Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 78.8 | 76.9 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 11, 10, 9.0 Pie | Android 10, 9.0 Pie |
| 2019-05-07 | 2019-04-26 |
| 5.96 x 2.76 x 0.32 inches | 6.47 x 3.02 x 0.31 inches |
| 5.19 ounces | 6.46 ounces |
| Black, Purple and White | Black, Blue, Pink and White |
| Plastic | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 186.00 | $ 299.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.6 inches | 6.7 inches |
| 2220 x 1080 pixels | 2400 x 1080 pixels |
| OLED | Super AMOLED |
| 441 pixels per inch | 393 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.2 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 SDM670 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 SM6150 chipset |
| Kryo 360, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor | Kryo 460, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Adreno 615 GPU | Adreno 612 GPU |
| 9.09 | 9.18 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 7.7 | 14.14 |
| Camera | |
| 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP | 32.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | 27.00mm focal length |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 9.79 | 3.52 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3000mAh Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 4.96 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Google Pixel 3a is a little bit better than Galaxy A70, with a global score of 78.8 against 76.9. The Google Pixel 3a construction is just a little bit thicker but somewhat lighter than the Galaxy A70, and they were released only a few months apart. Both phones in this review use Android OS, but Google Pixel 3a has a newer 11 version and Galaxy A70 has Android 10 version, giving a couple additional features.
Galaxy A70 has a bit faster CPU than Google Pixel 3a, and although they both have the same number of cores, the Galaxy A70 also has more RAM memory. The Google Pixel 3a features a little sharper screen than Samsung Galaxy A70, because although it has a bit smaller screen and a bit worse 1080 x 2220 resolution, it also counts with a bit greater count of pixels per inch of display.
The Google Pixel 3a counts with a much better camera than Galaxy A70, because although it has a smaller camera aperture which is not favorable for low-light photos and videos, and they both have the same 30 frames per second video frame rates and the same video resolution, the Google Pixel 3a also counts with a larger back-facing camera sensor.
The Galaxy A70 counts with a superior memory capacity to install games and applications than Google Pixel 3a, because it has 128 GB internal storage capacity and an external memory slot that admits up to 512 GB. The Samsung Galaxy A70 features a way better battery life than Google Pixel 3a, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity against 3000mAh.
In addition to being the best phone of the ones we are comparing, the Google Pixel 3a is also a lot cheaper.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.