HTC 10 evo vs. Google Pixel: A Deep Dive into Performance, Display, and Battery
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user seeking a balance of performance and longevity, the Google Pixel emerges as the superior choice. Its Snapdragon 821 chipset, built on a smaller 14nm process, delivers noticeably better efficiency and performance than the HTC 10 evo’s Snapdragon 810, coupled with slightly better battery endurance.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | HTC 10 evo | Google Pixel |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 26, 28, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41 |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (2CA) Cat6 300/50 Mbps | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (3CA) Cat9 450/50 Mbps or LTE (3CA) Cat11 600/75 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2016, November. Released 2016, November | 2016, October 04. Released 2016, October 20 |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 4), aluminum/glass back, aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 153.6 x 77.3 x 8.1 mm (6.05 x 3.04 x 0.32 in) | 143.8 x 69.5 x 8.5 mm (5.66 x 2.74 x 0.33 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 174 g (6.14 oz) | 143 g (5.04 oz) |
| IP57 dust/water resistant (up to 1m. and 30 mins) | Water-repellent coating | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 | Corning Gorilla Glass 4 |
| Resolution | 1440 x 2560 pixels, 16:9 ratio (~534 ppi density) | 1080 x 1920 pixels, 16:9 ratio (~441 ppi density) |
| Size | 5.5 inches, 83.4 cm2 (~70.2% screen-to-body ratio) | 5.0 inches, 68.9 cm2 (~69.0% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | Super LCD3 | AMOLED |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A57) | Quad-core (2x2.15 GHz Kryo & 2x1.6 GHz Kryo) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm MSM8994 Snapdragon 810 (20 nm) | Qualcomm MSM8996 Snapdragon 821 (14 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 430 | Adreno 530 |
| OS | Android 7.0 (Nougat) | Android 7.1 (Nougat), upgradable to Android 10 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | No |
| Internal | 32GB 3GB RAM, 64GB 3GB RAM | 32GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM |
| eMMC 5.0 | UFS 2.0 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Dual-LED flash, panorama | Laser AF, Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, PDAF, OIS | 12.3 MP, f/2.0, 1/2.3", 1.55µm, PDAF |
| Video | 4K@30fps (24-bit/192kHz audio), 720p@120fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@60/120fps, 1080p@30fps (gyro-EIS), 720p@240fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | - |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.4 | 8 MP, f/2.4, 1/3.2", 1.4µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | Yes |
| 35mm jack | No | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| 24-bit/192kHz audio | - | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.1, A2DP, LE | 4.2, A2DP, LE, aptX |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS | GPS, GLONASS |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 3.0 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct, DLNA | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct, DLNA |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (front-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired, QC2 | 18W wired, PD |
| Music play | - | Up to 110 h |
| Stand-by | Up to 480 h (3G) | Up to 456 h (3G) |
| Talk time | Up to 23 h (3G) | Up to 26 h (3G) |
| Type | Li-Ion 3200 mAh, non-removable | Li-Ion 2770 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Silver, Black | Quite Black, Very Silver, Really Blue |
| Models | 10 evo, M10f, 2PYB2 | - |
| Price | About 230 EUR | About 290 EUR |
| SAR | 0.60 W/kg (head) | 0.92 W/kg (head) 0.58 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | 0.51 W/kg (head) | 0.33 W/kg (head) 0.61 W/kg (body) |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Audio quality | - | Noise -93.0dB / Crosstalk -92.6dB |
| Battery life | Endurance rating 58h | Endurance rating 64h |
| Camera | Photo / Video | - |
| Display | Contrast ratio: 1357:1 (nominal), 2.407 (sunlight) | Contrast ratio: ∞ |
| Loudspeaker | Voice 65dB / Noise 75dB / Ring 80dB | Voice 74dB / Noise 68dB / Ring 78dB |
| Performance | GFXBench: 6.9fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) | Basemark OS II 2.0: 2461Basemark X: 33023 |
HTC 10 evo
- Potentially lower price point (due to age)
- High display contrast ratio for outdoor visibility
- 18W Quick Charge 2.0 support
- Older Snapdragon 810 chipset prone to throttling
- Less efficient power consumption
- Inferior camera image processing
Google Pixel
- More efficient Snapdragon 821 chipset
- Superior camera performance and image processing
- OLED display with infinite contrast ratio
- Potentially higher price (even now)
- 18W Power Delivery charging, while efficient, isn't dramatically faster
- May be harder to find in good condition
Display Comparison
The HTC 10 evo boasts a contrast ratio of 1357:1 (nominal) and 2.407 under sunlight, indicating good visibility outdoors. However, the Google Pixel’s ‘infinite’ contrast ratio, typical of OLED panels, provides significantly deeper blacks and a more vibrant image. While both offer adequate brightness, the Pixel’s OLED technology delivers a superior viewing experience, particularly for HDR content. The lack of specific resolution data for the HTC 10 evo makes a direct pixel density comparison impossible, but the Pixel’s display is generally considered sharper.
Camera Comparison
Both devices feature capable cameras, but the Google Pixel’s image processing algorithms were widely lauded at the time of release. While both are listed as offering 'Photo / Video' capabilities, the Pixel’s computational photography, powered by Google’s software expertise, consistently produced superior results in low-light conditions and dynamic range. The absence of detailed sensor information for both devices makes a direct hardware comparison difficult, but the Pixel’s software advantage is undeniable. The HTC 10 evo likely relied more heavily on hardware capabilities, which are less adaptable to varying conditions.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Google Pixel’s Snapdragon 821 (14nm) represents a significant architectural improvement over the HTC 10 evo’s Snapdragon 810 (20nm). The 821 utilizes custom Kryo cores, offering a more efficient and responsive experience. While both are octa-core CPUs, the 821’s configuration (2x2.15 GHz Kryo & 2x1.6 GHz Kryo) is optimized for sustained performance. The 810’s (4x1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A57) older architecture is more prone to thermal throttling under heavy load. This translates to smoother multitasking and gaming on the Pixel.
Battery Life
The Google Pixel edges out the HTC 10 evo in battery endurance with a rating of 64 hours versus 58 hours. While the difference isn’t massive, the Snapdragon 821’s superior power efficiency plays a crucial role. Both support 18W wired charging, but the Pixel utilizes Power Delivery (PD) which offers more intelligent charging management. This means the Pixel can potentially optimize charging speed and battery health over time, while the HTC 10 evo relies on Quick Charge 2.0.
Buying Guide
Buy the HTC 10 evo if you prioritize a higher contrast display for media consumption and are seeking a device at a potentially lower price point. Buy the Google Pixel if you value a smoother, more responsive user experience, a superior camera system, and guaranteed software updates (at the time of release).