Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 73.1 | 80.7 |
| 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 | 6.22 x 3.02 x 0.31 inches |
| 6.38 ounces | 6.49 ounces |
| Blue | Black, Pink and White |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 107.00 | $ 194.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.5 inches | 6.3 inches |
| 1280 x 720 pixels (HD) | 2960 x 1440 pixels |
| TFT | Super AMOLED |
| 267 pixels per inch | 522 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 7.1 | 8.7 |
| 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 | 3430mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 5.28 | 5.44 |
| 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
Google Pixel 3 XL is much better than the Galaxy J7 Star, with a general score of 80.7 against 73.1. The Google Pixel 3 XL design is just a little heavier but a bit thinner than Galaxy J7 Star, and they were released only a couple of months apart. Google Pixel 3 XL counts with a little faster processing unit than Samsung Galaxy J7 Star, and although they both have the same number of cores, the Google Pixel 3 XL also has a higher amount of RAM memory.
Google Pixel 3 XL has a much sharper display than Samsung Galaxy J7 Star, because it has a lot greater pixels count per inch in the display, a way higher 1440 x 2960 resolution and a little larger screen. Galaxy J7 Star features a lot bigger memory capacity for applications, games, photos and videos than Google Pixel 3 XL, because although it has only 32 GB internal storage capacity, it also counts with a SD memory card expansion slot that admits a maximum of 400 GB.
The Google Pixel 3 XL has a bit longer battery lifetime than Galaxy J7 Star, because it has a 4% larger battery capacity. The Google Pixel 3 XL counts with a bit better camera than Galaxy J7 Star, because although it has a worse resolution camera and a tinier aperture which is not so good for capturing photos or videos in low-light environments, it also counts with a much better video definition and a bigger sensor providing a better image quality.
Although Google Pixel 3 XL is a better device, it is a lot more expensive than the Galaxy J7 Star, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as the Galaxy J7 Star. If you are trying to save some money, you can buy Galaxy J7 Star, letting go a couple features, but you will get the most out of your budget.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.