3800 - 5012, n=17)
4688 Points ∼85% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=76)
2550 Points ∼46% -43%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4112 Points ∼89%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3219 Points ∼69% -22%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
3106 Points ∼67% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3754 Points ∼81% -9%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4635 Points ∼100% +13%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4171 Points ∼90% +1%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
2979 Points ∼64% -28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (1934 - 4576, n=17)
3845 Points ∼83% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5576, n=406)
2002 Points ∼43% -51%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6383 Points ∼79%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
8119 Points ∼100% +27%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
5368 Points ∼66% -16%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7076 Points ∼87% +11%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
7977 Points ∼98% +25%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4361 Points ∼54% -32%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
4882 Points ∼60% -24%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5184 - 7115, n=17)
6772 Points ∼83% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=406)
1824 Points ∼22% -71%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5685 Points ∼83%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
6067 Points ∼88% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
4620 Points ∼67% -19%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5913 Points ∼86% +4%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6875 Points ∼100% +21%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4317 Points ∼63% -24%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
4275 Points ∼62% -25%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3969 - 6312, n=17)
5759 Points ∼84% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6916, n=407)
1693 Points ∼25% -70%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4072 Points ∼90%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3411 Points ∼76% -16%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
3077 Points ∼68% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3788 Points ∼84% -7%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4517 Points ∼100% +11%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4164 Points ∼92% +2%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
2781 Points ∼62% -32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2345 - 4703, n=16)
3824 Points ∼85% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5133, n=435)
1910 Points ∼42% -53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9217 Points ∼52%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
17853 Points ∼100% +94%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
4886 Points ∼27% -47%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10291 Points ∼58% +12%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
11433 Points ∼64% +24%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
5767 Points ∼32% -37%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
6404 Points ∼36% -31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (6358 - 10420, n=16)
9490 Points ∼53% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=435)
2432 Points ∼14% -74%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7196 Points ∼78%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
9199 Points ∼100% +28%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
4321 Points ∼47% -40%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7449 Points ∼81% +4%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8531 Points ∼93% +19%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
5313 Points ∼58% -26%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
4966 Points ∼54% -31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5268 - 8141, n=16)
7096 Points ∼77% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=435)
2040 Points ∼22% -72%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4199 Points ∼93%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
2429 Points ∼54% -42%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
3005 Points ∼67% -28%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3758 Points ∼84% -11%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4492 Points ∼100% +7%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
3849 Points ∼86% -8%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3203 Points ∼71% -24%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2705 - 4429, n=17)
3918 Points ∼87% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4909, n=486)
1907 Points ∼42% -55%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6214 Points ∼87%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
5726 Points ∼80% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
5206 Points ∼73% -16%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6355 Points ∼89% +2%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
7150 Points ∼100% +15%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4400 Points ∼62% -29%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
5188 Points ∼73% -17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5663 - 6362, n=17)
6242 Points ∼87% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=486)
1510 Points ∼21% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5615 Points ∼89%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
4400 Points ∼70% -22%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
4477 Points ∼71% -20%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5509 Points ∼87% -2%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6319 Points ∼100% +13%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4264 Points ∼67% -24%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
4560 Points ∼72% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (4556 - 5747, n=17)
5498 Points ∼87% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=487)
1453 Points ∼23% -74%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4540 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
2906 Points ∼64% -36%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3614 Points ∼80% -20%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4377 Points ∼96% -4%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
3828 Points ∼84% -16%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
2533 Points ∼56% -44%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3001 - 4540, n=16)
3864 Points ∼85% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4900, n=527)
1770 Points ∼39% -61%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8765 Points ∼81%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
4507 Points ∼42% -49%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9963 Points ∼92% +14%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10781 Points ∼100% +23%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
5431 Points ∼50% -38%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
7075 Points ∼66% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (6122 - 10008, n=16)
9255 Points ∼86% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=526)
1982 Points ∼18% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7263 Points ∼89%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
4015 Points ∼49% -45%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7166 Points ∼88% -1%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8136 Points ∼100% +12%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4969 Points ∼61% -32%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
5059 Points ∼62% -30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5251 - 7820, n=16)
7039 Points ∼87% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8338, n=529)
1708 Points ∼21% -76%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
37641 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
33864 Points ∼90% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
32155 Points ∼85% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
25339 Points ∼67% -33%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
33697 Points ∼90% -10%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
31483 Points ∼84% -16%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
32914 Points ∼87% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (20636 - 45072, n=16)
31794 Points ∼84% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=687)
14357 Points ∼38% -62%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
102168 Points ∼49%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
209204 Points ∼100% +105%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
72022 Points ∼34% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
106534 Points ∼51% +4%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
117304 Points ∼56% +15%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
63469 Points ∼30% -38%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
84256 Points ∼40% -18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (97354 - 110432, n=15)
105649 Points ∼51% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=685)
22559 Points ∼11% -78%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
73984 Points ∼76%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
97276 Points ∼100% +31%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
56465 Points ∼58% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
62225 Points ∼64% -16%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
75613 Points ∼78% +2%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
51779 Points ∼53% -30%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
62568 Points ∼64% -15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (55771 - 83518, n=15)
68785 Points ∼71% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=685)
18200 Points ∼19% -75%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
139 fps ∼43%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
322 fps ∼100% +132%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
141 fps ∼44% +1%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
167 fps ∼52% +20%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
185 fps ∼57% +33%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
138 fps ∼43% -1%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
127 fps ∼39% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (85 - 167, n=18)
153 fps ∼48% +10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=705)
38.5 fps ∼12% -72%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
88 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼68% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
60 fps ∼68% -32%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼68% -32%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
59 fps ∼67% -33%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
60 fps ∼68% -32%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
61 fps ∼69% -31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (59 - 91, n=18)
63.8 fps ∼73% -27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=714)
28.3 fps ∼32% -68%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
75 fps ∼43%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
175 fps ∼100% +133%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
85 fps ∼49% +13%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
100 fps ∼57% +33%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
112 fps ∼64% +49%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
91 fps ∼52% +21%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
55 fps ∼31% -27%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (50 - 102, n=18)
92.5 fps ∼53% +23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=610)
22.3 fps ∼13% -70%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
67 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼90% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
59 fps ∼88% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼90% -10%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
59 fps ∼88% -12%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
59 fps ∼88% -12%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
54 fps ∼81% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (51 - 85, n=18)
60.3 fps ∼90% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=619)
19.6 fps ∼29% -71%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
57 fps ∼49%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
117 fps ∼100% +105%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
53 fps ∼45% -7%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
69 fps ∼59% +21%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
79 fps ∼68% +39%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
56 fps ∼48% -2%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
46 fps ∼39% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (35 - 71, n=18)
62.1 fps ∼53% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=475)
18.2 fps ∼16% -68%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
51 fps ∼85%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +18%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
53 fps ∼88% +4%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
58 fps ∼97% +14%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
58 fps ∼97% +14%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
47 fps ∼78% -8%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
41 fps ∼68% -20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (36 - 58, n=18)
48.3 fps ∼81% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=477)
17 fps ∼28% -67%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
24 fps ∼40%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +150%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
28 fps ∼47% +17%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
24 fps ∼40% 0%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
27 fps ∼45% +13%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
20 fps ∼33% -17%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
23 fps ∼38% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (14 - 26, n=17)
21.7 fps ∼36% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=198)
10.2 fps ∼17% -57%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
13 fps ∼39%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
33 fps ∼100% +154%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
16 fps ∼48% +23%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
16 fps ∼48% +23%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
18 fps ∼55% +38%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
14 fps ∼42% +8%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
11 fps ∼33% -15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8.5 - 24, n=18)
16.5 fps ∼50% +27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 33, n=197)
7.08 fps ∼21% -46%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
33 fps ∼55%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +82%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
16 fps ∼27% -52%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
37 fps ∼62% +12%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
41 fps ∼68% +24%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
32 fps ∼53% -3%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
27 fps ∼45% -18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (22 - 38, n=17)
33.8 fps ∼56% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=202)
15 fps ∼25% -55%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
32 fps ∼37%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
87 fps ∼100% +172%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
41 fps ∼47% +28%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
41 fps ∼47% +28%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
47 fps ∼54% +47%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
36 fps ∼41% +13%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
29 fps ∼33% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (22 - 43, n=18)
40.3 fps ∼46% +26%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 87, n=202)
16.8 fps ∼19% -47%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
34 fps ∼47%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
73 fps ∼100% +115%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
43 fps ∼59% +26%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
42 fps ∼58% +24%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
47 fps ∼64% +38%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
33 fps ∼45% -3%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
28 fps ∼38% -18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (22 - 42, n=18)
39.4 fps ∼54% +16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=400)
12.4 fps ∼17% -64%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
30 fps ∼50%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +100%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
40 fps ∼67% +33%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
38 fps ∼63% +27%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
41 fps ∼68% +37%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
27 fps ∼45% -10%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
26 fps ∼43% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (21 - 41, n=18)
32.3 fps ∼54% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=404)
11.1 fps ∼19% -63%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
376698 Points ∼92%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (376698 - 438559, n=3)
411345 Points ∼100% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (84645 - 501784, n=17)
258152 Points ∼63% -31%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
341863 Points ∼75%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
456891 Points ∼100% +34%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
329444 Points ∼72% -4%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
374820 Points ∼82% +10%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
395265 Points ∼87% +16%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
316199 Points ∼69% -8%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
280162 Points ∼61% -18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (217967 - 398720, n=16)
354450 Points ∼78% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (17073 - 462516, n=296)
143005 Points ∼31% -58%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1601 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
1439 Points ∼90% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1378 Points ∼86% -14%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
1485 Points ∼93% -7%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
1409 Points ∼88% -12%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
1435 Points ∼90% -10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (1076 - 1601, n=17)
1344 Points ∼84% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=643)
765 Points ∼48% -52%
Graphics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9307 Points ∼88%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
8484 Points ∼80% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9270 Points ∼87% 0%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10611 Points ∼100% +14%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
7758 Points ∼73% -17%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
7965 Points ∼75% -14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8125 - 9510, n=17)
9197 Points ∼87% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=643)
2116 Points ∼20% -77%
Memory (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6458 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
4474 Points ∼69% -31%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4031 Points ∼62% -38%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4869 Points ∼75% -25%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
5210 Points ∼81% -19%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
4650 Points ∼72% -28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2661 - 7500, n=17)
5010 Points ∼78% -22%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=643)
1558 Points ∼24% -76%
System (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8058 Points ∼90%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
7831 Points ∼87% -3%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8441 Points ∼94% +5%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8988 Points ∼100% +12%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
8572 Points ∼95% +6%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
7826 Points ∼87% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5993 - 9143, n=17)
8548 Points ∼95% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=643)
3039 Points ∼34% -62%
Overall (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5277 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S10e
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 6144
4548 Points ∼86% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4595 Points ∼87% -13%
OnePlus 7T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5124 Points ∼97% -3%
Huawei P30 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4701 Points ∼89% -11%
Google Pixel 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
4516 Points ∼86% -14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3847 - 5397, n=17)
4768 Points ∼90% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=643)
1526 Points ∼29% -71%

The browser benchmarks were performed with the preloaded version of Chrome, v78. The Pixel 4 performed very well and felt very snappy, however it was unable to keep up with the iPhone.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
132.886 Points ∼100% +134%
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76)
65.295 Points ∼49% +15%
Huawei P30 Pro (Chrome 73)
60.469 Points ∼46% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (45.5 - 67, n=15)
58.4 Points ∼44% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73)
57.207 Points ∼43% +1%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
56.678 Points ∼43%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 133, n=115)
36.4 Points ∼27% -36%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
293.36 Points ∼100% +173%
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76)
120.83 Points ∼41% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
110.54 Points ∼38% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90.8 - 120, n=15)
110 Points ∼37% +2%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
107.51 Points ∼37%
Google Pixel 3 (Chrome 70)
86.331 Points ∼29% -20%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=540)
42.5 Points ∼14% -60%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
157 runs/min ∼100% +154%
OnePlus 7T (Chome 76)
69.1 runs/min ∼44% +12%
Huawei P30 Pro (Chrome 73)
67.8 runs/min ∼43% +10%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
65.7 runs/min ∼42% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (42.5 - 67.9, n=14)
62 runs/min ∼39% 0%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
61.8 runs/min ∼39%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 157, n=103)
40.2 runs/min ∼26% -35%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
184 Points ∼100% +96%
Huawei P30 Pro (Chrome 73)
122 Points ∼66% +30%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
108 Points ∼59% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90 - 129, n=18)
106 Points ∼58% +13%
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76)
100 Points ∼54% +6%
Google Pixel 3 (Chrome 70)
99 Points ∼54% +5%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
94 Points ∼51%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=173)
67.4 Points ∼37% -28%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
48819 Points ∼100% +116%
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76)
25353 Points ∼52% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
24534 Points ∼50% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17011 - 25640, n=18)
23212 Points ∼48% +3%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
22572 Points ∼46%
Huawei P30 Pro (Chrome 73)
22447 Points ∼46% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S10e (Chrome 73)
18697 Points ∼38% -17%
Google Pixel 3 (Chrome 70)
16454 Points ∼34% -27%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=701)
6908 Points ∼14% -69%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (571 - 59466, n=726)
10451 ms * ∼100% -404%
Google Pixel 3 (Chrome 70)
2304.5 ms * ∼22% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S10e (Chrome 73)
2239.5 ms * ∼21% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1852 - 2611, n=17)
2133 ms * ∼20% -3%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
2072.2 ms * ∼20%
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76)
2021.4 ms * ∼19% +2%
Huawei P30 Pro (Chrome 73)
2009.1 ms * ∼19% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
1873.2 ms * ∼18% +10%
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
572.8 ms * ∼5% +72%

* ... smaller is better

The Pixel 4 comes with either 64 GB or 128 GB of UFS 2.1 storage. Considering that the hitherto free extra cloud storage that used to come with every Google smartphone purchase is no longer available, as well as the fact that the Pixel 4 lacks a microSD card slot, we consider the 64 GB SKU to be inadequate at its current price.

Performance was decent, and we did not encounter any issues during our tests.

Google Pixel 4Samsung Galaxy S10eXiaomi Mi 9OnePlus 7THuawei P30 ProGoogle Pixel 3Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-18%
24%
16%
21%
1%
-16%
-65%
Random Write 4KB
146.64
24.1
-84%
165.32
13%
29.9
-80%
159.22
9%
133.76
-9%
60.1 (8.77 - 165, n=38)
-59%
23.1 (0.14 - 259, n=762)
-84%
Random Read 4KB
122.38
136.9
12%
149.36
22%
170.1
39%
174.36
42%
149.82
22%
134 (78.2 - 173, n=38)
9%
48.5 (1.59 - 226, n=762)
-60%
Sequential Write 256KB
247.73
194.1
-22%
388.27
57%
218.4
-12%
250.82
1%
181.81
-27%
199 (133 - 388, n=38)
-20%
99.5 (2.99 - 590, n=762)
-60%
Sequential Read 256KB
655.4
792.2
21%
666.06
2%
1406
115%
849.48
30%
766.41
17%
711 (484 - 895, n=38)
8%
280 (12.1 - 1781, n=762)
-57%

Gaming

Gaming Performance was determined using GameBench. We expected a decent performance based on the powerful SoC, and we were not disappointed. Unfortunately, the Pixel 4 did not really benefit from its 90 Hz panel as even games such as Arena of Valor peaked at just 63 FPS. Less-demanding games, such as PUBG Mobile, performed better. However, we noticed some glitches here and there.

Overall, performance was more than adequate for all current games. Sensors and touchscreen were quick to react and the speakers were decent. The display turned out to be too small for games that required a lot of screen real estate for a better overview.

PUBG Mobile (HD)
010203040506070Tooltip
; 0.15.0: Ø59.7 (40-61)
Arena of Valor (Ultra)
010203040506070Tooltip
; 1.31.1.5: Ø61.5 (35-63)

Emissions

Temperature

T-Rex
Manhattan

Surface temperatures were inconspicuous, and we found a single hotspot of 34.2 °C (94.5 F).

Using GFXBench’s battery test we found some minor issues with the Pixel 4’s SoC cooling. In the Manhattan test, the smartphone’s performance decreased by 28%.

Max. Load
 33.5 °C
92 F
34.2 °C
94 F
33.1 °C
92 F
 
 34.6 °C
94 F
34.5 °C
94 F
33.2 °C
92 F
 
 34.1 °C
93 F
35.5 °C
96 F
33.3 °C
92 F
 
Maximum: 35.5 °C = 96 F
Average: 34 °C = 93 F
31.4 °C
89 F
32 °C
90 F
32.3 °C
90 F
31.5 °C
89 F
31.9 °C
89 F
33.6 °C
92 F
31 °C
88 F
34.5 °C
94 F
33.7 °C
93 F
Maximum: 34.5 °C = 94 F
Average: 32.4 °C = 90 F
Power Supply (max.)  28.4 °C = 83 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 33.1 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.5 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 35.5 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 34.5 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.

Speakers

Pink noise

Both of the Pixel’s speakers were decent, unfortunately neither of them is forward-facing. On medium volume audio quality was great and well-balanced but rapidly distorted very noticeably on maximum volume.

Unfortunately, a 3.5-mm headset dongle is no longer included with the phone. Bluetooth codec support includes aptX, aptX HD, and LDAC.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2034.935.12529.128.93125.425.64029.426.25039.435.56327.324.68021.624.41002426.812520.736.816019.956.32001858.825016.855.831516.259.640015.961.350013.56463013.965.580012.971.310001473.4125014.774160014.175.8200014.277.1250014.575.3315015.472.9400014.975.2500014.871.963001572.1800015.373.31000015.368.81250015.661.21600015.562.3SPL2785.6N0.964.3median 15.3median 68.8Delta1.37.935.729.227.628.130.624.324.828.332.735.224.624.923.224.119.23317.943.216.55415.250.217.352.217.254.316.856.614.658.71461.314.760.114.767.814.868.71571.314.971.81573.614.674.31475.515.172.114.671.514.870.115.164.315.155.515.544.72783.40.953.8median 15median 61.30.49.1hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseGoogle Pixel 4Apple iPhone 11
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Google Pixel 4 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 21% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 73% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple iPhone 11 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 13.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 17% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 73% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 45% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Life

Power Consumption

Generally speaking, power consumption was pretty decent and low. However, power consumption during standby was fairly high and we would have expected much lower numbers at minimum brightness as well.

The Pixel 4 supports wired fast charging as well as wireless charging.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.02 / 0.57 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.01 / 1.63 / 1.69 Watt
Load midlight 4.67 / 8.78 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Google Pixel 4
2800 mAh
Apple iPhone 11
3110 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S10e
3100 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9
3300 mAh
OnePlus 7T
3800 mAh
Huawei P30 Pro
4200 mAh
Google Pixel 3
2915 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-14%
10%
19%
-9%
-10%
-10%
-0%
6%
Idle Minimum *
1.01
0.56
45%
0.6
41%
0.67
34%
0.9
11%
0.68
33%
1.21
-20%
0.967 (0.6 - 1.96, n=17)
4%
0.882 (0.2 - 3.4, n=789)
13%
Idle Average *
1.63
2.99
-83%
1.2
26%
1.26
23%
1.4
14%
2.6
-60%
2.01
-23%
1.519 (0.85 - 2.8, n=17)
7%
1.739 (0.6 - 6.2, n=788)
-7%
Idle Maximum *
1.69
3.02
-79%
1.5
11%
1.29
24%
2.9
-72%
2.77
-64%
2.05
-21%
1.841 (1 - 2.9, n=17)
-9%
2.03 (0.74 - 6.6, n=789)
-20%
Load Average *
4.67
4.17
11%
5.2
-11%
3.71
21%
4.7
-1%
3.74
20%
4.06
13%
4.6 (3.64 - 5.8, n=17)
1%
4.07 (0.8 - 10.8, n=783)
13%
Load Maximum *
8.78
5.44
38%
10.2
-16%
9.3
-6%
8.3
5%
6.82
22%
8.79
-0%
9.1 (7.49 - 11.9, n=17)
-4%
5.93 (1.2 - 14.2, n=783)
32%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Compared to its predecessor, Google decided to decrease battery capacity. Considering the Pixel 3’s already poor battery life this decision is highly questionable, to say the least. As expected, the Pixel 4 scored dead last within our test group in our battery test.

It performed particularly poor in our real-world Wi-Fi test and did not shine in any of the other tests either. Power users should thus consider carrying around a power bank or giving it a quick top-up whenever possible.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
16h 47min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Chrome 78)
7h 40min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
10h 17min
Load (maximum brightness)
3h 05min
Google Pixel 4
2800 mAh
Apple iPhone 11
3110 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S10e
3100 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9
3300 mAh
OnePlus 7T
3800 mAh
Huawei P30 Pro
4200 mAh
Google Pixel 3
2915 mAh
Battery Runtime
98%
7%
38%
76%
89%
11%
Reader / Idle
1007
2765
175%
1185
18%
1650
64%
2003
99%
1966
95%
1372
36%
H.264
617
1147
86%
795
29%
1008
63%
967
57%
1193
93%
727
18%
WiFi v1.3
460
866
88%
416
-10%
546
19%
896
95%
838
82%
471
2%
Load
185
267
44%
164
-11%
194
5%
283
53%
344
86%
159
-14%

Pros

+ well built
+ balanced speakers
+ updates available for a long time
+ great dual camera setup
+ color-accurate 90 Hz display...

Cons

- ...lacking display brightness boost
- no Wi-Fi 6
- meager storage capacity without expandability options
- poor battery life
- poor screen-to-body ratio

Verdict

In review: Google Pixel 4. Test unit provided by Google Germany
In review: Google Pixel 4. Test unit provided by Google Germany

We find it hard to include the Google Pixel 4 among the ranks of other high-end smartphones. It is much more akin to more affordable flagships, such as the OnePlus 7T or the ZenFone 6. Google continues to focus on software instead of hardware innovations. Touchless gestures are more intuitive than on the LG G8s; however, they lack functionality and deepness and feel unfinished overall.

Once again, the camera is one of the Pixel’s main draws, and it now features an additional telephoto lens. Too bad it lacks an ultra-wide-angle lens. The display-to-body ratio is fairly poor but offset by the fairly decent 90 Hz panel. Unfortunately, the display is not as bright as some of its competitors and is thus not as capable of displaying HDR contents properly.

Google’s Pixel 4 offers a great camera and the latest software. Unfortunately, its small battery is a major drawback.

Storage capacity is another faux pas. 64 GB without the possibility of memory expansion is simply not enough in this price range, a handicap that cannot even be compensated by a full three years of update availability. On the plus side we find fast charging and an IP68-certified case that are then again quickly marginalized by the tiny battery with its poor battery life.

If you love pure vanilla Android and want to be at the forefront of the feature train then a Pixel smartphone is a must for you. However, you may want to consider a Pixel 3a instead. Yes, it is not as technologically advanced as the Pixel 4, but it offers a much better battery life in return.

Google Pixel 4 - 11/25/2019 v7
Daniel Schmidt

Chassis
87%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
97%
Connectivity
52 / 70 → 74%