Energizer Ultimate U652S vs. Google Pixel 6a: A Deep Dive into Value and Performance
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing a smooth, intelligent experience and excellent camera capabilities, the Google Pixel 6a is the clear winner. Its Google Tensor chipset delivers significantly superior performance and software support. However, the Energizer U652S offers a functional smartphone experience at a dramatically lower price point.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Energizer Ultimate U652S | Google Pixel 6a |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 48, 66, 71 - GX7AS, GB62Z (USA/Canada) |
| 5G bands | - | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 20, 25, 28, 30, 38, 40, 41, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - GX7AS (USA/Canada) |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| - | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 20, 25, 28, 30, 40, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - G1AZG (International) | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2024, February | 2022, May 11 |
| Status | Available. Released 2024, July | Available. Released 2022, July 21 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), aluminum frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 164.3 x 76.1 x 9.1 mm (6.47 x 3.00 x 0.36 in) | 152.2 x 71.8 x 8.9 mm (5.99 x 2.83 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + eSIM |
| Weight | 190 g (6.70 oz) | 178 g (6.28 oz) |
| - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~270 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~429 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.51 inches, 102.3 cm2 (~81.8% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.1 inches, 90.7 cm2 (~83.0% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | OLED, HDR |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Quad-core 1.5 GHz | Octa-core (2x2.80 GHz Cortex-X1 & 2x2.25 GHz Cortex-A76 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6739WW (28 nm) | Google Tensor (5 nm) |
| GPU | IMG 8XE1PPC | Mali-G78 MP20 |
| OS | Android 13 (Go edition) | Android 12, upgradable to Android 15, up to 5 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | No |
| Internal | 64GB 2GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM |
| - | UFS 3.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 12.2 MP, f/1.7, 27mm, (wide), 1/2.55", 1.4µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS 12 MP, f/2.2, 17mm, 114˚ (ultrawide), 1.25µm |
| Features | LED flash | Dual-LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama |
| Single | - | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1.12µm |
| Triple | 18 MP (wide), AF Auxiliary lenses | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps; gyro-EIS, OIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 13 MP, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1.12µm |
| Video | Yes | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.2, A2DP | 5.2, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, QZSS |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 3.1 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | - | 18W wired, PD3.0 |
| Type | Li-Ion 4000 mAh | Li-Po 4410 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black | Chalk, Charcoal, Sage |
| Models | - | GX7AS, GB62Z, G1AZG, GB17L |
| Price | About 70 EUR | $ 138.99 / C$ 228.74 / ₹ 23,999 |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 94h |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
Energizer Ultimate U652S
- Significantly lower price point
- Functional for basic smartphone tasks
- Potentially longer battery life due to less demanding hardware
- Outdated processor and architecture
- Poor performance for demanding apps and games
- Inferior camera quality
Google Pixel 6a
- Powerful Google Tensor chipset
- Excellent camera with advanced features
- Guaranteed software updates and support
- Higher price point
- May experience some thermal throttling under heavy load
- Charging speed is not class-leading
Display Comparison
The Pixel 6a boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 876 nits, compared to an unspecified brightness for the Energizer U652S. This translates to far better visibility outdoors. While both phones offer an 'infinite' (nominal) contrast ratio, the Pixel 6a’s display technology is likely superior, contributing to a more vibrant and engaging viewing experience. The U652S, being a budget device, likely utilizes a simpler LCD panel, while the Pixel 6a likely uses OLED. Bezels are also expected to be slimmer on the Pixel 6a, offering a more modern aesthetic.
Camera Comparison
The Pixel 6a’s camera system is a major advantage. While specific sensor details for the U652S are unavailable, it’s safe to assume it utilizes a lower-resolution sensor and lacks the advanced image processing capabilities of the Pixel 6a. Google’s computational photography, powered by the Tensor chip, delivers exceptional image quality, particularly in low-light conditions. The Pixel 6a’s image processing excels in dynamic range and detail preservation. The U652S likely relies on basic image processing, resulting in less refined photos. Ignoring the likely inclusion of a low-resolution macro lens on the U652S, the Pixel 6a’s overall camera experience is far superior.
Performance
The performance gap between these two devices is substantial. The Google Pixel 6a’s Google Tensor chipset, built on a 5nm process, features an octa-core CPU with high-performance Cortex-X1 cores, designed for demanding tasks. In contrast, the Energizer U652S relies on the Mediatek MT6739WW, a quad-core processor fabricated on a 28nm node. This older architecture and larger process node result in significantly lower processing power and efficiency. The Tensor chip’s advanced AI capabilities also enable features like Magic Eraser and Real Tone, unavailable on the U652S. The Pixel 6a’s likely use of faster LPDDR5 RAM further enhances responsiveness.
Battery Life
Both devices share an endurance rating of 94 hours, suggesting comparable battery life under similar usage scenarios. However, the Pixel 6a’s 18W wired charging with PD3.0 support offers faster and more efficient charging compared to the U652S, which likely has a slower, less efficient charging system. While the U652S might have a slightly larger battery capacity to compensate for its less efficient processor, the Pixel 6a’s optimized power management and faster charging provide a more convenient user experience.
Buying Guide
Buy the Energizer Ultimate U652S if you need a basic, functional smartphone for essential tasks like calls, texts, and light web browsing, and your budget is extremely limited. You're willing to sacrifice performance and features for affordability. Buy the Google Pixel 6a if you prioritize a responsive user experience, a capable camera system, and guaranteed software updates, and are willing to spend more for a premium mid-range experience.