Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.8 | 80.2 |
| Basic Information | |
| Android 9.0 Pie | -- |
| 2019-10-16 | 2016-10-20 |
| 6.76 x 3.09 x 0.38 inches | 5.66 x 2.74 x 0.34 inches |
| 7.58 ounces | 5.04 ounces |
| Cyber shade | Black, Gray and White |
| Aluminum | Aluminum and Glass |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 600.00 | $ 299.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 5 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) |
| AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 385 pixels per inch | 441 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.2 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ SM8150-AC chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro chipset |
| Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2960 MHz) processor | Kryo, 64-bit (Quad-Core 2150 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 640 GPU | Adreno 530 GPU |
| 9.81 | 8.91 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 13.3 | 10.1 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 16.00 MP | 12.30 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/2.00 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor | 0.43 inches (1/2.3") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (15 fps) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 11.88 | 9.79 |
| 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) and HSDPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 2770mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.8 | 4.72 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| GPS | GPS |
| -- | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Google Pixel has a general score of 80.2, which is just a bit better than the nubia Red Magic 3S's general score of 75.8. The Google Pixel is an extremely older phone than the nubia Red Magic 3S, but Google was able to make it way lighter and somewhat thinner. Google Pixel counts with a little more vivid display than nubia Red Magic 3S, because although it has a bit lower 1080 x 1920 pixels resolution and a lot smaller display, it also counts with a just a bit more pixels per inch of screen.
Nubia Red Magic 3S has a greater performance than Google Pixel, because it has a larger number of cores and more RAM. Nubia Red Magic 3S features a lot bigger memory capacity for apps and games than Google Pixel, because it has 256 GB internal storage. The nubia Red Magic 3S takes much better photos and videos than Google Pixel, because it has a larger back camera sensor which provides a higher image and video quality, a lot better video resolution, a back facing camera with a much better 48 MP resolution and a bigger aperture for better captures in low light situations.
The nubia Red Magic 3S features a really longer battery duration than Google Pixel, because it has a 5000mAh battery capacity against 2770mAh.
In addition to being the best phone of the ones we are comparing here, the Google Pixel is also very cheap compared to the other ones.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.