Lava Shark vs Google Pixel 7a: A Deep Dive into Budget Smartphone Choices
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing camera quality and a smooth software experience, the Google Pixel 7a is the clear winner. However, the Lava Shark presents a compelling option for those on a tighter budget who prioritize basic functionality and aren't demanding users.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Lava Shark | Google Pixel 7a |
| 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 | LTE | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 38, 40, 41, 48, 66, 71 - GWKK3, G0DZQ |
| 5G bands | SA/NSA | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 20, 25, 28, 30, 38, 41, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - GWKK3 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| - | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 20, 25, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79 SA/NSA/Sub6 - GHL1X, G82U8 | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2025, May 23 | 2023, May 10 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, May 23 | Available. Released 2023, May 10 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), aluminum frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | - | 152 x 72.9 x 9 mm (5.98 x 2.87 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + eSIM |
| Weight | - | 193.5 g (6.84 oz) |
| - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1612 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~262 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~429 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.75 inches, 109.5 cm2 | 6.1 inches, 90.7 cm2 (~81.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz | OLED, HDR, 90Hz |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.3 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.1 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.85 GHz Cortex-X1 & 2x2.35 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Unisoc T765 (6 nm) | Google Tensor G2 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC2 | Mali-G710 MP7 |
| OS | Android 15 | Android 13, upgradable to Android 15, up to 5 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | No |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM |
| - | UFS 3.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 64 MP, f/1.9, 26mm (wide), 1/1.73", 0.8µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide), 1.12µm |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Dual-LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama |
| Single | 13 MP, (wide), AF | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps, OIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 5 MP | 13 MP, f/2.2, 20mm (ultrawide), 1.12µm |
| Video | Yes | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS, NavIC |
| Radio | Unspecified | No |
| USB | USB Type-C, OTG | USB Type-C 3.2 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n/ac, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, tri-band |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted); unspecified sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 18W wired, PD3.0 7.5W wireless |
| Type | Li-Ion 5000 mAh | Li-Po 4385 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Stellar Gold, Stellar Blue | Charcoal, Snow, Sea, Coral |
| Models | - | GWKK3, GHL1X, G0DZQ, G82U8 |
| Price | About 80 EUR | € 179.90 / $ 150.00 / £ 170.00 / ₹ 25,980 |
Lava Shark
- Significantly lower price point
- Potentially longer battery life due to less demanding hardware
- Functional for basic smartphone tasks
- Substantially slower performance
- Inferior camera quality
- Limited software updates and features
Google Pixel 7a
- Superior performance with Google Tensor G2
- Excellent camera quality and computational photography
- Guaranteed software updates and features from Google
- Higher price tag
- Potentially shorter battery life under heavy use
- Wireless charging is relatively slow at 7.5W
Display Comparison
The Google Pixel 7a boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1070 nits, compared to an assumed lower peak brightness on the Lava Shark (typical of its price segment). This translates to better visibility outdoors. While the Lava Shark’s display specs are unknown, the Pixel 7a’s panel likely offers superior color accuracy and viewing angles. The Pixel 7a’s display is also likely to have a higher refresh rate, contributing to smoother scrolling and animations, a feature likely absent on the Lava Shark.
Camera Comparison
The Pixel 7a’s camera system is a major strength. While specific sensor details are not provided, Google’s computational photography prowess, powered by the Tensor G2, delivers exceptional image quality, particularly in challenging lighting conditions. The Lava Shark’s camera is likely to be more basic, relying on hardware rather than software processing. The Pixel 7a’s video capabilities are also expected to be superior, offering features like cinematic mode and improved stabilization. The absence of detailed camera specs for the Lava Shark suggests a focus on affordability over advanced features.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Google Tensor G2 (5nm) is a flagship-adjacent processor featuring a prime Cortex-X1 core clocked at 2.85 GHz, offering substantial performance advantages over the Lava Shark’s Unisoc T765 (6nm). The Tensor G2’s architecture, with its Cortex-A78 performance cores, provides a more responsive experience in demanding applications and multitasking. The Unisoc T765, while efficient, is geared towards basic usage. The Pixel 7a’s likely use of faster LPDDR5x RAM further enhances performance, while the Lava Shark likely utilizes LPDDR4x. This difference will be noticeable in app loading times and overall system responsiveness.
Battery Life
The Pixel 7a has an endurance rating of 76 hours, indicating strong battery life. Both phones support 18W wired charging, but the Pixel 7a adds the convenience of 7.5W wireless charging and PD3.0 support for faster wired charging speeds. While the Lava Shark’s battery capacity is unknown, the Pixel 7a’s optimized power management, thanks to the Tensor G2, likely results in longer real-world usage despite potentially similar battery sizes. The Pixel 7a’s charging ecosystem is also more versatile.
Buying Guide
Buy the Lava Shark if you need a functional smartphone for essential tasks like calling, texting, and light social media use, and your budget is extremely limited. Buy the Google Pixel 7a if you prioritize a superior camera, faster performance for demanding apps, and Google’s guaranteed software updates and features, even if it means spending more.