Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 73.1 | 80 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 9.0 Pie, 8.0 Oreo | -- |
| 2018-07-13 | 2018-10-18 |
| 6.03 x 3.00 x 0.34 inches | 5.73 x 2.69 x 0.31 inches |
| 6.38 ounces | 5.22 ounces |
| Blue | Black, Pink and White |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 107.00 | $ 157.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 5.5 inches |
| 1280 x 720 pixels (HD) | 2160 x 1080 pixels |
| TFT | P-OLED |
| 267 pixels per inch | 439 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.1 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7870 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 14 nm (Octa-Core 1600 MHz) processor | Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2500 MHz) processor |
| 2 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-T830 MP1 GPU | Adreno 630 GPU |
| 8.73 | 9.36 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 400 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 9.44 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 13.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 28.00mm focal length | 28.00mm focal length |
| 0.33 inches (1/3.06") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.13 | 9.79 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 2915mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 5.28 | 4.88 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | 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 3 is a little bit better than the Galaxy J7 Star, having an 80 score against 73.1. Although the Google Pixel 3 and the Galaxy J7 Star were released only a couple months apart, the Google Pixel 3 is just a little bit thinner and lighter. The Google Pixel 3 counts with a much better display than Galaxy J7 Star, and although they both have a display of the same size, the Google Pixel 3 also has a lot better pixels number per display inch and a much better 1080 x 2160 resolution.
The Google Pixel 3 has just a little better processing power than Galaxy J7 Star, and although they both have 8 CPU cores, the Google Pixel 3 also has more RAM memory. Google Pixel 3 counts with just a bit better camera than Samsung Galaxy J7 Star, because although it has a smaller aperture which is not favorable for taking pictures and video in poorly lited environments and a lesser megapixels resolution back facing camera, it also counts with a larger camera sensor capturing higher quality photos and videos and a way higher video definition.
The Galaxy J7 Star counts with a superior storage capacity for games and applications than Google Pixel 3, because although it has less internal memory, it also counts with an external SD slot that allows up to 400 GB. Galaxy J7 Star features just a little bit longer battery duration than Google Pixel 3, because it has a 13 percent bigger battery capacity.
Google Pixel 3 is way more expensive than the Galaxy J7 Star, but you can get a better phone for that few more dollars.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.