Notebookcheck Logo
Teaser

Great battery life and a handy size - Google Pixel 9a review

Slimmed down.

The Google Pixel 9a is flatter, while boasting a bigger battery and display. The latter is even said to get brighter once more. Plus, more AI features have found their way onto the smartphone. Is this enough to be the leader of the mid-range?
Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by Daisy Dickson) Published 🇩🇪 🇫🇷 ...
5G Android Google Pixel Smartphone Touchscreen

Verdict - A good mid-range phone with long runtimes

Fans of slim and compact smartphones will surely find joy in the Pixel 9a, as its camera sits almost flush with the back of the device and although it has grown in size, it's still one of the most compact Android smartphones on the market.

Its display gets super bright, but it doesn't use high-frequency PWM dimming, and our test device's illumination isn't completely even. Although the Tensor G4 offers high peak performance within its price class, it's throttled severely in the long run. Furthermore, the small storage configuration is a little tight.

Even so, the Pixel 9a is a good mid-range smartphone with great battery life, an IP68 certification, wireless charging, eSIM support, and a long update delivery period. Its cameras on the back deliver good results, too.

Pros

+ good cameras
+ long battery runtimes
+ IP68 certified
+ wireless charging
+ long update delivery

Cons

- only Corning Gorilla Glass 3
- low PWM frequency
- high SoC throttling under load
- slow charging speed

Price and availability

You can order the Pixel 9a directly via Google's online store.

Amazon Logo
$599.00
Google Pixel 9 - Unlocked Android Smartphone with Gemini, 24-Hour Battery, Advanced Camera, and 6.3" Actua Display - Obsidian - 128 GB
  • $5.99
    Ferilinso 3 Pack Screen Protector for Google Pixel 9A, Tempered Glass Phone Case Friendly Accessories, Protector de Pantalla for Google Pixel 9A
  • $7.99
    Supershieldz (3 Pack) Designed for Google Pixel 9a Tempered Glass Screen Protector, Anti Scratch, Bubble Free

The Google Pixel 9a follows in the Pixel 8a's footsteps and brings with it changes to its design as well as a larger display. Its battery has grown massively too, and the phone's SoC has been given an upgrade. Moreover, its protection against water has been improved.

Although it features new AI functions, these have been slimmed down a bit in comparison to the flagship models. The Google smartphone's prices have remained the same, with an MRSP of $499 (128 GB) and $599 (256 GB).

Specifications - Google Pixel 9a

Google Pixel 9a (Pixel 9 Series)
Processor
Google Tensor G4 8 x 2 GHz
Graphics adapter
Memory
8 GB 
, LPDDR5x
Display
6.30 inch 20:9, 2424 x 1080 pixel 421 PPI, Capacitive, pOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 3, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 114 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer, OTG, Titan M2
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 5.3, 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, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 28, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 66, 75), 5G-Sub6 (Band 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 75, 77, 78, 79), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.9 x 154.7 x 73.3 ( = 0.35 x 6.09 x 2.89 in)
Battery
5100 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 15
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix (f/1.7, 1/2", 25 mm, OIS) + 13MP (f/2.2, 1/3.1")
Secondary Camera: 13 MPix (f/2.2, 20 mm)
Additional features
Speakers: Dual, Keyboard: OnScreen, USB-Cabel, 24 Months Warranty, Bluetooth Audio Codecs: SBC, AAC, LDAC, LC3 | GNSS: GPS (L1), Glonass (L1), BeiDou (B1, B1C), Galileo (E1), QZSS (L1), NavIC (L5) | HDR: HLG, HDR10, HDR10+ | DRM Widevine L1 | eSIM | IP68 | USB Copy Test: 200.12 MB/s (connected to Samsung Portable SSD T7 (USB 3.2 Gen. 2), Supported File Systems for external storages: FAT32, exFAT | Body-SAR: 1.39 W/kg, Head-SAR: 0.99 W/kg | max. charging speed: 23 W (wired) / 7.5 W (wireless), fanless, waterproof
Weight
185.9 g ( = 6.56 oz / 0.41 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
549 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case - The Pixel 9a is now IP68 certified

The Google Pixel 9a is available in four colors: Iris (lilac), Poeny (coral), Porcelain (white) and Obsidian (black). Visually, it has gotten more angular, making it appear a little thicker despite its identical build height compared to the Pixel 8a. Its camera module is now smaller and flatter, protruding by only 0.55 millimeters from the case.

Its build quality is great thanks to all gaps being tight-fitting and even. There are only some slight irregularities between the back cover and the frame. The matte aluminum frame is resistant to fingerprints and feels nice to touch. When attempting to be twisted, the Pixel 9a appears solid, but it does creak slightly.

The Google phone is IP68-certified, so it's both dust-tight and waterproof. It uses Corning Gorilla Glass 3 on the front—Google could have gone for a more modern and, as a result, more durable type of glass.

Size comparison

163.52 mm / 6.44 in 77.5 mm / 3.05 in 8.39 mm / 0.3303 in 211 g0.4652 lbs162.53 mm / 6.4 in 74.67 mm / 2.94 in 8.85 mm / 0.3484 in 205 g0.4519 lbs162.2 mm / 6.39 in 77.5 mm / 3.05 in 7.4 mm / 0.2913 in 198 g0.4365 lbs154.7 mm / 6.09 in 73.3 mm / 2.89 in 8.9 mm / 0.3504 in 185.9 g0.4098 lbs152.2 mm / 5.99 in 72.7 mm / 2.86 in 8.9 mm / 0.3504 in 188 g0.4145 lbs146.7 mm / 5.78 in 71.5 mm / 2.81 in 7.8 mm / 0.3071 in 167 g0.3682 lbs148 mm / 5.83 in 105 mm / 4.13 in 1 mm / 0.03937 in 1.5 g0.00331 lbs

Connectivity - Entry-level model with limited storage

During our test, the Google Pixel 9a's USB port allowed wired image output (screen mirroring) and proved to be faster than its predecessor. It achieved just over 200 MB/s in the copying test, but could only be used in conjunction with a less energy-hungry Samsung Portable SSD T7. Its output power wasn't enough for a Samsung 980 Pro.

Buyers can choose between 128 and 256 GB of internal storage. In view of the price range in which the Pixel 9a operates, this seems too little to us, especially as users can't expand the phone's storage.

Top: microphone
Top: microphone
Left side
Left side
Right: power, volume
Right: power, volume
Bottom: speaker, USB, microphone, SIM
Bottom: speaker, USB, microphone, SIM

Software - 7 years of updates for the Pixel 9a

The Pixel 9a comes with Google Android 15 and, from launch, is set to be supplied with regular updates for seven years.

Gemini is now firmly integrated into the system and some AI-supported functions are part of the Pixel 9a. These include the camera features "Add Me" and "Best Shot". Macro focus, Magic Editor and Pixel Studio are now also on board.

The one-year free trial period for Gemini Advanced seems to be reserved for the Pro models. It's a shame that Google hasn't clearly indicated which functions only work in the cloud.

Sustainability

Google has provided a sustainability report for the Pixel 9a on its website. The outer packaging is completely plastic-free. In addition to recycled aluminum, the back of the phone also uses 81% recycled plastic. Based on its weight, the smartphone consists of 23% recycled materials.

Repair instructions and spare parts are provided and distributed via iFixit.

Communication and GNSS - 6 GHz WLAN with the handbrake on

The good news is that the Pixel 9a supports Wi-Fi 6E, which includes the 6 GHz frequency band. Unfortunately, however, it's only with 2x2 MIMO, so its transfer rates are no higher than when using conventional Wi-Fi 6.

The Pixel 9a features broad frequency support for cellular communications, so long-distance travel shouldn't be a problem. We noted no reception issues in a city environment.

Networking
Google Pixel 9a
Wi-Fi 6E
iperf3 receive AXE11000
920 (min: 458) MBit/s ∼98%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
807 (min: 348) MBit/s ∼86%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
780 (min: 731) MBit/s ∼46%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
833 (min: 789) MBit/s ∼54%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
766 (min: 698) MBit/s ∼80%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
666 (min: 568) MBit/s ∼71%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Wi-Fi 6E
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
892 (min: 522) MBit/s ∼93%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
674 (min: 627) MBit/s ∼72%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1698 (min: 1552) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1539 (min: 695) MBit/s ∼100%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
951 (min: 922) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
826 (min: 709) MBit/s ∼88%
Apple iPhone 16e
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
765 (min: 732) MBit/s ∼80%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
727 (min: 715) MBit/s ∼77%
Google Pixel 8a
Wi-Fi 6E
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
856 (min: 450) MBit/s ∼90%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
834 (min: 780) MBit/s ∼89%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
521 (min: 418) MBit/s ∼31%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
754 (min: 611) MBit/s ∼49%
Average Wi-Fi 6E
 
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
955 (min: 227) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
940 (min: 442) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1371 (min: 229) MBit/s ∼81%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1331 (min: 598) MBit/s ∼86%
Average of class Smartphone
 
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
724 (min: 49.8) MBit/s ∼76%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
736 (min: 52) MBit/s ∼78%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1381 (min: 508) MBit/s ∼81%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1400 (min: 451) MBit/s ∼91%
050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900Tooltip
Google Pixel 9a Wi-Fi 6E; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø780 (731-867)
Google Pixel 9a Wi-Fi 6E; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø833 (789-843)
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø766 (698-805)
Google Pixel 9a Wi-Fi 6E; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø905 (458-947)
Google Pixel 9a Wi-Fi 6E; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø806 (348-873)
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø666 (568-772)
GPS test: outdoors
Outdoors
GPS test: indoors
Indoors

The Pixel 9a only supports single-band GNSS, but its satellite locating abilities are both fast and precise outdoors. The situation looks different indoors, on the other hand. During our test, it then took a very long time to establish our location, which was very inaccurate, and the connection was lost from time to time.

We compared the Google phone with the Garmin Venu 2 on a bike trip. Although the 9a showed a few inaccuracies in this scenario, it should still be more than sufficient for navigation tasks.

GNSS test trip: journey around a lake
GNSS test trip: journey around a lake
GNSS test trip: turning point
GNSS test trip: turning point
GNSS test trip: summary
GNSS test trip: summary

Telephone functions and call quality

The Google Pixel 9a has space for a Nano SIM card as well as support for an eSIM, which can be used together in dual SIM operation. It also supports WLAN calls and VoLTE.

When held up to your ear, the Pixel 9a shows good call quality for voices as long as the ambient noise isn't too loud. A busy main road might be enough to stop the Pixel user from being intelligible. The hands-free mode is fine in quiet surroundings and even at a distance of 2 meters from the phone, we could be understood well during our test.

Cameras - Strong photos on the Pixel 9a

Portrait selfie with the Pixel 9a
Portrait selfie with the Pixel 9a

The front-facing camera boasts balanced color reproduction, a nice level of sharpness and good HDR properties. At best, you can record videos in Ultra HD at 30fps. The quality is good, but the subject isn't always in focus during fast movements.

Google has given its main camera a new sensor with a 48 MPix resolution, which is lower than the Pixel 8a—but the sensor in the Pixel 9a is larger. As a result of pixel binning, the photos are only 12 MPix in size and users don't have the option to use the full resolution on the 9a. The smartphone takes good photos and impresses with a high level of detail and balanced image compositions. Although the level of detail decreases in low light, the photos still leave a generally good impression.

The additional ultra-wide-angle lens delivers decent results, but gets blurry early on in the peripheral areas of close subjects (macro mode); this doesn't apply to panoramic shots. You can only zoom digitally on this phone. Up to 2x magnification, the shots look really good in daylight, but beyond this, artifacts become clearly visible. A maximum zoom of 8x is possible.

At best, the Pixel 9a records videos in Ultra HD at up to 60fps. If you limit yourself to 30fps, you can use both lenses for recording and switch between them while filming. The digital zoom is limited to 5x magnification.

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
orginal image
click to load images

In controlled lighting conditions, the Google Pixel 9a showed good color depiction without any major outliers. Light skin tones were shown with a bit of a red tint, and only when depicting cyan was its DeltaE value above 10. Our test chart remained rich in detail and sharp right into the edges.

ColorChecker
6.4 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
8.3 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
4.4 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
6.1 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
3.7 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
3.3 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
2.7 ∆E
4.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel 9a: 6.03 ∆E min: 2.73 - max: 10.52 ∆E
ColorChecker
14.5 ∆E
20.1 ∆E
18.2 ∆E
21 ∆E
20.9 ∆E
27.3 ∆E
21.1 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
13.1 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
28.1 ∆E
26.2 ∆E
11.8 ∆E
25.7 ∆E
9.6 ∆E
22.6 ∆E
16.4 ∆E
23.1 ∆E
20.8 ∆E
20.7 ∆E
22.1 ∆E
22.4 ∆E
21 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel 9a: 19.38 ∆E min: 9.56 - max: 28.15 ∆E

Accessories and warranty - Further slimmed-down scope of delivery

The Google Pixel 9a comes with a USB-C cable and a SIM tool. Google has removed the OTG adapter, but you can still purchase it separately if needed. Google also offers cases and a matching power adapter via its website.

In the USA, the phone is covered by a standard 12-month warranty and cannot be extended or expanded.

Input devices and operation - The Pixel 9a with an optical fingerprint sensor

The Google Pixel 9a's capacitive touchscreen responds reliably and quickly to touch inputs. An optical fingerprint sensor is integrated into the display, which delivers reliable recognition rates and unlocks the smartphone quickly. In addition, users can make use of facial recognition via the front-facing camera, which quickly reaches its limits in the dark and is less reliable.

The phone's linear vibration motor provides crisp haptic feedback. The power button is pre-assigned with the digital assistant when pressed and held, but can also call up the classic menu. There is also a one-handed mode available.

Display - Bright pOLED at up to 120 Hz

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

The Pixel 9a's pOLED display has grown to 6.3 inches, which isn't only due to the fact that the smartphone as such has become slightly larger, but also as a result of its slightly narrower bezels.

Its resolution delivers a high pixel density and works with a refresh rate of up to 120 Hz, but this can only be lowered to 60 Hz. The panel boasts a high brightness, but its illumination is only average. Still, this shouldn't be a negative factor during everyday use.

The 9a reached its peak brightness during the HDR test (2,679 cd/m²), but was barely darker when displaying a reduced white area (APL18: 2,653 cd/m²). We measured screen flickering at a fairly constant 240 Hz, which is probably due to PWM. Although the amplitude is flat, sensitive people should still expect some complaints.

1909
cd/m²
1933
cd/m²
1741
cd/m²
1922
cd/m²
1978
cd/m²
1672
cd/m²
1509
cd/m²
1763
cd/m²
1552
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 1978 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 1775.4 cd/m² Minimum: 2.38 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 76 %
Center on Battery: 1978 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.1 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.83
ΔE Greyscale 2.2 | 0.09-98 Ø5.1
98.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.22
Google Pixel 9a
pOLED, 2424x1080, 6.3"
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.7"
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
AMOLED, 2712x1220, 6.7"
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
AMOLED, 2392x1080, 6.8"
Apple iPhone 16e
OLED, 2532x1170, 6.1"
Google Pixel 8a
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.1"
Screen
-19%
0%
-11%
13%
-6%
Brightness middle
1978
1184
-40%
1210
-39%
1318
-33%
833
-58%
1518
-23%
Brightness
1775
1179
-34%
1222
-31%
1306
-26%
837
-53%
1466
-17%
Brightness Distribution
76
99
30%
92
21%
98
29%
99
30%
88
16%
Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
1.1
1.7
-55%
1
9%
1.5
-36%
0.7
36%
1.2
-9%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
3
3.2
-7%
2.7
10%
2.9
3%
1.6
47%
3.3
-10%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
2.2
2.4
-9%
1.5
32%
2.3
-5%
0.6
73%
2
9%
Gamma
2.22 99%
2.12 104%
2.25 98%
2.26 97%
2.19 100%
2.2 100%
CCT
6622 98%
6544 99%
6509 100%
6819 95%
6525 100%
6786 96%

* ... smaller is better

Display / APL18 Peak Brightness
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2653 cd/m²
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2136 cd/m² -19%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1952 cd/m² -26%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
1412 cd/m² -47%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1280 cd/m² -52%
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
832 cd/m² -69%
Display / HDR Peak Brightness
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3081 cd/m² +15%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2679 cd/m²
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2237 cd/m² -16%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2001 cd/m² -25%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
1347 cd/m² -50%
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
1201 cd/m² -55%

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 240 Hz
Amplitude: 12.82 %

The display backlight flickers at 240 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 240 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8350 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

minimum display brightness
min.
25 % display brightness
25 %
50 % display brightness
50 %
75 % display brightness
75 %
maximum manual display brightness
100 %

Measurement series with fixed zoom level and different brightness settings (The amplitude curve at minimum brightness looks flat, but this is due to the scaling. The info box shows the enlarged version of the amplitude at minimum brightness). 

Our Calman measurements attest to the Pixel 9a's accurate color reproduction, provided the profile Natural is used. Otherwise, its display is visibly cooler.

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

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
0.81 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.4405 ms rise
↘ 0.367 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. » 2 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.5 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
0.93 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.4575 ms rise
↘ 0.474 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.1 ms).

Outdoors, the Pixel's display remains legible in all lighting conditions—the reflections from its glass surface may, however, be distracting in bright light.

The Google Pixel 9a outdoors
Outdoors
The Google Pixel 9a outdoors
The Google Pixel 9a outdoors

The Google Pixel 9a's viewing angle stability is very good. The smartphone always remains easy to read even at very flat viewing angles—the brightness of the panel then only decreases slightly and it displays colors slightly cooler.

The Google Pixel 9a's viewing angle stability
The Google Pixel 9a's viewing angle stability

Performance - The Pixel 9a with the Tensor G4

The Pixel 9a shares the same chipset as the other smartphones in Google's 9-series, namely the Tensor G4. However, at 8 GB, the 9a has less RAM available. As a result, it was on par with its siblings, such as the Pixel 9, during our CPU test.

That being said, it performed weaker in the system benchmarks. For example, the Pixel 9 was 22% faster during PCMark and even 34% faster during Basemark OS II. The RAM in particular seemed to play a role here, as did the GPU. Even so, the Pixel 9a works smoothly during everyday use.

Geekbench 6.4
Single-Core
Apple iPhone 16e
Apple A18, A18 GPU, 8192
3338 Points +96%
Average Google Tensor G4
  (1702 - 1982, n=5)
1881 Points +11%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
1702 Points
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
1699 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (196 - 3479, n=204, last 2 years)
1607 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
1380 Points -19%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1179 Points -31%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1162 Points -32%
Multi-Core
Apple iPhone 16e
Apple A18, A18 GPU, 8192
8044 Points +81%
Average of class Smartphone
  (830 - 10401, n=204, last 2 years)
4631 Points +4%
Average Google Tensor G4
  (4453 - 4820, n=5)
4610 Points +4%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
4453 Points
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
4408 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
3890 Points -13%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
3298 Points -26%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
3239 Points -27%
Antutu v10 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 16e
Apple A18, A18 GPU, 8192
1432050 Points +70%
Average of class Smartphone
  (142748 - 3015111, n=146, last 2 years)
1333864 Points +58%
Average Google Tensor G4
  (844082 - 1322101, n=4)
1081893 Points +28%
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
1049981 Points +24%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
901303 Points +7%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
844082 Points
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
787469 Points -7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
756800 Points -10%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
14298 Points +25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4507 - 27169, n=192, last 2 years)
14293 Points +25%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
13874 Points +22%
Average Google Tensor G4
  (11398 - 13948, n=5)
12668 Points +11%
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
11565 Points +1%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
11398 Points
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
10617 Points -7%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
7088 Points +38%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1196 - 14066, n=152, last 2 years)
7046 Points +37%
Average Google Tensor G4
  (5154 - 7716, n=4)
6850 Points +33%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
5881 Points +14%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
5430 Points +5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
5402 Points +5%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
5154 Points
System
Average of class Smartphone
  (2368 - 20776, n=152, last 2 years)
10842 Points +110%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
10153 Points +96%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
9765 Points +89%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
7930 Points +53%
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
7828 Points +51%
Average Google Tensor G4
  (5170 - 8038, n=4)
7208 Points +39%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
5170 Points
Memory
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
9837 Points +140%
Average Google Tensor G4
  (4094 - 10197, n=4)
8222 Points +101%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
8078 Points +97%
Average of class Smartphone
  (962 - 20652, n=152, last 2 years)
7914 Points +93%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
6960 Points +70%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
5642 Points +38%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
4094 Points
Graphics
Average of class Smartphone
  (1046 - 384996, n=152, last 2 years)
22829 Points +23%
Average Google Tensor G4
  (18582 - 23041, n=4)
21072 Points +13%
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
18837 Points +1%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
18582 Points
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
10319 Points -44%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
9482 Points -49%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
8662 Points -53%
Web
Average Google Tensor G4
  (1648 - 1983, n=4)
1826 Points +2%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
1794 Points
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
1762 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
1706 Points -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (858 - 2363, n=152, last 2 years)
1634 Points -9%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1567 Points -13%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1566 Points -13%
UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
37104 Points
Average Google Tensor G4
  (35227 - 37104, n=4)
36239 Points -2%
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
29654 Points -20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1267 - 81594, n=143, last 2 years)
18691 Points -50%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
11181 Points -70%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
8652 Points -77%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
8460 Points -77%
AImark - Score v3.x
Apple iPhone 16e
Apple A18, A18 GPU, 8192
30473 Points +4316%
Average of class Smartphone
  (82 - 307528, n=128, last 2 years)
26916 Points +3801%
Average Google Tensor G4
  (690 - 1434, n=4)
1035 Points +50%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
926 Points +34%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
702 Points +2%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
690 Points
Google Pixel 8a
Google Tensor G3, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
Points -100%
Geekbench AI
Single Precision TensorFlow NNAPI 1.2
Average of class Smartphone
  (51 - 2472, n=55, last 2 years)
508 Points +70%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
298 Points
Average Google Tensor G4
  (n=1)
298 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
276 Points -7%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
231 Points -22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
230 Points -23%
Half Precision TensorFlow NNAPI 1.2
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
4240 Points
Average Google Tensor G4
  (n=1)
4240 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (51 - 9453, n=55, last 2 years)
1148 Points -73%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
276 Points -93%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
232 Points -95%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
231 Points -95%
Quantized TensorFlow NNAPI 1.2
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
8020 Points
Average Google Tensor G4
  (n=1)
8020 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (123 - 13084, n=55, last 2 years)
1868 Points -77%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
646 Points -92%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
549 Points -93%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
536 Points -93%
AI Benchmark - Score V6
Average of class Smartphone
  (68.9 - 12578, n=55, last 2 years)
4310 Points +387%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1373 Points +55%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1246 Points +41%
Average Google Tensor G4
  (885 - 1168, n=4)
1056 Points +19%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4, Mali-G715 MP7, 8192
885 Points
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
301 Points -66%

The integrated ARM Mali-G715 MP7 is responsible for graphics calculations. It doesn't support ray tracing and appears to work somewhat slower than the nominally identical variants in the Pixel 9 Pro and co, but this can also be attributed to poorer cooling.

In comparison, it still offers high performance and was only surpassed by the iPhone 16e during our test.

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
2827 Points +12%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2520 Points
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2353 Points -7%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1362 Points -46%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
1060 Points -58%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1039 Points -59%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
3330 Points +27%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2615 Points
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2359 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1382 Points -47%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
1055 Points -60%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1054 Points -60%
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
14024 Points +51%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9302 Points
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8960 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5237 Points -44%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
4176 Points -55%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
4131 Points -56%
3DMark / Solar Bay Score
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
6120 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
Points
3DMark / Solar Bay Unlimited Score
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
5557 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
Points
3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Unlimited Score
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
1149 Points +11%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1038 Points
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
989 Points -5%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
659 Points -37%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
383 Points -63%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
354 Points -66%
3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Score
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
1517 Points +44%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1055 Points
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
994 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
654 Points -38%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
375 Points -64%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
359 Points -66%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
119 fps +98%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
116 fps +93%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
98 fps +63%
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
60 fps 0%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
60 fps 0%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
397.5 fps +3%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
386 fps
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
373 fps -3%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
156 fps -60%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
131 fps -66%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
130 fps -66%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
119 fps +98%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
97 fps +62%
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
60 fps 0%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
59 fps -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
57 fps -5%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
259.9 fps +29%
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
241 fps +20%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
201 fps
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
112 fps -44%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
85 fps -58%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
84 fps -58%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
98 fps +63%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
74 fps +23%
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
60 fps 0%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
54 fps -10%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
42 fps -30%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
175.3 fps +15%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
153 fps
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
117 fps -24%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
85 fps -44%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
62 fps -59%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
61 fps -60%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
75 fps +25%
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
60 fps 0%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
42 fps -30%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
29 fps -52%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
23 fps -62%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
129.1 fps +43%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
90 fps
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
74 fps -18%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
47 fps -48%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
35 fps -61%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
34 fps -62%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
59.2 fps 0%
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59 fps 0%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59 fps
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
36 fps -39%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
28 fps -53%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
22 fps -63%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
50 fps +28%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
39 fps
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
36 fps -8%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
26 fps -33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
20 fps -49%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
20 fps -49%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
81 fps +35%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
59.9 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
53 fps -12%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
46 fps -23%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
35 fps -42%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
140 fps +28%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
109 fps
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
96 fps -12%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
65 fps -40%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
52 fps -52%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
52 fps -52%
GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
20.6 fps +8%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
19 fps
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
16 fps -16%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
12 fps -37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
8.8 fps -54%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
8.8 fps -54%

The browser benchmarks showed a mixed picture. While the Pixel 9a took second place in Octane 2.0 or Speedometer 3.0 as expected, it was surprisingly weak in other benchmarks.

Jetstream 2 - 2.0 Total Score
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
299.928 Points +194%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
151.579 Points +49%
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=156, last 2 years)
141.4 Points +39%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134)
132.67 Points +30%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
118.037 Points +16%
Average Google Tensor G4 (102 - 117.5, n=4)
108.8 Points +7%
Google Pixel 9a (Chrome 137)
101.959 Points
Google Pixel 8a (Chrome 126)
94.765 Points -7%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
550 runs/min +122%
Google Pixel 9a (Chrome 137)
248 runs/min
Average Google Tensor G4 (182 - 248, n=4)
206 runs/min -17%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
191 runs/min -23%
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 585, n=138, last 2 years)
179.9 runs/min -27%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 135)
170 runs/min -31%
Google Pixel 8a (Chrome 126)
161 runs/min -35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
144 runs/min -42%
Speedometer 3.0 - Score
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
33.3 runs/min +127%
Average Google Tensor G4 (14.7 - 15.8, n=4)
15.1 runs/min +3%
Google Pixel 9a (Chrome 137)
14.7 runs/min
Average of class Smartphone (1.03 - 34, n=104, last 2 years)
12.7 runs/min -14%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
12 runs/min -18%
Google Pixel 8a (Chrome 126)
10.5 runs/min -29%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 135)
10 runs/min -32%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
8.58 runs/min -42%
WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
273 Points +203%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
138 Points +53%
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 273, n=150, last 2 years)
132.7 Points +47%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134)
125 Points +39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
110 Points +22%
Average Google Tensor G4 (90 - 112, n=4)
102.8 Points +14%
Google Pixel 8a (Chrome 126)
95 Points +6%
Google Pixel 9a (Chrome 137)
90 Points
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
97104 Points +86%
Average Google Tensor G4 (52224 - 62374, n=5)
58757 Points +13%
Google Pixel 9a (Chrome 137)
52224 Points
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
50719 Points -3%
Google Pixel 8a (Chrome 126)
46738 Points -11%
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=204, last 2 years)
44560 Points -15%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134)
44460 Points -15%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
37415 Points -28%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=159, last 2 years)
1303 ms * -21%
Google Pixel 9a (Chrome 137)
1081.2 ms *
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
1044 ms * +3%
Google Pixel 8a (Chrome 126)
886.7 ms * +18%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134)
875.1 ms * +19%
Average Google Tensor G4 (699 - 1081, n=4)
809 ms * +25%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
792.6 ms * +27%
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
287.8 ms * +73%

* ... smaller is better

The Google Pixel 9a's UFS 3.1 storage boasted high speeds during our test, but it could have been a little faster when it came to sequential writing.

Google Pixel 9aSamsung Galaxy A56 5GXiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GNothing Phone (3a) ProGoogle Pixel 8aAverage 128 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-8%
-23%
-1%
-30%
-7%
45%
Sequential Read 256KB
1688.82
1634.8
-3%
992.72
-41%
996.23
-41%
1509.65
-11%
Sequential Write 256KB
853.5
999.95
17%
931.68
9%
970.63
14%
255.31
-70%
Random Read 4KB
241.03
207.01
-14%
171.2
-29%
255.89
6%
165.98
-31%
Random Write 4KB
261.8
184.08
-30%
186.14
-29%
304.95
16%
243.82
-7%

Games - Not always a stable 60fps

We analyzed the gaming properties of the Pixel 9a using GameBench. In general, most games can be played smoothly, but PUBG Mobile, for example, showed that throttling under load also influenced its frame rates. The only strange thing was that the setting with the lowest detail level generated fewer frames than the HD setting.

051015202530354045505560Tooltip
Google Pixel 9a; PUBG Mobile; Smooth: Ø52.3 (41-58)
Google Pixel 9a; PUBG Mobile; HD; 3.8.0: Ø53.8 (39-60)
Google Pixel 9a; PUBG Mobile; Ultra HD; 3.8.0: Ø39.7 (33-41)
Google Pixel 9a; Diablo Immortal: Ø58.6 (16-60)

Emissions - Poor cooling slows down the Pixel 9a

Temperature

The phone's surface temperatures are completely harmless in idle mode and don't rise to a critical value at any time, even under constant load.

During the stress tests with 3DMark, the Pixel 9a was revealed to have rather weak cooling performance, as the nominally fast SoC was slowed down considerably by the heat and was even slower or just as fast as an Exynos 1580 in the Galaxy A56 in the long term.

Max. Load
 43 °C
109 F
42.5 °C
109 F
40.3 °C
105 F
 
 42.3 °C
108 F
42.2 °C
108 F
39.2 °C
103 F
 
 41.9 °C
107 F
42 °C
108 F
39.2 °C
103 F
 
Maximum: 43 °C = 109 F
Average: 41.4 °C = 107 F
39.4 °C
103 F
43.1 °C
110 F
42.6 °C
109 F
38.6 °C
101 F
40.6 °C
105 F
43.4 °C
110 F
37.3 °C
99 F
40.8 °C
105 F
42.2 °C
108 F
Maximum: 43.4 °C = 110 F
Average: 40.9 °C = 106 F
Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 41.4 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 32.8 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 43.4 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Steel Nomad stress test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
99.5 % +83%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
95.4 % +75%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
93.4 % +71%
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
83 % +52%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
54.5 %
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
51.4 % -6%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
99 % +70%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
97.7 % +67%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
97.3 % +67%
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
82.5 % +41%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
58.4 %
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
51.3 % -12%
Solar Bay Stress Test Stability
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
95.2 %
Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
99 % +17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
98.8 % +17%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
98.7 % +17%
Google Pixel 9a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
84.5 %
Apple iPhone 16e
A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
75 % -11%
Google Pixel 8a
Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G3, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
54.1 % -36%
0510152025303540455055Tooltip
Google Pixel 9a Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø11.3 (9.19-15.7)
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø8.6 (8.48-8.68)
Apple iPhone 16e A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 0.0.0.0: Ø14.6 (14-17)
Google Pixel 9a Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø37 (30.1-55.2)
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø32.2 (31.3-32.8)
Apple iPhone 16e A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø50.2 (49-59)
Apple iPhone 16e A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe; Solar Bay Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø14.5 (14.1-14.8)
Google Pixel 9a Mali-G715 MP7, Tensor G4, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 1.1.1.3: Ø7.34 (6.66-7.88)
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 1.1.1.3: Ø4.85 (4.81-4.88)
Apple iPhone 16e A18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø7.88 (7.52-10)

Speakers

The smartphone's two speakers deliver a good sound, but seem a little weak at high volumes. The high tones are then too present and lack clarity.

Alternatively, you can output sound via USB. Bluetooth is available wirelessly but unfortunately, Google hasn't provided any information on which codecs are supported and prevents users from reading it out in the developer options. Though it will likely look similar to its predecessor. Auracast is not yet supported.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2040.843.42530.131.73126.7264027.829.85035.941.46328.324.28028.827.610027.33012517.238.816016.353.420014.751.625012.853.631513.257.440012.657.850012.36363012.268.280012.172.7100012.372.3125012.372.5160012.172.520001274.4250012.270.931501376.4400013.182.7500013.181.3630013.573.2800013.469.21000013.466.91250013.566.51600013.360.6SPL2588.1N0.668.4median 13.1median 68.4Delta1.77.237.839.828.125.424.427.920.524.929.532.418.92517.727.515.831.313.436.113.947.611.249.510.453.611.752.810.1588.863.88.962.89.268.99.870.210.372.510.872.411.876.411.379.71277.21380.312.678.512.873.912.971.313.367.513.556.213.645.123.887.70.566.5median 11.8median 67.51.510.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseGoogle Pixel 9aSamsung Galaxy A56 5G
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Google Pixel 9a audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 9% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 36%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 30% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 62% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%

Samsung Galaxy A56 5G audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 33% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 36%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 52% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%

Battery life - Large battery for long endurance

Power consumption

The Google Pixel 9a has a particularly high power consumption when the display brightness is high, but this is due to its high luminosity without the ambient light sensor activated (1,188 cd/m²).

You can charge the Pixel 9a at a maximum of 23 watts via a cable and 7.5 watts wirelessly. Using a 125-watt power supply from Motorola (PD 2/3), it took 96 minutes to fully charge it during our test (50%: 31 mins, 80%: 54 mins, 90%: 69 mins).

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.13 / 0.34 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.71 / 2.36 / 2.41 Watt
Load midlight 8.24 / 15.36 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Google Pixel 9a
5100 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
5110 mAh
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
5000 mAh
Apple iPhone 16e
4005 mAh
Google Pixel 8a
4492 mAh
Average Google Tensor G4
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
14%
30%
39%
28%
15%
4%
19%
Idle Minimum *
0.71
0.72
-1%
1.07
-51%
0.89
-25%
0.68
4%
0.92
-30%
0.744 ?(0.48 - 1.28, n=5)
-5%
Idle Average *
2.36
1.45
39%
1.26
47%
1.3
45%
1.89
20%
1.46
38%
1.894 ?(1.1 - 2.99, n=5)
20%
Idle Maximum *
2.41
1.49
38%
1.28
47%
1.33
45%
1.93
20%
1.65
32%
2.11 ?(1.2 - 3.32, n=5)
12%
Load Average *
8.24
9.68
-17%
3.7
55%
3.29
60%
3.77
54%
7.96
3%
Load Maximum *
15.36
13.39
13%
7.52
51%
4.76
69%
9.04
41%
10.74
30%

* ... smaller is better

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

012345678910111213Tooltip
Google Pixel 9a Google Tensor G4; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø5.97 (0.86-13.4)
Google Pixel 9 Google Tensor G4; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø6.43 (0.81-13.9)
Google Pixel 9a Google Tensor G4; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.908 (0.86-1.094)
Google Pixel 9 Google Tensor G4; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.645 (0.596-0.931)

Power consumption: GFXbench (150 cd/m²)

0123456789Tooltip
Google Pixel 9a Google Tensor G4; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø8.31 (7.56-9.22)
Google Pixel 9 Google Tensor G4; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø8.15 (7.27-8.9)
Google Pixel 9a Google Tensor G4; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.908 (0.86-1.094)
Google Pixel 9 Google Tensor G4; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.645 (0.596-0.931)

Runtimes

The Google Pixel 9a's runtimes were great during our test, clearly outperforming both its predecessor and the Pixel 9.

However, especially during the Wi-Fi test with the display brightness adjusted, the comparison field was somewhat closer and the gaps were smaller.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
44h 48min
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 137)
21h 13min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
31h 47min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 02min
Google Pixel 9a
5100 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
5110 mAh
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
5000 mAh
Apple iPhone 16e
4005 mAh
Google Pixel 8a
4492 mAh
Battery Runtime
8%
-24%
-7%
-2%
-31%
Reader / Idle
2688
3173
18%
1433
-47%
2842
6%
1803
-33%
H.264
1907
2506
31%
1109
-42%
1460
-23%
1132
-41%
WiFi v1.3
1273
1199
-6%
1168
-8%
1188
-7%
1390
9%
796
-37%
Load
242
215
-11%
249
3%
244
1%
211
-13%

Notebookcheck total rating

The Google Pixel 9a offers a strong overall package with a long update supply, high peak performance, a long-lasting battery and a good camera duo.

However, its bright display didn't fully evade our criticism during our test, its storage options are limited, and its charging speed isn't particularly fast.

Google Pixel 9a - 06/17/2025 v8
Daniel Schmidt

Chassis
85%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
93%
Connectivity
48 / 69 → 70%
Weight
90%
Battery
92%
Display
90%
Games Performance
26 / 55 → 47%
Application Performance
62 / 85 → 73%
AI Performance
64%
Temperature
87%
Noise
100%
Audio
77 / 90 → 85%
Camera
77%
Average
78%
81%
Smartphone - Weighted Average
CO2 Emissions
89.1%
Materials
50%
Packaging
95%
Power Use
94.3%
Repairability
72%
Software Updates
100%
Recycle Logo Total Sustainability Score: 83.4%

Possible alternatives compared

Image
Model / Review
Price
Weight
Drive
Display
1.
81%
Google Pixel 9a
Google Pixel 9a
Google Tensor G4 ⎘
ARM Mali-G715 MP7 ⎘
8 GB Memory, 128 GB 
Amazon:
1. $599.00
Google Pixel 9 - Unlocked An...
2. $5.99
Ferilinso 3 Pack Screen Prot...
3. $7.99
Supershieldz (3 Pack) Design...
List Price: 549€
185.9 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.30"
2424x1080
421 PPI
pOLED
2.
80%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Exynos 1580 ⎘
Samsung Xclipse 540 ⎘
8 GB Memory, 128 GB 
Amazon:
1. $5.95
Mr.Shield Screen Protector c...
2. $6.99
Supershieldz (2 Pack) Design...
3. $6.89
NEW'C 3 Pack Designed for Sa...
List Price: 479€
198 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.70"
2340x1080
385 PPI
Super AMOLED
3.
79.6%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3 ⎘
Qualcomm Adreno 810 ⎘
12 GB Memory, 512 GB UFS 2.1
Amazon:
1. $6.99
Natbok 2+2 Pack 3D Screen Pr...
2. $7.99
Natbok 2+2 Pack 3D Screen Pr...
3. $11.99
Ibywind Screen Protector For...
List Price: 530€
205 g512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.67"
2712x1220
446 PPI
AMOLED
4.
79.6%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3 ⎘
Qualcomm Adreno 810 ⎘
12 GB Memory
Amazon:
1. $6.99
Fhyeugfy for Nothing Phone (...
2. $7.99
Supershieldz (3 Pack) Design...
3. $11.99
Ibywind For Nothing Phone (3...
211 g6.77"
2392x1080
388 PPI
AMOLED
5.
84.1%
Apple iPhone 16e
Apple iPhone 16e
Apple A18 ⎘
Apple A18 GPU ⎘
8 GB Memory, 128 GB NVMe
Amazon:
1. $39.00
Apple iPhone 16e Silicone Ca...
2. $5.98
Ailun Screen Protector for i...
3. $9.99
iPhone 16e Car Charger USB C...
List Price: 699 Euro
167 g128 GB NVMe6.10"
2532x1170
460 PPI
OLED

Transparency

The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this 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. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.

This is how Notebookcheck is testing

Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Reviews > Great battery life and a handy size - Google Pixel 9a review
Daniel Schmidt, 2025-06-19 (Update: 2025-06-20)