Notebookcheck Logo

Google Pixel Fold review: Foldable smartphone with decent camera

Photophobic. Rumors about a foldable smartphone from Google have been circulating for years, and now it's finally here. The specs are promising, but in the absence of innovation a competitive price is not forthcoming. Find out in our review how Google's first foldable fares.
(Photo: Daniel Schmidt)

After Google claimed the upper class with the Pixel 7 & Pixel 7 Pro and the middle class with the Pixel 7a, the US giant is venturing into the foldable smartphone field for the first time with its Pixel Fold.

The affiliation to the current Pixel 7 family cannot be overlooked visually, but unlike Samsung, Huawei and Honor the Pixel Fold differs particularly in the form factor, which is more reminiscent of the Oppo Find N2.

Just in time for market launch, Google has also further optimized Android for tablets and foldables, thus greatly benefiting its own products. We take a closer look at the Pixel Fold.

Google Pixel Fold
Processor
Google Tensor G2 8 x 1.8 - 2.9 GHz, Cortex X1 / A76 / A55, Titan M2 Security Chipset
Graphics adapter
Memory
12 GB 
, LPDDR5
Display
7.60 inch 6:5, 2208 x 1840 pixel 378 PPI, Capacitive, OLED, Cover display: 5.8 inches, 2092x1080, OLED 120Hz, Corning Gorilla Glass Victus, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 256 GB 
, 241 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.1 Gen2, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer, OTG, UWB
Networking
Wi-Fi 6E (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/ Wi-Fi 6E 6 GHz), Bluetooth 5.2, GSM (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, 21, 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, 79), 5G mmWave (Band 257, 258, 260, 261), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 6.05 x 158.7 x 139.7 ( = 0.24 x 6.25 x 5.5 in)
Battery
4821 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 13
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix (f/1.7, 25 mm, 1/2", 0.8 µm, OIS) + 10.8 MPix (5x optical zoom, f/3.1, 112 mm, 1.22 µm) + 10.8 MPix (Ultra Wide, f/2.2, 1/3", 1.25 µm); Camera2-API-Level: Full
Secondary Camera: 9.5 MPix (f/2.2, 1.12 µm, 84°, Fixfocus) + 8 MPix (Inside, f/2.0, 1.12 µm, 84 °, Fixfocus)
Additional features
Speakers: Dual, Keyboard: Onscreen, USB-C cable, OTG adapter, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, GNSS: GPS (L1, L5), Glonass (L1), Galileo (E1, E5a), BeiDou (B1, B2a), QZSS, NavIC; DRM Widevine L1, Body-SAR: 1.39 W/kg, Head-SAR: 0.99 W/kg, IPX8, fanless, waterproof
Weight
283 g ( = 9.98 oz / 0.62 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
1899 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible competitors in comparison

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
84.7 %
08/2023
Google Pixel Fold
Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7
283 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash7.60"2208x1840
89.1 %
08/2023
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740
253 g256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash7.60"2176x1812
86.3 %
06/2023
Huawei Mate X3
SD 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730
239 g512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash7.85"2496x2224
87.2 %
03/2023
Honor Magic Vs
SD 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730
261 g512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash7.90"2272x1984
86.3 %
12/2022
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
SD 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730
262 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash8.02"2160x1914

Case - Distinctive crease and thick camera

In the comparison field, the Google Pixel Fold is about as thick as a Galaxy Z Fold5 or the Honor Magic Vs and has a thickness of 6.05 millimeters when unfolded; it is 2.5 millimeters more with the camera. When folded, it is 12.1 or 13.6 millimeters thick. It is also quite heavy at 283 grams.

Form factor and workmanship, on the other hand, are convincing. The former in particular is a unique selling point on the European market. The Pixel Fold's gaps are flush and fit perfectly, but it creaks and cracks audibly under light torsional stress. The display-to-surface ratio of 83 percent could also be better. The IPX8 certification, which certifies the Google foldable as waterproof, is a positive aspect.

The stainless steel hinge makes a very solid and high-quality impression, and the foldable display also seems stable, but its seam is very pronounced. This is also due to the fact that the Pixel Fold cannot be fully opened at a 180-degree angle, but stops at about 178 degrees.

The smartphone comes in the colors Obsidian and Porcelain

(Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
(Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
(Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
(Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
(Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
(Photo: Daniel Schmidt)

Size comparison

161.6 mm / 6.36 in 144.7 mm / 5.7 in 5.4 mm / 0.2126 in 262 g0.578 lbs160.3 mm / 6.31 in 141.5 mm / 5.57 in 6.1 mm / 0.2402 in 261 g0.575 lbs158.7 mm / 6.25 in 139.7 mm / 5.5 in 6.05 mm / 0.2382 in 283 g0.624 lbs156.9 mm / 6.18 in 141.5 mm / 5.57 in 5.3 mm / 0.2087 in 239 g0.527 lbs154.9 mm / 6.1 in 129.9 mm / 5.11 in 6.1 mm / 0.2402 in 253 g0.558 lbs148 mm / 5.83 in 105 mm / 4.13 in 1 mm / 0.03937 in 1.5 g0.00331 lbs

Equipment - Pixel Fold comes with USB 3.2 and UWB

The Google Pixel Fold uses a fast USB 3.2 port (Gen. 2), which does not support image output. Unsurprisingly, the device does not have an audio jack or optional memory expansion via microSD.

In return, Google offers two storage variants: the smaller 256 GB model, which is also our test device, priced at US$1799, and the 512 GB variant, priced at US$1919. The latter is also only available in black.

NFC, Bluetooth 5.2 and UWB are on board.

Top (opened): speaker, mmWave antenna, microphone (Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
Top (opened): speaker, mmWave antenna, microphone
Left (opened) (Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
Left (opened)
Right (opened): power/fingerprint, volume rocker (Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
Right (opened): power/fingerprint, volume rocker
Bottom (unfolded): microphone, USB, speakers, microphone, SIM (Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
Bottom (unfolded): microphone, USB, speakers, microphone, SIM
Top (closed): mmWave antenna, microphone, speaker (Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
Top (closed): mmWave antenna, microphone, speaker
Left (closed): hinge (Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
Left (closed): hinge
Right (closed): power/fingerprint, volume rocker (Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
Right (closed): power/fingerprint, volume rocker
Bottom (closed): Microphone, USB, speakers, SIM, microphone (Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
Bottom (closed): Microphone, USB, speakers, SIM, microphone

Software - Android with optimized apps for foldables

The Google Pixel Fold comes with Android 13 and is slated to receive security updates for at least five years and three major upgrades, i.e. up to Android 16.

Apps and the system have now been better optimized for use with large displays. In the settings, you can scroll through the menu on the left, while the respective content is displayed on the right. Some apps such as Weather or Gmail have also been optimized accordingly. It is also possible to run two apps side by side and move content between them via drag and drop. While this doesn't apply to many apps, the number will increase in the future.

The security patches on the Pixel Fold were updated during our review (in August) and thus very much up to date.

External display
External display
Main display: homescreen
Gmail
Weather app
Settings
Two apps running parallel
Grouped apps remain connected in the task manager

Communication and GNSS - 5G mmWave, but no Wi-Fi 7

The Google Pixel Fold supports all modern mobile phone standards with an exemplary frequency range. The smartphone even supports mmWave for 5G. Although this is not yet usable in Europe, it definitely makes for a future-proof smartphone. Signal strength was very good during in our tests in the city and gave no cause for criticism. Transmission speeds are also on the expected level.

The Pixel Fold supports the IEEE 802.11 standards i.e. a/b/g/n/ac/ax (Wi-Fi 6E) and can operate in the frequency bands of 2.4, 5.0 and 6.0 GHz. This works flawlessly in tandem with our Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 reference router because both the transmission rates and the transmission power are solid.

Networking
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
920 (min: 888) MBit/s ∼70%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
950 (min: 481) MBit/s ∼65%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1714 (min: 856) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1684 (min: 1447) MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
886 (min: 764) MBit/s ∼67%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
924 (min: 456) MBit/s ∼63%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1631 (min: 1075) MBit/s ∼95%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1601 (min: 1511) MBit/s ∼95%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
928 (min: 851) MBit/s ∼71%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
934 (min: 888) MBit/s ∼64%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
1315 (min: 1162) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
1467 (min: 1101) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
808 (min: 737) MBit/s ∼61%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
915 (min: 858) MBit/s ∼62%
Average of class Smartphone
 
iperf3 receive AXE11000
684 (min: 34.8) MBit/s ∼52%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
712 (min: 40.5) MBit/s ∼49%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1526 (min: 229) MBit/s ∼89%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1367 (min: 668) MBit/s ∼81%
095190285380475570665760855950104511401235133014251520161517101805Tooltip
Google Pixel Fold Google Tensor G2, ARM Mali-G710 MP7; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1686 (856-1766)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Qualcomm Adreno 740; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1631 (1075-1812)
Google Pixel Fold Google Tensor G2, ARM Mali-G710 MP7; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1683 (1447-1788)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Qualcomm Adreno 740; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1598 (1511-1667)
Google Pixel Fold Google Tensor G2, ARM Mali-G710 MP7; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø919 (888-932)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Qualcomm Adreno 740; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø884 (764-954)
Google Pixel Fold Google Tensor G2, ARM Mali-G710 MP7; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø934 (481-980)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Qualcomm Adreno 740; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø909 (456-950)

Indoors the Pixel Fold's location is pinpointed quite quickly and accurately. The Foldable supports all global satellite networks in dual-band mode.

On a short bike ride, the Google smartphone has to prove itself against the Garmin Venu 2 fitness smartwatch. The route clearly shows that the Pixel queries its location less frequently and so the Fold's covered distance is correspondingly longer. It shows a visible deviation from the actual route between houses in particular. But no major limitations are to be expected in the way of navigational tasks.

GNSS test ride: circumnavigation of the lake
GNSS test ride: circumnavigation of the lake
GNSS test ride: loop
GNSS test ride: loop
GNSS test ride: summary
GNSS test ride: summary

Telephony and Voice Quality

The Google Pixel Fold houses a nano-SIM slot and can use an eSIM, which also enables dual-SIM operation. Users can individually assign a SIM to each stored phone number and optionally choose which number to use before each call. A separate ringtone for the additional SIM cannot be selected. Likewise, the smartphone cannot automatically switch the data connection. Dual SIM users also miss out on the option of installing a messenger app in dual mode. Basic features such as VoLTE and WiFi calling are supported.

The voice quality of the Pixel Fold is very good when held to the ear and reliably filters out most background noise. The foldable also delivers good acoustics in speaker mode and echoes only minimally.

Cameras - Good triple camera in the Google Pixel Fold

The Pixel Fold has two front cameras. One is integrated in the front display, the other in the frame of the foldable panel. Both have a fixed focus. However, the one on the outside can record Ultra HD video at up to 60 FPS, while the one on the inside is limited to Full HD at 30 FPS. Selfies turn out quite good, especially with the optics of the cover display. The bokeh generated in portrait mode is pleasing, but the transitions to the subject are a little rough. Better selfies can be taken with the main camera, where the front panel is used as a viewfinder.

The main sensor of the rear camera works at 48 MPix and uses pixel binning, so that 12 MPix images are created. The pictures convince with a well-balanced color balance and a good white balance. The sharpness is pleasantly pronounced in daylight; only the bokeh of the background looks a bit clumpy and could be a bit softer. Nevertheless, a lot can still be adjusted according to the user's own wishes afterwards. When there is little light, the automatic mode quickly switches to night mode, which brightens up the subject, but also swallows up a few details.

The ultra wide angle delivers average quality. The dynamic range and depth of field are good, but many details are lost and appear uncleanly reproduced. The periscope zoom provides 5x optical magnification and a maximum of 20x magnification digitally. The results here are pleasing, as long as there is sufficient light. None of the lenses offer a dedicated macro mode.

Videos can be recorded with all three lenses in Ultra HD at up to 60 fps. If you reduce the frame rate to 30 FPS, you can also record HDR videos at a color depth of 10 bits.

The main camera can also be used for selfies.
The main camera can also be used for selfies.
Selfie with the inner camera
Selfie with the inner camera
Selfie with the external camera (portrait mode)
Selfie with the external camera (portrait mode)

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.

Main cameraMain cameraUltra wide angle5x zoomLow light

The Google Pixel Fold does a really good job of capturing our test chart under controlled lighting conditions. Many details are retained, even in the peripheral areas.

The color representation is also convincing and does not reveal any noticeable outliers (DeltaE > 10).

ColorChecker
6.8 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
0.6 ∆E
3.5 ∆E
2.8 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
3.4 ∆E
3.3 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
7.7 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
3 ∆E
2.9 ∆E
10 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
3 ∆E
1.9 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel Fold: 4.55 ∆E min: 0.65 - max: 9.96 ∆E
ColorChecker
17.6 ∆E
27.6 ∆E
23.2 ∆E
22.6 ∆E
26.9 ∆E
36 ∆E
26.7 ∆E
16.8 ∆E
17.9 ∆E
16 ∆E
35.4 ∆E
36.8 ∆E
15 ∆E
27.3 ∆E
12.2 ∆E
30.3 ∆E
21.5 ∆E
28.2 ∆E
24.6 ∆E
26.2 ∆E
30.9 ∆E
25.8 ∆E
21.1 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel Fold: 24.17 ∆E min: 12.18 - max: 36.84 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty - Foldable comes without power adapter

The Google Pixel Fold has a rather slim scope of delivery: a USB-C cable, a SIM pin and an OTG adapter. That's it. A power adapter is not included, but it can be purchased optionally from Google. Alternatively, third-party power adapters can be used.

Google also offers two optional protective cases. One is made of transparent plastic and the other is available in three colors. Special insurance cannot be purchased. The warranty in Germany is 24 months, which may differ in other regions. Buyers are thus advised to double check before purchasing

Input Devices & Operation - Facial recognition only with front camera

Both capacitive touchscreens have very good gliding properties and implement inputs quickly and accurately. Unfortunately, neither screen offers pen support. The foldable panel also has a very pronounced seam, both optically and haptically.

For biometric security, there is a fingerprint sensor in the power button, which can also be used to launch Google Assistant. This offers good recognition rates and unlocks the foldable smartphone quickly. Facial recognition can also be used for the camera on the external display.

Display - Trendy bright OLEDs with up to 120 Hz in Pixel Fold

Subpixel matrix (foldable display)
Subpixel matrix (foldable display)
Subpixel matrix (external display)
Subpixel matrix (external display)

On the outside, Google uses a 5.8-inch OLED display with a resolution of 2092x1080 pixels and a refresh rate of up to 120 Hz. The smaller cover display can be much brighter than its foldable counterpart, achieving 1,225 cd/m² in the center of the image in a pure white display with an activated ambient light sensor. The main panel achieves reaches a peak brightness of 1,559 cd/m² with an uniform distribution of bright and dark areas (APL18). If you regulate the brightness manually, you have a maximum of 597 cd/m² at your disposal.

The main display inside measures 7.6 inches and has an aspect ratio of 6:5, a higher resolution of 2,208 x 1,840 and also runs at up to 120 Hz. The brightness is lower and reaches an average of 997 cd/m² with the ambient light sensor activated. It then climbs up to 1318 cd/m² in the APL18 measurement and reaches 608 cd/m² in manual mode. Both displays support the HDR standards HLG, HDR10 and HDR10+.

When measuring the brightness, however, we noticed that the area around the ambient light sensor quickly overheats when exposed to a lot of light and the system then dims the panel heavily. In such a case, we measured only up to 465 cd/m². This certainly might be a problem on hot days.

The typical OLED flickering can also be found on the Pixel Fold's displays and works identically. We measured a fairly constant frequency of 120 Hz with the oscilloscope. Although this is not particularly high, very few people should have any complaints due to the very low modulation level and the even amplitude curve. However, this cannot be ruled out for particularly sensitive individuals.

1) X-Rite i1Pro 3 - Cover Screen 2) X-Rite i1Pro 3 - Foldable Screen
1235
cd/m²
1231
cd/m²
1220
cd/m²
1227
cd/m²
1225
cd/m²
1212
cd/m²
1227
cd/m²
1228
cd/m²
1213
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3 - Cover Screen
Maximum: 1235 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 1224.2 cd/m² Minimum: 2 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 98 %
Center on Battery: 1225 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.97
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.57-98 Ø5.2
98.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.22
1017
cd/m²
1004
cd/m²
998
cd/m²
1019
cd/m²
993
cd/m²
979
cd/m²
1017
cd/m²
985
cd/m²
961
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3 - Foldable Screen
Maximum: 1019 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 997 cd/m² Minimum: 1.76 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 94 %
Center on Battery: 993 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.4 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.97
ΔE Greyscale 2.1 | 0.57-98 Ø5.2
97.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.24
Google Pixel Fold
OLED, 2208x1840, 7.6"
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Dynamic AMOLED, 2176x1812, 7.6"
Huawei Mate X3
OLED, 2496x2224, 7.9"
Honor Magic Vs
OLED, 2272x1984, 7.9"
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
OLED, 2160x1914, 8"
Screen
-28%
5%
-45%
-6%
Brightness middle
993
1104
11%
948
-5%
803
-19%
1015
2%
Brightness
997
1107
11%
969
-3%
809
-19%
1022
3%
Brightness Distribution
94
97
3%
94
0%
97
3%
98
4%
Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
1.4
3.1
-121%
1.4
-0%
2.27
-62%
1.6
-14%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
3.2
4.2
-31%
2.6
19%
5.99
-87%
3.4
-6%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
2.1
3
-43%
1.7
19%
3.9
-86%
2.6
-24%
Gamma
2.24 98%
2.01 109%
2.15 102%
2.25 98%
2.22 99%
CCT
6796 96%
6594 99%
6539 99%
6234 104%
6506 100%

* ... 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 120.2 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 120.2 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 120.2 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17490 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

minimale Displayhelligkeit
min.
25 % Displayhelligkeit
25 %
50 % Displayhelligkeit
50 %
75 % Displayhelligkeit
75 %
maximale manuelle Displayhelligkeit
100 %

Series of measurements at a fixed zoom level and different brightness settings

Upon testing the display's color and display accuracy with the Calman analysis software, we achieved the best results with the Natural color profile. The external display is even more accurate than the foldable screen: its values are so good that deviations cannot be seen with the naked eye.

If you use the default setting, you'll have a visibly cooler display, but you can also use the larger DCI-P3 color space.

Grayscale (external display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (external display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Colors (external display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Colors (external display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Color space (external display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Color space (external display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (external display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (external display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (foldable display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (foldable display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Colors (foldable display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Colors (foldable display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Color space (foldable display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Color space (foldable display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (foldable display, color profile: Natural, target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (foldable display, color 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
1.59 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.7815 ms rise
↘ 0.808 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 5 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.3 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
5.59 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2.4 ms rise
↘ 3.187 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 13 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.4 ms).

Outdoors, the Google Pixel Fold does very well and remains readable at all times on cloudy days. Due to the noted dimming of the panel, content may not always be optimally readable, especially on warm and sunny days.

Outside on a cloudy day
Outside on a cloudy day

We like the viewing angle stability of the Pixel Fold's foldable OLED display. The brightness drops a little at flat viewing angles, but not to an extent that is bothersome. The display also then gets a bit cooler.

Viewing angle stability of the Google Pixel Fold (main display)
Viewing angle stability of the Google Pixel Fold (main display)

Performance - Tensor G2 with 12 GB RAM

Like the other current smartphones from Google, the Pixel Fold is powered by a Google Tensor G2 and has 12 GB of LPDDR5 RAM in both storage variants.

Although the SoC is positioned in the upper class, it could not keep up with the Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 last year. The gap to the current Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 has increased accordingly.

In the system benchmarks, however, it is noticeable that the Fold also falls behind its siblings with an identical SoC. This is partly due to the fact that the Pixel Fold has more pixels to process, but also because of the poorer cooling of the SoC, which we'll discuss in more detail in the Temperature section.

Geekbench 6.2
Single-Core
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
1999 Points +35%
Huawei Mate X3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1806 Points +22%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
1480 Points
Average Google Tensor G2
  (1428 - 1480, n=4)
1452 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (193 - 2930, n=125, last 2 years)
1368 Points -8%
Multi-Core
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
5384 Points +52%
Huawei Mate X3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
4656 Points +32%
Average of class Smartphone
  (845 - 7408, n=125, last 2 years)
3795 Points +7%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (3383 - 3967, n=4)
3638 Points +3%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
3533 Points
Antutu v9 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
1135554 Points +83%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1057225 Points +71%
Huawei Mate X3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
985150 Points +59%
Honor Magic Vs
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
782013 Points +26%
Average of class Smartphone
  (99654 - 1650926, n=132, last 2 years)
780468 Points +26%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (619727 - 773857, n=5)
692109 Points +12%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
619727 Points
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
16311 Points +40%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
13195 Points +14%
Huawei Mate X3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
12606 Points +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4609 - 21385, n=193, last 2 years)
12147 Points +5%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
11617 Points
Honor Magic Vs
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
11296 Points -3%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (10530 - 11736, n=5)
11184 Points -4%
CrossMark - Overall
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
1253 Points +40%
Huawei Mate X3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1117 Points +25%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
975 Points +9%
Honor Magic Vs
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
911 Points +2%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (886 - 934, n=5)
900 Points +1%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
895 Points
Average of class Smartphone
  (187 - 1474, n=155, last 2 years)
856 Points -4%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
9337 Points +64%
Huawei Mate X3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
7236 Points +27%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
7003 Points +23%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (5704 - 6419, n=5)
6057 Points +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (411 - 11438, n=153, last 2 years)
5988 Points +5%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
5704 Points
Honor Magic Vs
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
5642 Points -1%
System
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
14032 Points +69%
Huawei Mate X3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
12326 Points +48%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
11275 Points +36%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2368 - 16475, n=153, last 2 years)
9902 Points +19%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (7803 - 9601, n=5)
8791 Points +6%
Honor Magic Vs
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
8750 Points +5%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
8318 Points
Memory
Huawei Mate X3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
8846 Points +94%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
8467 Points +86%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
7342 Points +61%
Average of class Smartphone
  (962 - 12716, n=153, last 2 years)
6489 Points +42%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (4556 - 6548, n=5)
5416 Points +19%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
4556 Points
Honor Magic Vs
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
3871 Points -15%
Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
31928 Points +97%
Honor Magic Vs
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
23174 Points +43%
Huawei Mate X3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
20974 Points +29%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
18021 Points +11%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
16243 Points
Average Google Tensor G2
  (15766 - 16375, n=5)
16151 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (764 - 58651, n=153, last 2 years)
15245 Points -6%
Web
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
2032 Points +18%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (1720 - 1838, n=5)
1750 Points +2%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
1720 Points
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1612 Points -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10 - 2145, n=153, last 2 years)
1532 Points -11%
Honor Magic Vs
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1291 Points -25%
Huawei Mate X3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1198 Points -30%
UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
73962 Points +96%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (37656 - 44323, n=5)
42050 Points +12%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
37656 Points
Average of class Smartphone
  (207 - 84787, n=143, last 2 years)
19624 Points -48%
Honor Magic Vs
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
8502 Points -77%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740, 12288
1267 Points -97%
AImark - Score v3.x
Average of class Smartphone
  (82 - 245629, n=117, last 2 years)
17208 Points +3369%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1201 Points +142%
Honor Magic Vs
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1001 Points +102%
Average Google Tensor G2
  (496 - 1008, n=5)
840 Points +69%
Google Pixel Fold
Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288
496 Points

Graphics acceleration is handled by the ARM Mali-G710 MP7 integrated into the SoC. It delivers high performance, but is clearly subordinate to the current Adrenos from Qualcomm. Due to the high resolution of the main display, the onscreen rates are also lower than, for example, those of the Pixel 7 Pro, which means that the frame rate is around 30 percent lower.

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
3892 Points +127%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2757 Points +61%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2735 Points +60%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2726 Points +59%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1711 Points
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
3901 Points +122%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2821 Points +60%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2799 Points +59%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2795 Points +59%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1760 Points
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
14599 Points +113%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
11041 Points +61%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
11022 Points +61%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10893 Points +59%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6849 Points
3DMark / Wild Life Score
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7433 Points +18%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6278 Points
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6030 Points +21%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
5983 Points +20%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5847 Points +18%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4973 Points
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
24283 Points +130%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
20549 Points +94%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
20220 Points +91%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10577 Points
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
14482 Points +71%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
13386 Points +58%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
13077 Points +55%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8459 Points
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
120 fps
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
120 fps 0%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
119 fps -1%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
89 fps -26%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps -50%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
434 fps +43%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
419 fps +38%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
381 fps +26%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
329 fps +9%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
303 fps
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
111 fps +35%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
92 fps +12%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
89 fps +9%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
82 fps
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps -27%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
238 fps +164%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
222 fps +147%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
211 fps +134%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
164 fps +82%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
90 fps
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
74 fps +35%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
71 fps +29%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
70 fps +27%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps +9%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
55 fps
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
146 fps +85%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
145 fps +84%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
130 fps +65%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
111 fps +41%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
79 fps
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
55 fps +67%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
53 fps +61%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
43 fps +30%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
41 fps +24%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
33 fps
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
103 fps +110%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
94 fps +92%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
83 fps +69%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
80 fps +63%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
49 fps
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
65 fps +132%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
45 fps +61%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
32 fps +14%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
31 fps +11%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
28 fps
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
59 fps +103%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
50 fps +72%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
41 fps +41%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
39 fps +34%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
29 fps
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
77 fps +120%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59 fps +69%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
51 fps +46%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
51 fps +46%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
35 fps
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
138 fps +116%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
125 fps +95%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
120 fps +88%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
106 fps +66%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
64 fps
GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
31 fps +121%
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
23 fps +64%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
19 fps +36%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
18 fps +29%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
14 fps

In matters of web surfing the Google Pixel Fold provides decent performance and also delivers good results in the benchmarks. Also practical is that the websites accessed are displayed directly in the desktop version on the large display.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 (Chrome 115)
188.652 Points +77%
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 351, n=160, last 2 years)
112.8 Points +6%
Honor Magic Vs (Chrome 111)
111.449 Points +5%
Google Pixel Fold (Chrome 115)
106.562 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (96.3 - 117.8, n=5)
104.7 Points -2%
Huawei Mate X3 (Huawei Browser 13.0.4)
103.364 Points -3%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2 (MiUI-Browser 14.7)
76.341 Points -28%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Google Pixel Fold (Chrome 115)
127 runs/min
Average of class Smartphone (14.9 - 445, n=145, last 2 years)
118.8 runs/min -6%
Average Google Tensor G2 (100 - 134, n=5)
118 runs/min -7%
Honor Magic Vs (Chome 111)
99.4 runs/min -22%
WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 (Chrome 115)
185 Points +83%
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 212, n=153, last 2 years)
104.6 Points +4%
Google Pixel Fold (Chrome 115)
101 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (90 - 111, n=5)
98.6 Points -2%
Huawei Mate X3 (Huawei Browser 13.0.4)
97 Points -4%
Honor Magic Vs (Chrome 111)
81 Points -20%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Points -100%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 (Chrome 115)
60317 Points +38%
Huawei Mate X3 (Huawei Browser 13.0.4)
50732 Points +16%
Average Google Tensor G2 (43817 - 47939, n=5)
45221 Points +3%
Google Pixel Fold (Chrome 115)
43817 Points
Honor Magic Vs (Chrome 111)
36606 Points -16%
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 89112, n=204, last 2 years)
34321 Points -22%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2 (MiUI-Browser 14.7)
29168 Points -33%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Average of class Smartphone (388 - 10968, n=160, last 2 years)
1546 ms * -44%
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2 (MiUI-Browser 14.7)
1530.8 ms * -42%
Google Pixel Fold (Chrome 115)
1074.5 ms *
Honor Magic Vs (Chrome 111)
1055.4 ms * +2%
Average Google Tensor G2 (920 - 1075, n=5)
992 ms * +8%
Huawei Mate X3 (Huawei Browser 13.0.4)
880.8 ms * +18%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 (Chrome 115)
693.3 ms * +35%

* ... smaller is better

The Google Pixel Fold still uses UFS 3.1 storage and not the more modern UFS 4.0, which is simply due to the fact that it is not yet supported by the Tensor G2. Although the smartphones in the comparison field use the older standard, they are all faster. The gap to the Galaxy Z Fold5 or the Magic V2 is much larger, as they use UFS 4.0.

Google Pixel FoldHuawei Mate X3Honor Magic VsXiaomi Mix Fold 2Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4 5GAverage 256 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
41%
17%
53%
20%
17%
10%
Sequential Read 256KB
1606.37
1953.41
22%
1695.2
6%
1882.11
17%
1854.98
15%
Sequential Write 256KB
1169.32
1479.42
27%
1296.5
11%
1783.27
53%
1251.57
7%
Random Read 4KB
219.11
261.78
19%
270.2
23%
342.67
56%
321.87
47%
Random Write 4KB
238.72
466.74
96%
300.1
26%
446.48
87%
265.9
11%

Gaming - Pixel Fold lags and stutters

Normal casual games pose no issue for the Google Pixel Fold, but things take a turn in graphically demanding titles that are played on the large display, which we took a closer look at with GameBench.

In PUGB Mobile, the gaming experience is really good thanks to the large panel. The HD setting runs very smoothly at an almost constant 40 FPS, even at the highest detail level. However, fans of Genshin Impact, which is very demanding, will be disappointed because the game occasionally stutters, even at the lowest detail level.

Genshin Impact
Genshin Impact
PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
051015202530354045505560Tooltip
Google Pixel Fold; Genshin Impact; lowest 120 fps; 3.8.0_15672274_15939604: Ø44.7 (20-61)
Google Pixel Fold; Genshin Impact; highest 120 fps; 3.8.0_15672274_15939604: Ø29.9 (18-50)
Google Pixel Fold; PUBG Mobile; HD; 2.7.0: Ø57 (47-61)
Google Pixel Fold; PUBG Mobile; Ultra HD; 2.7.0: Ø39.6 (31-41)

Emissions - Google foldable with weak cooling

Temperature

As expected, the surface temperatures of the Google Pixel Fold are low when idling in maximum display brightness. Under load, they climb to a peak of over 46 °C and the right side of the foldable also heated up considerably during gaming, reaching up to 44 °C in places.

We use the 3DMark stress test to check how well the SoC copes with the generated heat under load. The Pixel Fold loses up to 50 percent of its original performance and is also slower than other Pixel smartphones. For comparison, a Magic Vs also throttles its performance by around 30 percent under load, but is still faster than the Pixel Fold when cold.

Max. Load
 30.7 °C
87 F
40.9 °C
106 F
46.5 °C
116 F
 
 30.6 °C
87 F
39.2 °C
103 F
43.9 °C
111 F
 
 30.7 °C
87 F
41.7 °C
107 F
44 °C
111 F
 
Maximum: 46.5 °C = 116 F
Average: 38.7 °C = 102 F
44.8 °C
113 F
42.2 °C
108 F
30.5 °C
87 F
43 °C
109 F
41.5 °C
107 F
30.6 °C
87 F
37.6 °C
100 F
39.6 °C
103 F
29.8 °C
86 F
Maximum: 44.8 °C = 113 F
Average: 37.7 °C = 100 F
Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38.7 °C / 102 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 46.5 °C / 116 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 44.8 °C / 113 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.3 °C / 87 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
70.3 % +39%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
59.9 % +19%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
50.4 %
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
40.7 % -19%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
95.2 % +61%
Honor Magic Vs
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
69.6 % +18%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
67.2 % +14%
Google Pixel Fold
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59.2 %
Huawei Mate X3
Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
43.9 % -26%
05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Google Pixel Fold Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø7.7 (6.38-10.8)
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø9.93 (8.31-11)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø17.2 (15.6-23.3)
Google Pixel Fold Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø26 (20-39.6)
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø32.8 (26.2-38.6)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø57.3 (50.1-83.6)
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø36.5 (30.7-39.8)

Speakers

The two speakers of the Google Pixel Fold produce appealing sound with balanced mids and highs. Only the low tones are little thin. The spatial audio, when activated, only changes this a little.

Headphones have to be connected via USB-C, which may require an adapter. Missing from the selection of Bluetooth audio codecs are aptX TWS+ and aptX Adaptive, otherwise the portfolio is very complete and also comes with LC3 and Opus.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2030.933.22522.330.33123.223.54025.423.25031.136.46320298017.82510017.528.812517.341.11601550.320015.147.925016.355.631513.561.940013.959.550013.466.563013.370.280011.773.910001470.312501469.9160013.369.220001368.7250013.569.1315014.373400013.473.4500014.770.4630013.667.9800014.170.1100001468.71250014.264.91600013.858.7SPL25.882.5N0.756median 14median 68.7Delta0.76.230.937.222.325.323.225.625.42731.137.82026.317.82217.531.217.340.41555.215.154.816.358.113.556.713.956.113.463.813.365.311.769.61471.91475.413.377.21379.613.577.414.378.513.479.414.778.413.674.914.171.91467.314.26413.85725.888.40.771.1median 14median 69.60.710.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseGoogle Pixel FoldSamsung Galaxy Z Fold5
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Google Pixel Fold audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 16% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 80% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.2% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 13% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 35% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Battery Life - Wireless charging and PD3 support

Power Consumption

The power consumption of the Google Pixel Fold is inconspicuous and quite frugal for a foldable.

The charging speeds depend heavily on the power supply used and can therefore take a very long time. Since the Google smartphone also supports PowerDelivery 3.0 (PD 3.0), we tried it with a suitable power adapter and it is actually quite quick: a full charge took 92 minutes. The battery was 25 percent after 14 minutes, 50 percent after 31 minutes, 80 percent after 56 minutes and 90 percent after 69 minutes.

Wireless charging is also supported, but the Pixel Fold cannot supply other devices with power wirelessly.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.02 / 0.07 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.86 / 1.7 / 1.8 Watt
Load midlight 9.1 / 11.06 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 Fold
4821 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
4400 mAh
Huawei Mate X3
4800 mAh
Honor Magic Vs
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
4500 mAh
Average Google Tensor G2
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
25%
-62%
-6%
24%
-1%
16%
Idle Minimum *
0.86
0.55
36%
0.81
6%
1.3
-51%
0.97
-13%
0.896 ?(0.62 - 1.33, n=5)
-4%
Idle Average *
1.7
0.9
47%
4.26
-151%
1.7
-0%
1.37
19%
1.984 ?(0.87 - 4.67, n=5)
-17%
Idle Maximum *
1.8
1
44%
4.45
-147%
2
-11%
1.48
18%
2.07 ?(0.95 - 4.78, n=5)
-15%
Load Average *
9.1
9.58
-5%
10.11
-11%
7
23%
3.98
56%
Load Maximum *
11.06
10.74
3%
11.58
-5%
10.1
9%
6.83
38%

* ... smaller is better

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

012345678910111213Tooltip
Google Pixel Fold Google Tensor G2; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø3.6 (0.943-5.71)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø6.08 (1.023-13.7)
Google Pixel Fold Google Tensor G2; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.013 (0.939-1.303)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.767 (0.706-1.165)

Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

012345678910111213Tooltip
Google Pixel Fold Google Tensor G2; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø5.12 (3.67-8.19)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø9.81 (6.01-13.1)
Google Pixel Fold Google Tensor G2; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.013 (0.939-1.303)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.767 (0.706-1.165)

Battery Life

The battery life of the Google Pixel Fold is quite good in our tests. It lasts almost eleven hours during continuous web browsing with an adjusted display brightness of 150 cd/m² on the large screen with Smooth Display activated and is thus on a similar level as the Galaxy Z Fold4. Only the Magic Vs lasts noticeably longer in the comparison field.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
26h 22min
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 115)
10h 51min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16h 00min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 17min
Google Pixel Fold
4821 mAh
Huawei Mate X3
4800 mAh
Honor Magic Vs
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4 5G
4400 mAh
Battery Runtime
-27%
6%
-13%
-1%
Reader / Idle
1582
1435
-9%
1276
-19%
H.264
960
1089
13%
1153
20%
WiFi v1.3
651
476
-27%
756
16%
567
-13%
663
2%
Load
257
271
5%
238
-7%

Pros

+ great form factor
+ accurate OLED displays
+ long update supply
+ waterproof
+ UWB and wireless charging

Cons

- overheating issue with the ambient light sensor
- SoC throttles heavily under load
- no wifi 7
- display fold seam is clearly noticeable
- heavy

Verdict - Solid debut from Google

In review: Google Pixel Fold. Test device provided by Google Germany. (Photo: Daniel Schmidt)
In review: Google Pixel Fold. Test device provided by Google Germany.

The Google Pixel Fold stands out from the competition in particular due to its form factor, which proved to be absolutely solid in our tests. The foldable smartphone is also not too thick and closes completely flush, but loses a few points on account of its mediocre display-to-surface ratio.

Google's smartphone doesn't win any trophies in terms of performance either. Occasional stutters occur during normal system operation, but more often in gaming and even competing devices from last year are much better equipped.

Google has managed to create a strong first foldable in the Pixel Fold, but it still reveals one or two weaknesses upon closer inspection.

The good camera is a positive and the Pixel Fold's battery runtimes are also solid. The problem of the ambient light sensor is more serious - if we expose it to bright light, it gets hot and dims the display. This may be a problem for some users, especially in summer.

In terms of price, the Google foldable is on par with the Galaxy Z Fold5. Those who don't place much value on the form factor may find the Fold4 to be an exciting alternative, since its price has fallen greatly. Also much cheaper is the Honor Magic Vs.

Price and Availability

In the US, the Pixel Fold is available in Obsidian at Best Buy for $1,799.

Prices are as of 13.08.2023 and are subject to change.

Google Pixel Fold - 08/11/2023 v7 (old)
Daniel Schmidt

Chassis
83%
Keyboard
70 / 75 → 93%
Pointing Device
91%
Connectivity
57 / 70 → 82%
Weight
87%
Battery
89%
Display
83%
Games Performance
50 / 64 → 78%
Application Performance
83 / 86 → 96%
Temperature
86%
Noise
100%
Audio
82 / 90 → 91%
Camera
78%
Average
80%
85%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Transparency

The present review sample was made available to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or a shop for the purposes of review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review.

Price comparison

Read all 3 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Reviews > Google Pixel Fold review: Foldable smartphone with decent camera
Daniel Schmidt, 2023-08-13 (Update: 2024-05-28)