Notebookcheck Logo

Google Pixel 7 review - Compact Google smartphone without big trade-offs

Powerful droid The smaller of the Google Pixel 7 series models possesses not only a more compact form factor than the Pro model but also has to make do with a few compromises on the technical front. What they are and whether they are noticeable in everyday use, find out in our review.

With the Pixel 7, Google is not budging from last year's smartphone concept and with it they are offering a direct successor to the Pixel 6. Once again, the smartphone is somewhat more compact than the more expensive Pro model. That is reflected in the smaller display which also operates at a lower refresh rate. Apart from that, the Pixel 7 also has less RAM, has no optical zoom for its camera and has a smaller battery. 

Regarding internal storage, Google has made positive strides. Although expansion via microSD card is still not possible, a 256 GB model can now also be purchased, costing an additional 100 euros ($103). The 128 GB base model can be had for 649 euros ($665).

Google Pixel 7 (Pixel 7 Series)
Processor
Google Tensor G2 8 x 1.8 - 2.9 GHz, Exynos X1 / Cortex-A76 / A55
Graphics adapter
Memory
8 GB 
, LPDDR5
Display
6.30 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 418 PPI, capacitive, 10 point multi-touch, OLED, Corning Gorilla Glass Victus, HLG, HDR10, HDR10+, glossy: yes, HDR, 90 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 114 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.1 Gen2, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Proximity, Accelerometer, Magnetometer, Gyroscope, Pressure, OTG
Networking
Wi-Fi 6E (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.2, 2G (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz), 3G (Band: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 19), LTE (Band: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 46, 48, 66, 71), 5G-Sub6 (Band 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 20, 25, 28, 30, 38, 40, 41, 48, 66, 71, 75, 76, 77, 78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.7 x 155.6 x 73.2 ( = 0.34 x 6.13 x 2.88 in)
Battery
4355 mAh Lithium-Ion, USB-PD 3.0, 12W/20W wireless charging
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 13
Camera
Primary Camera: 50 MPix (Samsung GN1, 1/1.31", 1.2 µm, 82°, f/1.85, OIS, aspect ratio: 4:3, 16:9) + 12 MP (Ultra Wide, 1.25 µm, 114°, f/2.2); UHD video (up to 60 FPS); Camera2-API-Level: Full
Secondary Camera: 10.8 MPix (1.22 µm, 92.8°, f/2.2, Fixfocus)
Additional features
Speakers: Dual, Keyboard: Onscreen, OTG adapter, USB-C cable, 24 Months Warranty, GNSS: GPS (L1, L5), Glonass (L1), Galileo (E1, E5a), BeiDou (B1, B2a), QZSS, NavIC (L5); Body-SAR: 1.40 W/kg, Head-SAR: 0.99 W/kg; DRM Widevine L1; IP68, fanless, waterproof
Weight
197 g ( = 6.95 oz / 0.43 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
649 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible competitors compared

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
88.5 %
11/2022
Google Pixel 7
Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7
197 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.30"2400x1080
89.2 %
10/2022
Apple iPhone 14
A15, A15 GPU 5-Core
172 g128 GB NVMe6.10"2532x1170
87.4 %
10/2022
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
SD 888+ 5G, Adreno 660
172 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.55"2400x1080
87.4 %
11/2021
Google Pixel 6
Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20
207 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.40"2400x1080
09/2022
Sony Xperia 5 IV
SD 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730
172 g6.10"2520x1080
89.3 %
05/2022
Samsung Galaxy S22
Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920
167 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.10"2340x1080

Case - A smart mix of aluminum and glass for the Pixel 7

Google Pixel 7 color variants
Google Pixel 7 color variants

The Google Pixel 7 possesses a similar design to its predecessor, however, the camera bump is now made from a one-piece, matte aluminum frame which certainly enhances its looks. The smartphone is available in Obsidian (black), Snow (white) and Lemongrass color variants.

The smartphone doesn't wobble on flat surfaces due to the camera's wide cut-out but is tilted enough to go far a walk, even on slight inclines. This is mainly due to the smooth surface of the Corning Gorilla Glass Victus which adorns both the front and back of the device.

The Pixel 7 has good build quality with the smartphone making a high-quality impression as well as feeling good in the hand. Overall the device is well finished and is free of small gaps between the frame, front and rear sides. However, on our test device the rear side is not always even. Especially, where the glass transitions to aluminum. By comparison, the SIM slot sits flush to the frame. 

The Pixel 7 battery is non-removable and cannot be replaced by the user. The smartphone has an IP68 rating for water and dust resistance.

Size comparison

158.6 mm / 6.24 inch 74.8 mm / 2.94 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 207 g0.4564 lbs158.48 mm / 6.24 inch 71.99 mm / 2.83 inch 7.45 mm / 0.2933 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs155.6 mm / 6.13 inch 73.2 mm / 2.88 inch 8.7 mm / 0.3425 inch 197 g0.4343 lbs156 mm / 6.14 inch 68 mm / 2.68 inch 8.2 mm / 0.3228 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs146.7 mm / 5.78 inch 71.5 mm / 2.81 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs146 mm / 5.75 inch 70.6 mm / 2.78 inch 7.6 mm / 0.2992 inch 167 g0.3682 lbs

Equipment - Pixel 7 has to do without UWB

As with its predecessor, the Google Pixel 7 lacks a headphone jack, an IR blaster, FM radio as well as memory expansion in the form of a microSD card. The latter is easier to accept now that a model with 256 GB of internal storage is available.

The Google Pixel 7 has a fast USB 3.2 port (2nd gen) which allows high data speeds and supports OTG but not wired video output. Bluetooth 5.2 and NFC are also included with UWB being a feature exclusive to the Pixel 7 Pro

Top view: microphone
Top view: microphone
Left: SIM slot
Left: SIM slot
Right: power button, volume rocker
Right: power button, volume rocker
Bottom view: speakers, USB, microphone
Bottom view: speakers, USB, microphone

Software - Android smartphone with a long update cycle

The Pixel 7 ships with Android 13 and is likely to receive three version upgrades, including Android 16. Security patches will continue to be distributed for at least another two years after that. Google has provided further information on a corresponding page which you can find here

Bloatware is nowhere to be seen on the Pixel 7 as only the company's own apps are preinstalled. Exclusive Pixel features such as Live Translation and Now Playing are also available. Plus, in December, the Pixel 7 will also receive free Google VPN. 

Communication and GNSS - Sub 6GHz 5G and Wi-Fi 6E for the Pixel 7

The Google Pixel 7 supports all common mobile network standards, including Sub 6GHz 5G. Reception characteristics in urban areas are very good for both Deutsche Telekom and Vodafone. 

Concerning Wi-Fi connectivity, the same problem exists as with the Pixel 7 Pro as the smartphone doesn't recognize our Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 reference router's 6GHz band. Surely this will be fixed via an update. As soon as this is the case, we will re-examine the corresponding measurement at a later date. However, we were able to achieve very high and stable transfer rates with WiFi 6 on the 5GHz frequency. 

Networking
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
904 (min: 816) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
936 (min: 863) MBit/s ∼100%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
iperf3 receive AXE11000
746 (min: 642) MBit/s ∼83%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
894 (min: 834) MBit/s ∼96%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
775 (min: 699) MBit/s ∼86%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
844 (min: 744) MBit/s ∼90%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1670 (min: 610) MBit/s ∼97%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
800 (min: 597) MBit/s ∼51%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 transmit AX12
802 (min: 421) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AX12
895 (min: 870) MBit/s ∼100%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
iperf3 receive AXE11000
582 (min: 509) MBit/s ∼64%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
918 (min: 876) MBit/s ∼98%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1728 (min: 880) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1563 (min: 1447) MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
763 (min: 386) MBit/s ∼84%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
823 (min: 418) MBit/s ∼88%
Average of class Smartphone
 
iperf3 receive AXE11000
604 (min: 44.3) MBit/s ∼67%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
651 (min: 57.7) MBit/s ∼70%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1407 (min: 853) MBit/s ∼81%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1284 (min: 598) MBit/s ∼82%
iperf3 transmit AX12
488 (min: 5.59) MBit/s ∼61%
iperf3 receive AX12
461 (min: 15.5) MBit/s ∼52%
050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900950Tooltip
Google Pixel 7 Google Tensor G2, ARM Mali-G710 MP7; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø903 (816-917)
Samsung Galaxy S22 Samsung Exynos 2200, Samsung Xclipse 920; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø750 (386-780)
Google Pixel 7 Google Tensor G2, ARM Mali-G710 MP7; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø936 (863-963)
Samsung Galaxy S22 Samsung Exynos 2200, Samsung Xclipse 920; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø809 (418-852)
GPS test: Outdoors
Outdoors
GPS test: Indoors
Indoors
GPS test: Supported GNSS networks
GNSS

The Google Pixel 7 uses dual-band GNSS to determine its position and supports all common networks. Outdoors, the satellite fix works very quickly and precisely. Indoors, it takes a little longer but also works accurately. 

We compared the smartphone to the Garmin Venu 2 on a short bike tour. The determined route was nearly identical for both devices. Only a look at the detailed route log reveals the differences. While circling a lake, the Pixel recorded the covered route more accurately but the smartwatch was more precise when it came to the turning loop.

GNSS test trip: Circling a lake
GNSS test trip: Circling a lake
GNSS test trip: Turning loop
GNSS test trip: Turning loop
GNSS test trip: Summary
GNSS test trip: Summary

Telephone functions and call quality

The Google Pixel 7 is a dual-SIM smartphone which offers space for a physical nano-SIM as well as an eSIM. In March 2023, dual-eSIM support will be provided in the form of an update. Functions such as VoLTE and Wi-Fi calling are supported but not system-side SIP account control.

During testing, we were very pleased with the call quality and it is comparable to the level found on the Pixel 7 Pro. When held to the ear, the Pixel smartphone reproduces the user's voice very naturally. Small background noises are inaudible and filtered out without a loss in quality. The Pixel 7 even copes with busy environments in a satisfactory manner, although, very ocassionally, background noises as well as the user's voice can sound a lttle hollow. This effect is amplified in noisy environments.

Cameras - Attractive photos with Google's dual camera

Selfie with the Pixel 7 (photo mode)
Selfie with the Pixel 7 (photo mode)

The front camera is identical to the one found on the Pixel 7 Pro, delivering 10.8 MP with no autofocus. On the highest setting, videos can be recorded in UHD at up to 60fps. However, using the HDR function limits the framerate to 30fps. A large section can be captured using the wide-angle mode. In general, we are very pleased with daytime shots and in lowlight situations Night Sight mode can be activated. 

In addition to the 50 MP main camera, Google has given the setup an additional ultra wide-angle 12 MP one on the rear of the device which is as good as identical to those found on the Pro models. This additional camera's coverage angle appears somewhat narrower at 114°. When it comes to recording quality, the difference is almost imperceptible and the Pixel 7's ultra wide angle also gets a little soft towards the edges. 

The main camera enables particularly good shots, especially at close range. Subjects which are somewhat further away show a very high amount of background noise and there is a small reduction in the depth of field. Image magnifications are only done digitally. The smartphone reaches its limits at 8X zoom and the quality ranges from average to mixed. However, two to three-fold magnifictions still look quite good. 

At best, videos are recorded in UHD at up to 60fps and can be protected from camera shake by various stabilization options. This often comes with limitations. Used for capturing fast moving images, the active mode is limited to Full HD. Although the cinema effect is available in 4K, it runs at a lower framerate.   

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.

HauptkameraHauptkameraUltraweitwinkel5-facher ZoomLow-Light

We took a closer look at the Pixel 7's dual camera under controlled lighting conditions. The colors are captured very naturally, with only the blue tones - especially cyan - deviating slightly.

The test chart was captured with a warm white balance but, in spite of this, the details remained intact right up to the edges. 

ColorChecker
5.6 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
3.6 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
9.6 ∆E
3.3 ∆E
1.7 ∆E
3.8 ∆E
3 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
4 ∆E
5 ∆E
2.3 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
3.8 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
2.3 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel 7: 4.76 ∆E min: 1.66 - max: 10.41 ∆E
ColorChecker
27.6 ∆E
44.6 ∆E
27.5 ∆E
34.7 ∆E
32.4 ∆E
52 ∆E
38.9 ∆E
19.9 ∆E
28.8 ∆E
18.6 ∆E
47.2 ∆E
49.8 ∆E
14.8 ∆E
37.1 ∆E
22.5 ∆E
43.6 ∆E
28.2 ∆E
34.9 ∆E
43.3 ∆E
46.1 ∆E
44.9 ∆E
36.3 ∆E
25.4 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel 7: 33.85 ∆E min: 13.46 - max: 52 ∆E

Accessories and guarantee - Pixel 7 once again without a charger

The Google Pixel 7 comes complete wth a USB-C cable and an OTG adapter (Type-C to Type-A). A suitable charger purchased directly from Google will set you back an additional 29 euros. A wireless charging dock, the Pixel Stand, is also available but will set you back 79 euros. Additionally, Google also offers protective phone cases for its smartphone which are available for 22 euros each.

The guarantee in Germany is for 24 months and cannot be extended. 

Input devices & operation - now also with face recognition

The Pixel 7's touchscreen is protected by Corning Gorilla Glass and is wonderfully smooth to the touch. The touch sensitive surface recognizes up to ten simultaneous inputs and is implemented precisely. 

In the area of biometric security, an optical fingerprint scanner is once again built into the display. It is relatively small but appears to be more responsive than its predecessor. Many users' complaints have been listened to regarding the Pixel 6's sensor leading to calls for the implementation of face recognition technology. Google listened and has introduced such a feature via the front camera. This is not as safe as the 3D face recognition found in the Pixel 4, but is convenient. 

The vibration motor delivers solid feeback and feels great in the hand. The full scope of accessibilty features and gestures described in the Pixel 7 Pro review are also available for the Pixel 7.

Display - Google smartphone with a bright 90Hz OLED

Subpixel structure
Subpixel structure

The Google Pixel 7 OLED display measures 6.3 inches (16 cm). With Full HD Plus resolution, the panel used here is very sharp. Unlike the Pro model Google didn't implement an LTPO panel. With the Smooth Display function activated, the system automatically switches between 60 and 90Hz. Alternatively, the smartphone can be operated at a locked 60fps. Common HDR standards (HLG, HDR10, HDR10+) are supported.

The luminosity can described as average, reaching a high of 947 cd/m² with the ambient light sensor activated and a full-surface pure white image displayed. We were able to measure up to 1262 cd/m² with an even distribution of light and dark areas (APL18). When the brightness is set to manual, a maximum of 480 cd/m² is possible.

At minimum brightness the OLED display flickers in quite a pronounced, irregular, periodic manner and fluctuates between 90 and 360Hz. This increases the likelihood of complaints from users who are sensitive to such issues. However, we were unable to detect any temporal dithering. To achieve this, we looked at the display through a microscope using 240fps slow motion video (dark gray, at maximum brightness).

927
cd/m²
942
cd/m²
952
cd/m²
939
cd/m²
936
cd/m²
948
cd/m²
948
cd/m²
979
cd/m²
951
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 979 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 946.9 cd/m² Minimum: 1.9 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 936 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.3 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.2
ΔE Greyscale 1.4 | 0.57-98 Ø5.5
98.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.25
Google Pixel 7
OLED, 2400x1080, 6.30
Apple iPhone 14
OLED, 2532x1170, 6.10
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
pOLED, 2400x1080, 6.55
Google Pixel 6
OLED, 2400x1080, 6.40
Sony Xperia 5 IV
OLED, 2520x1080, 6.10
Samsung Galaxy S22
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.10
Screen
-15%
-5%
-17%
-32%
-20%
Brightness middle
936
835
-11%
954
2%
805
-14%
896
-4%
853
-9%
Brightness
947
841
-11%
961
1%
805
-15%
902
-5%
858
-9%
Brightness Distribution
95
97
2%
98
3%
98
3%
97
2%
96
1%
Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
1.3
1.05
19%
1.5
-15%
1.4
-8%
2
-54%
1.9
-46%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
2.7
2.81
-4%
2.5
7%
3.7
-37%
6.4
-137%
3.2
-19%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
1.4
2.6
-86%
1.8
-29%
1.8
-29%
1.3
7%
1.9
-36%
Gamma
2.25 98%
2.034 108%
2.24 98%
2.29 96%
2.25 98%
2.07 106%
CCT
6664 98%
6616 98%
6254 104%
6507 100%
6618 98%
6460 101%

* ... 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 360 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 360 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 360 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 19590 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

Minimum display brightness
Min.
25 % display brightness
25 %
50 % display brightness
50 %
75 % display brightness
75 %
Maximum manual display brightness
100 %

Measurements with fixed zoom and different brightness settings 

The Google Pixel 7 achieves its most balanced color reproduction when the color profile Natural is selected in the settings. To the human eye, colors are reproduced without noticable deviations. A slight green tint is only discernible at very bright gray scales.   

Grayscale (Profile: natural, target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (Profile: natural, target color space: sRGB)
ColorChecker (Profile: natural, target color space: sRGB)
ColorChecker (Profile: natural, target color space: sRGB)
Color space (Profile: natural, target color space: sRGB)
Color space (Profile: natural, target color space: sRGB)
Saturation Sweeps (Profile: natural, target color space: sRGB)
Saturation Sweeps (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
1.89 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.9765 ms rise
↘ 0.915 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 0.4 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (22.7 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
4.61 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2.266 ms rise
↘ 2.34 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 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 7 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (35.9 ms).

Outoors, the Google Pixel 7's display remains viewable in all kinds of weather conditions. In the sun, the surface is a little reflective and can be slightly annoying when viewed from an extreme angle.

Outdoors
Outdoors
Under cloudy conditions
Under cloudy conditions

The Google Pixel 7's viewing angle stability is very good. There is no loss of brightness even when viewed at an extreme angle. Although, slight shimmering is visible on the OLED's surface. 

Google Pixel 7 viewing angle stability
Google Pixel 7 viewing angle stability

Performance - The Tensor G2 works hard in the Pixel 7

For the Pixel 7, Google relies on the second generation of its in-house chipset, the Tensor G2. This is supported by 8 GB of LPDDR5 RAM. On paper, the marginally high-end SoC is similar to its predecessor and is also manufactured at five nanometers. Performance gains are correspondingly small in the area of CPU performance.

By comparison, AI acceleration fares much better as a performance increase of up to 50 percent can be found here. Although the Tensor G2 is a very fast SoC, it comes last when compared to the competition but still allows for very smooth system navigation.  

Geekbench 5.4
Single-Core
Apple iPhone 14
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
1732 Points ∼100% +65%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
1181 Points ∼68% +12%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1158 Points ∼67% +10%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
1145 Points ∼66% +9%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
1050 Points ∼61%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (1048 - 1050, n=2)
1049 Points ∼61% 0%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
1041 Points ∼60% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (58 - 1885, n=265, last 2 years)
737 Points ∼43% -30%
Multi-Core
Apple iPhone 14
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
4733 Points ∼100% +45%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
3544 Points ∼75% +9%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
3474 Points ∼73% +6%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
3425 Points ∼72% +5%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
3265 Points ∼69%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (3222 - 3265, n=2)
3244 Points ∼69% -1%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
2805 Points ∼59% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (248 - 5538, n=265, last 2 years)
2374 Points ∼50% -27%
Antutu v9 - Total Score
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
910383 Points ∼100% +18%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
829929 Points ∼91% +7%
Apple iPhone 14
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
829792 Points ∼91% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
813746 Points ∼89% +5%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (773655 - 773857, n=2)
773756 Points ∼85% 0%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
773655 Points ∼85%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
702981 Points ∼77% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (111952 - 1119358, n=160, last 2 years)
584886 Points ∼64% -24%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
14068 Points ∼100% +34%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
12525 Points ∼89% +19%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
12136 Points ∼86% +15%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (10530 - 11397, n=2)
10964 Points ∼78% +4%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
10530 Points ∼75%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
10409 Points ∼74% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4436 - 19200, n=213, last 2 years)
10352 Points ∼74% -2%
CrossMark - Overall
Apple iPhone 14
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
1180 Points ∼100% +31%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
993 Points ∼84% +11%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
957 Points ∼81% +7%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
898 Points ∼76%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (886 - 898, n=2)
892 Points ∼76% -1%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
849 Points ∼72% -5%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
828 Points ∼70% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (226 - 1332, n=97, last 2 years)
775 Points ∼66% -14%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
7345 Points ∼100% +18%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
6991 Points ∼95% +12%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
6382 Points ∼87% +2%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
6287 Points ∼86% +1%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
6247 Points ∼85%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (6164 - 6247, n=2)
6206 Points ∼84% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (411 - 8753, n=179, last 2 years)
4625 Points ∼63% -26%
Apple iPhone 14
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
Points ∼0% -100%
System
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
11336 Points ∼100% +18%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
11210 Points ∼99% +17%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
9864 Points ∼87% +3%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
9601 Points ∼85%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (9294 - 9601, n=2)
9448 Points ∼83% -2%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
9085 Points ∼80% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2083 - 19657, n=179, last 2 years)
8168 Points ∼72% -15%
Apple iPhone 14
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
Points ∼0% -100%
Memory
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
6697 Points ∼100% +24%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
6569 Points ∼98% +22%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
6413 Points ∼96% +19%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
6071 Points ∼91% +13%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (5392 - 5456, n=2)
5424 Points ∼81% +1%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
5392 Points ∼81%
Average of class Smartphone
  (670 - 11617, n=179, last 2 years)
5204 Points ∼78% -3%
Apple iPhone 14
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
Points ∼0% -100%
Graphics
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
21477 Points ∼100% +34%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
17269 Points ∼80% +8%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (16001 - 16375, n=2)
16188 Points ∼75% +1%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
16001 Points ∼75%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
15303 Points ∼71% -4%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
14811 Points ∼69% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (697 - 26660, n=179, last 2 years)
8925 Points ∼42% -44%
Apple iPhone 14
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
Points ∼0% -100%
Web
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
1924 Points ∼100% +5%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
1851 Points ∼96% +1%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
1838 Points ∼96%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (1739 - 1838, n=2)
1789 Points ∼93% -3%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
1785 Points ∼93% -3%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1728 Points ∼90% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10 - 2392, n=179, last 2 years)
1407 Points ∼73% -23%
Apple iPhone 14
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
Points ∼0% -100%
UL Procyon AI Inference - Overall Score
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
78964 Points ∼100% +86%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (42556 - 42662, n=2)
42609 Points ∼54% 0%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
42556 Points ∼54%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
32339 Points ∼41% -24%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
28581 Points ∼36% -33%
Average of class Smartphone
  (207 - 84787, n=97, last 2 years)
23194 Points ∼29% -45%
AImark - Score v2.x
Average of class Smartphone
  (1043 - 286905, n=156, last 2 years)
51780 Points ∼100% +745%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
6487 Points ∼13% +6%
Google Pixel 7
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 8192
6131 Points ∼12%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (5976 - 6131, n=2)
6054 Points ∼12% -1%
Google Pixel 6
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 8192
5723 Points ∼11% -7%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
1046 Points ∼2% -83%

In benchmarking with the OpenGL ES 3.2 API, the graphics chip - an ARM Mali-G710 MP7 - shows big increases in performance compared to the Mali-G78 MP20. Regarding the Vulkan API, this looks somewhat different. Occasionally, the older GPU even has the edge. In this regard, Google will probably have to improve its drivers.  

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
2776 Points ∼100% +54%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
2047 Points ∼74% +14%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1855 Points ∼67% +3%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1823 Points ∼66% +1%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1800 Points ∼65%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1521 Points ∼55% -15%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
3005 Points ∼100% +63%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
2488 Points ∼83% +35%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2067 Points ∼69% +12%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1946 Points ∼65% +6%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1841 Points ∼61%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1519 Points ∼51% -17%
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
11779 Points ∼100% +77%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
9268 Points ∼79% +39%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7458 Points ∼63% +12%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7064 Points ∼60% +6%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6660 Points ∼57%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5764 Points ∼49% -13%
3DMark / Wild Life Score
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
8313 Points ∼100% +28%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7064 Points ∼85% +8%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6954 Points ∼84% +7%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6513 Points ∼78%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5688 Points ∼68% -13%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
Points ∼0% -100%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
3611 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
Points ∼0%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
Points ∼0%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
20329 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
Points ∼0%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
Points ∼0%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
10020 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
Points ∼0%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
Points ∼0%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5040 Points ∼100% +23%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4086 Points ∼81%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
4009 Points ∼80% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4000 Points ∼79% -2%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3643 Points ∼72% -11%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
Points ∼0% -100%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
17859 Points ∼100% +55%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
11893 Points ∼67% +3%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
11491 Points ∼64%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10930 Points ∼61% -5%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8605 Points ∼48% -25%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
Points ∼0% -100%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
10103 Points ∼100% +23%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8677 Points ∼86% +6%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8268 Points ∼82% +1%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8192 Points ∼81%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6606 Points ∼65% -19%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
Points ∼0% -100%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
Points
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
Points
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
0 Points
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
Points
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
0 Points
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
Points
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
119 fps ∼100% +32%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
90 fps ∼76% 0%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
90 fps ∼76%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
59.9 fps ∼50% -33%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
446.6 fps ∼100% +79%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
302 fps ∼68% +21%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
249 fps ∼56%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
144 fps ∼32% -42%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
127 fps ∼100% +41%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
119 fps ∼94% +32%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
90 fps ∼71%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
79 fps ∼62% -12%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
60 fps ∼47% -33%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
59.9 fps ∼47% -33%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
253 fps ∼100% +92%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
193 fps ∼76% +46%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
182 fps ∼72% +38%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
141 fps ∼56% +7%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
132 fps ∼52%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
90 fps ∼36% -32%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
113 fps ∼100% +28%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
94 fps ∼83% +7%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
88 fps ∼78%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
60 fps ∼53% -32%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
59.9 fps ∼53% -32%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
57 fps ∼50% -35%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
172.4 fps ∼100% +94%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
123 fps ∼71% +38%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
117 fps ∼68% +31%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
95 fps ∼55% +7%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
89 fps ∼52%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps ∼35% -33%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
62 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps ∼97% -3%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
59.9 fps ∼97% -3%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
53 fps ∼85% -15%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
49 fps ∼79% -21%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
36 fps ∼58% -42%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
105.2 fps ∼100% +55%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
68 fps ∼65%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
67 fps ∼64% -1%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
66 fps ∼63% -3%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
62 fps ∼59% -9%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
40 fps ∼38% -41%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
57.6 fps ∼100% +20%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
51 fps ∼89% +6%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
48 fps ∼83%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
41 fps ∼71% -15%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
40 fps ∼69% -17%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
36 fps ∼63% -25%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
38.2 fps ∼100% +16%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
33 fps ∼86%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
29 fps ∼76% -12%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
29 fps ∼76% -12%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
24 fps ∼63% -27%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
23 fps ∼60% -30%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
66 fps ∼100% +2%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
65 fps ∼98%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
60 fps ∼91% -8%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
57 fps ∼86% -12%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
57 fps ∼86% -12%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
47 fps ∼71% -28%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
111.1 fps ∼100% +56%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
74 fps ∼67% +4%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
71 fps ∼64%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
67 fps ∼60% -6%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
65 fps ∼59% -8%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
49 fps ∼44% -31%

Surfing the web is a smooth experience on the Google Pixel 7. Compared to the competition, the smartphone finds itself in the middle of the pack with results only being quite low in WebXPRT tests. In this case, this is due to Chrome as Microsoft's Edge achieves more points in testing. 

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 14 (Safari 16)
189.85 Points ∼100% +97%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion (Chrome 105)
100.393 Points ∼53% +4%
Average Google Tensor G2 (96.3 - 98.2, n=2)
97.2 Points ∼51% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S22 (Chrome 100.0.4896.79)
96.4 Points ∼51% 0%
Google Pixel 7 (Chrome 106)
96.314 Points ∼51%
Google Pixel 6 (Chrome 96)
90.1 Points ∼47% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (14.8 - 282, n=176, last 2 years)
73.4 Points ∼39% -24%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone 14 (Safari 16)
341 runs/min ∼100% +241%
Samsung Galaxy S22 (Chrome 100.0.4896.79)
111 runs/min ∼33% +11%
Google Pixel 6 (Chrome 96)
104 runs/min ∼30% +4%
Average Google Tensor G2 (100 - 104, n=2)
102 runs/min ∼30% +2%
Google Pixel 7 (Chrome 106)
100 runs/min ∼29%
Sony Xperia 5 IV (Chrome 107)
90.5 runs/min ∼27% -9%
Average of class Smartphone (12.5 - 375, n=163, last 2 years)
70.3 runs/min ∼21% -30%
WebXPRT 4 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone 14 (Safari 16)
188 Points ∼100% +102%
Sony Xperia 5 IV (Chrome 107)
114 Points ∼61% +23%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion (Chrome 105)
104 Points ∼55% +12%
Google Pixel 7 (Chrome 106)
93 Points ∼49%
Average Google Tensor G2 (90 - 93, n=2)
91.5 Points ∼49% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (25 - 202, n=53, last 2 years)
88.1 Points ∼47% -5%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone 14 (Safari 16)
279 Points ∼100% +185%
Sony Xperia 5 IV (Chrome 107)
174 Points ∼62% +78%
Samsung Galaxy S22 (Chrome 100.0.4896.79)
149 Points ∼53% +52%
Google Pixel 6 (Chrome 96)
110 Points ∼39% +12%
Average of class Smartphone (27 - 292, n=176, last 2 years)
101.9 Points ∼37% +4%
Google Pixel 7 (Chrome 106)
98 Points ∼35%
Average Google Tensor G2 (98 - 98, n=2)
98 Points ∼35% 0%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 14 (Safari 16)
65726 Points ∼100% +46%
Sony Xperia 5 IV (Chrome 107)
45945 Points ∼70% +2%
Google Pixel 7
45158 Points ∼69%
Average Google Tensor G2 (44245 - 45158, n=2)
44702 Points ∼68% -1%
Google Pixel 6 (Chrome 96)
43376 Points ∼66% -4%
Samsung Galaxy S22 (Chrome 100.0.4896.79)
38992 Points ∼59% -14%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion (Chrome 105)
37446 Points ∼57% -17%
Average of class Smartphone (3905 - 74261, n=195, last 2 years)
26805 Points ∼41% -41%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (414 - 12437, n=186, last 2 years)
2582 ms * ∼100% -153%
Samsung Galaxy S22 (Chrome 100.0.4896.79)
1566 ms * ∼61% -53%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion (Chrome 105)
1117.9 ms * ∼43% -9%
Google Pixel 6 (Chrome 96)
1034 ms * ∼40% -1%
Google Pixel 7 (Chrome 106)
1021.8 ms * ∼40%
Average Google Tensor G2 (1012 - 1022, n=2)
1017 ms * ∼39% -0%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
864 ms * ∼33% +15%
Apple iPhone 14 (Safari 16)
496.4 ms * ∼19% +51%

* ... smaller is better

In most areas, the UFS 3.1 storage's speed has been greatly improved upon over its predecessor with only sequential read being slower on the Pixel 7. Although it takes last place in this category compared to the competition, it's highly unlikely this is even noticeable during everyday use.  

Google Pixel 7Motorola Edge 30 FusionGoogle Pixel 6Sony Xperia 5 IVSamsung Galaxy S22Average 128 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
13%
-29%
7%
15%
5%
-24%
Sequential Read 256KB
1280.81
1870.18
46%
1546
21%
1474
15%
1486
16%
1565 ?(1030 - 1898, n=43)
22%
993 ?(45.6 - 1999, n=256, last 2 years)
-22%
Sequential Write 256KB
879.39
689.24
-22%
233.4
-73%
997
13%
993
13%
785 ?(233 - 1284, n=43)
-11%
568 ?(11.9 - 1783, n=256, last 2 years)
-35%
Random Read 4KB
210.47
248.86
18%
126.2
-40%
207
-2%
273
30%
239 ?(126.2 - 390, n=43)
14%
183.3 ?(13.5 - 543, n=256, last 2 years)
-13%
Random Write 4KB
253.92
276.74
9%
190.3
-25%
254
0%
257.6
1%
243 ?(121.4 - 503, n=43)
-4%
185.1 ?(18.4 - 503, n=257, last 2 years)
-27%

Gaming - Many titles play smoothly

The ARM Mali-G710 MP7 is a graphics powerhouse but Google puts the brakes on its potential (up to 16 cores). The Tensor G2 is equipped with a weaker GPU than MediaTek offers with the Dimensity 9000+ which has a G710 MP10. Nevertheless, enough performance is on hand to be able to enjoy almost every game, in its glory. 

Using GameBench we were able to analyse a few games more closely. PUBG Mobile ran at a very consistent 40 (Ultra Setting) to 60fps (HD Setting) and also Wild Rift showed no framerate drops. Although the latter is limited to 60fps, it is able to support up to 120fps. Undemanding games such as Battle Bay are also able to take advantage of the 90Hz display's potential. 

While testing the Pixel 7 Pro, we also tried Genshin Impact. Either the details or framerate had to be reduced in order to run this demanding game smoothly.  

League of Legends: Wild Rift
League of Legends: Wild Rift
PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Battle Bay
Battle Bay
051015202530354045505560657075808590Tooltip
Google Pixel 7; Battle Bay; 4.9.8: Ø90 (89-91)
Google Pixel 7; League of Legends: Wild Rift; 3.4.0.5930: Ø60.2 (59-61)
Google Pixel 7; PUBG Mobile; Smooth; 2.2.0: Ø60 (58-61)
Google Pixel 7; PUBG Mobile; HD; 2.2.0: Ø59.9 (58-62)
Google Pixel 7; PUBG Mobile; Ultra HD; 2.2.0: Ø39.9 (36-41)

Emissions - The Google phone gets quite warm

Temperature

Although even at maximum display brightness, the Google Pixel 7's surface temperatures remain pleasantly low while idling, they increase up to 43.2 °C under continuous load. This is comparatively high but otherwise harmless.

It also gets quite hot inside Google's smartphone. The 3DMark Wild Life (Extreme) stress test showed a reduction in performance of up to 34 percent. That is not inconsiderable but the Pixel 7's long-term performance still compares more favorably to that of the Galaxy S22 which possesses a marginally faster SoC.

Max. Load
 39.4 °C
103 F
39.4 °C
103 F
36.6 °C
98 F
 
 43.2 °C
110 F
42.5 °C
109 F
37 °C
99 F
 
 41.2 °C
106 F
42.7 °C
109 F
36.9 °C
98 F
 
Maximum: 43.2 °C = 110 F
Average: 39.9 °C = 104 F
34.8 °C
95 F
36.7 °C
98 F
39.5 °C
103 F
32.7 °C
91 F
39 °C
102 F
39.4 °C
103 F
31.5 °C
89 F
33.1 °C
92 F
39.3 °C
103 F
Maximum: 39.5 °C = 103 F
Average: 36.2 °C = 97 F
Room Temperature 21.1 °C = 70 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 39.9 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 32.7 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43.2 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.5 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.2 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Wild Life stress test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
84.1 % ∼100% +28%
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
74 % ∼88% +13%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
65.5 % ∼78%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
59.8 % ∼71% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
56.4 % ∼67% -14%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
53.1 % ∼63% -19%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
77.9 % ∼100% +7%
Apple iPhone 14
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
75.5 % ∼97% +4%
Google Pixel 7
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
72.9 % ∼94%
Sony Xperia 5 IV
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1
64.2 % ∼82% -12%
Samsung Galaxy S22
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
56 % ∼72% -23%
Google Pixel 6
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
54.9 % ∼70% -25%
0510152025303540Tooltip
Google Pixel 7 Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø9.65 (8.06-11.1)
Samsung Galaxy S22 Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø7.78 (6.63-11.8)
Google Pixel 7 Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø32.8 (25.8-39.3)
Samsung Galaxy S22 Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø27.2 (23.6-41.9)
Google Pixel 7 Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø34.4 (28.6-40.2)

Speakers

The Pixel 7's moderately loud speakers create a pleasing sound at medium volumes. Unfortunately, the louder it gets, the more noticeable it becomes that the lower mids aren't very present. Accordingly, the sound lacks depth. 

Wired headphones or speakers can be connected via the USB-C port. As a wireless option, Bluetooth 5.2 is available and only supports the most common audio codecs (SBC, AAC, aptX, aptX HD, LDAC).

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2037.532.62526.328.33123.729.74035.926.5503637.16324.923.78020.42410018.523.212516.934.716017.951.1200165125014.150.531512.254.740013.356.750010.966.363012.369.380012.172.5100012.571.6125011.869.9160011.973.5200012.475.3250012.878.6315013.177.140001380.4500013.279.9630013.676800013.674.81000013.777.1125001471.21600013.862.8SPL2588.3N0.672.5median 13.2median 71.2Delta1.510.337.439.52830.932.628.127.7303435.82730.123.630.322.328.317.733.916.148.712.846.813.152.71258.2959.91165.310.768.310.373.510.976.312.178.111.878.61278.811.880.511.980.712.979.113.37713.47113.575.913.669.814.869.614.166.324.689.50.677median 12.8median 69.81.111hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseGoogle Pixel 7Samsung Galaxy S22
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Google Pixel 7 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 14% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 41% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Samsung Galaxy S22 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 19% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 46% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Battery life - The Pixel 7 has a 4355 mAh battery

Power consumption

The Google Pixel 7's power consumption is very low and gave us no cause for criticism. 

Due to the absent charger, care should be taken to use one which supports USB PD 3.0. Alternatively, it is possible to purchase an optional 30W charger from Google. Using this, the smartphone can be charged to 50 percent within 30 minutes.  

Wireless charging is just as useable as reverse wireless charging. The former is possible up to 12W and Google Pixel Stand (2nd gen) owners can even charge the Pixel at up to 20W.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.11 / 0.32 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.89 / 1.07 / 1.2 Watt
Load midlight 3.27 / 5.5 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Google Pixel 7
4355 mAh
Apple iPhone 14
3279 mAh
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
4400 mAh
Google Pixel 6
4614 mAh
Sony Xperia 5 IV
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S22
3700 mAh
Average Google Tensor G2
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-11%
-21%
-17%
-9%
-34%
-8%
-32%
Idle Minimum *
0.89
0.6
33%
0.83
7%
0.68
24%
0.7
21%
0.69
22%
0.835 ?(0.78 - 0.89, n=2)
6%
0.887 ?(0.12 - 2.5, n=194, last 2 years)
-0%
Idle Average *
1.07
0.8
25%
1.72
-61%
1
7%
1.04
3%
1.19
-11%
1.34 ?(1.07 - 1.61, n=2)
-25%
1.568 ?(0.65 - 3.6, n=194, last 2 years)
-47%
Idle Maximum *
1.2
1
17%
1.75
-46%
1.02
15%
1.15
4%
1.26
-5%
1.415 ?(1.2 - 1.63, n=2)
-18%
1.783 ?(0.69 - 3.7, n=194, last 2 years)
-49%
Load Average *
3.27
5.4
-65%
2.76
16%
5.39
-65%
4.25
-30%
6.97
-113%
3.28 ?(3.27 - 3.29, n=2)
-0%
4.36 ?(2.1 - 7.74, n=194, last 2 years)
-33%
Load Maximum *
5.5
9.2
-67%
6.74
-23%
9
-64%
7.84
-43%
8.85
-61%
5.76 ?(5.5 - 6.01, n=2)
-5%
7.17 ?(3.56 - 11.9, n=194, last 2 years)
-30%

* ... smaller is better

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

0123456789101112131415Tooltip
Google Pixel 7 Google Tensor G2: Ø7.34 (1.385-12)
Samsung Galaxy S22 Samsung Exynos 2200: Ø6.67 (0.973-15.2)

Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

012345678910111213141516Tooltip
Google Pixel 7 Google Tensor G2; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø8.99 (7.64-11.5)
Samsung Galaxy S22 Samsung Exynos 2200; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø9.32 (5-16.8)
Google Pixel 7 Google Tensor G2; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.907 (0.874-1.166)
Samsung Galaxy S22 Samsung Exynos 2200; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.845 (0.79-1.42)

Battery life

In actual fact, the Pixel 7 has very good battery life. However, this was surprisingly low during the reader’s test which simulates reading a book using the browser at minimum display brightness. That can likely be traced back to the Wi-Fi module's higher consumption. No doubt Google will have to make improvements in this area with one or two updates.  

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
17h 43min
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 107)
12h 11min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
20h 30min
Load (maximum brightness)
5h 02min
Google Pixel 7
4355 mAh
Google Pixel 6
4614 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S22
3700 mAh
Apple iPhone 14
3279 mAh
Motorola Edge 30 Fusion
4400 mAh
Battery Runtime
18%
19%
48%
-6%
Reader / Idle
1063
2020
90%
2182
105%
2689
153%
H.264
1230
1219
-1%
887
-28%
1266
3%
WiFi v1.3
731
627
-14%
675
-8%
1010
38%
686
-6%
Load
302
291
-4%
324
7%
289
-4%

Pros

+ Bright and accurate 90Hz display
+ Snappy system speed
+ Long-term update support
+ IP68 certification
+ USB 3.2 (2nd gen)

Cons

- USB-C doesn't support video output
- Still no 6 GHz Wi-Fi
- Throttling under load

Verdict - The Pixel 7 is excellent value for money

Reviewed: Google Pixel 7. Review device provided by Google Germany.
Reviewed: Google Pixel 7. Review device provided by Google Germany.

The Pixel 7 skilfully builds on its predecessor and stays focussed on being a powerful smartphone at a comparatively low price. This extends from the fast SoC, the very bright and color accurate OLED display all the way to the powerful dual camera. Google is able to round this off with good battery life as well as long-term updates. In addition, they even provide a free VPN from Google One.

However, that's not all. On the plus side, there is also wide mobile frequency coverage, including 5G, IP68 certification as well as wireless charging. Although there's still no microSD expansion slot, an optional 256 GB model is available to purchase.

The Google Pixel 7 is an attractive proposition with a good dual camera and at least five years of updates.

However, some compromises had to be made. In particular, the Pixel 7's display still has a lot of potential for the upcoming Pixel 8 as its current refresh rate sits at 90Hz and it's not of the LTPO kind. On top of that, Google could have paid similar attention to PWM management as they did with the Pixel 7 Pro. In addition, UWB is not included and the ultrawide angle camera has to make do without a macro mode.

Good alternatives in this price segment are the Samsung Galaxy S22 as well as the Motorola Edge 30 Fusion. The iPhone 14's concept is similar but is 350 euros more expensive.

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

Price and availability

The Pixel 7 is available directly from the Google Store or alternatively on Amazon.

Google Pixel 7 - 11/18/2022 v7
Daniel Schmidt

Chassis
90%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
93%
Connectivity
58 / 70 → 83%
Weight
88%
Battery
90%
Display
94%
Games Performance
59 / 64 → 92%
Application Performance
83 / 86 → 96%
Temperature
89%
Noise
100%
Audio
77 / 90 → 86%
Camera
81%
Average
82%
89%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 3 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
.170