Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.8 | 78.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| -- | Android 11, 10, 9.0 Pie |
| 2016-06-10 | 2019-05-07 |
| 5.86 x 2.95 x 0.39 inches | 5.96 x 2.76 x 0.32 inches |
| 6.53 ounces | 5.19 ounces |
| Camo green, Sandy gold and Titanium gray | Black, Purple and White |
| Plastic | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 247.00 | $ 186.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 5.6 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2220 x 1080 pixels |
| Super AMOLED | OLED |
| 576 pixels per inch | 441 pixels per inch |
| 500 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 9.3 | 8.2 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 SDM670 chipset |
| Kryo, 64-bit, 14 nm (Quad-Core 2150 MHz) processor | Kryo 360, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 530 GPU | Adreno 615 GPU |
| 8.91 | 9.09 |
| Storage | |
| 32 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 200 GB) external memory slot | No SD card slot |
| 8.56 | 7.7 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 5.00 MP | 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| -- | 28.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 9.46 | 9.79 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| -- | Mobile Hotspot |
| HSPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 3 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Battery | 3000mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| Wireless Charging | -- |
| 5.92 | 4.96 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
The Google Pixel 3a has an overall score of 78.8, which is a little bit better than the Samsung Galaxy S7 Active's global score of 75.8. Google Pixel 3a is a incredibly newer cellphone, and it is also incredibly lighter and somewhat thinner than the Samsung Galaxy S7 Active. The Google Pixel 3a counts with just a bit better processing power than Galaxy S7 Active, and although they both have the same RAM amount, the Google Pixel 3a also has a higher number of cores (but slower).
Galaxy S7 Active features a more vivid screen than Google Pixel 3a, because although it has a little smaller display, it also counts with a higher pixel amount in each display inch and a better 1440 x 2560px resolution. The Google Pixel 3a has a bit better camera than Galaxy S7 Active, because although it has a smaller aperture, and they both have the same video frame rate and the same 3840x2160 (4K) video quality, the Google Pixel 3a also counts with a more MP back camera.
Samsung Galaxy S7 Active counts with a better storage capacity for applications and games than Google Pixel 3a, because although it has less internal memory capacity, it also counts with a slot for an external memory card that holds up to 200 GB. The Galaxy S7 Active has superior battery lifetime than Google Pixel 3a, because it has 4000mAh of battery capacity instead of 3000mAh.
The Google Pixel 3a not only is the best phones of the ones we compare here, but it's also a lot cheaper, which makes this phone a great choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.