Google Pixel 6a vs Nokia G300: A Deep Dive into Performance and Value
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Google Pixel 6a is the clear winner. Its Google Tensor chip delivers significantly faster performance and superior image processing, complemented by a brighter, higher-quality display. While the Nokia G300 offers 5G at a lower cost, the Pixel 6a’s overall experience justifies the price difference.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Nokia G300 | Google Pixel 6a |
| 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 | 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 41, 66, 71 | 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 | 2, 5, 25, 41, 66, 71, 77 SA/NSA | 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, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | 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 | 2021, October 12 | 2022, May 11 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, October 19 | Available. Released 2022, July 21 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), aluminum frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 169.4 x 78.4 x 9.3 mm (6.67 x 3.09 x 0.37 in) | 152.2 x 71.8 x 8.9 mm (5.99 x 2.83 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + eSIM |
| Weight | 210.1 g (7.41 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 (~269 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~429 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.52 inches, 102.6 cm2 (~77.3% 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 | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Kryo 460 & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 460) | Octa-core (2x2.80 GHz Cortex-X1 & 2x2.25 GHz Cortex-A76 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM4350 Snapdragon 480 5G (8 nm) | Google Tensor (5 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 619 | Mali-G78 MP20 |
| OS | Android 11 | Android 12, upgradable to Android 15, up to 5 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | No |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB 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, HDR, panorama | Dual-LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1.12µm |
| Triple | 16 MP, f/1.8, 27mm (wide), PDAF 5 MP, f/2.2, 115˚ (ultrawide) Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30/60fps | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps; gyro-EIS, OIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.2, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS (L1+L5) | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, QZSS |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 3.1 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 18W wired, PD3.0 |
| Type | Li-Po 4470 mAh | Li-Po 4410 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Meteor Grey | Chalk, Charcoal, Sage |
| Models | TA-1374, N1374DL | GX7AS, GB62Z, G1AZG, GB17L |
| Price | About 100 EUR | $ 138.99 / C$ 228.74 / ₹ 23,999 |
| SAR | 1.44 W/kg (head) 1.09 W/kg (body) | - |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 94h |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
Nokia G300
- Affordable 5G connectivity
- Long battery life (94h endurance)
- Clean Android experience
- Slow processor performance
- Lower-quality display
- Limited camera capabilities
Google Pixel 6a
- Exceptional performance with Google Tensor
- Bright and vibrant OLED display
- Excellent camera quality and image processing
- Higher price point
- Potentially faster battery drain under heavy use
- No expandable storage
Display Comparison
The Pixel 6a boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching 876 nits measured, compared to an unspecified brightness for the Nokia G300. This translates to far better visibility outdoors. While both displays offer an 'infinite' (nominal) contrast ratio, the Pixel 6a’s OLED panel inherently provides deeper blacks and more vibrant colors. The Nokia G300’s panel technology is not specified, suggesting a lower-tier LCD, which will likely exhibit narrower viewing angles and less accurate color reproduction.
Camera Comparison
While both phones likely feature multi-camera systems, the Pixel 6a’s image processing capabilities, powered by the Tensor chip, are in a different league. Google’s computational photography algorithms excel in dynamic range, noise reduction, and detail preservation. The Nokia G300’s camera performance will be adequate for casual snapshots, but it won’t match the Pixel 6a’s consistently high-quality results, especially in challenging lighting conditions. Sensor sizes and lens apertures are not specified for either device, but the Pixel 6a’s software optimization will likely compensate for any hardware limitations.
Performance
The performance gap between these devices is substantial. The Google Pixel 6a’s Google Tensor chip, fabricated on a 5nm process, features a tri-cluster CPU configuration with high-performance Cortex-X1 cores clocked at 2.80 GHz. This contrasts sharply with the Nokia G300’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 5G (8nm), which utilizes Kryo 460 cores peaking at 2.0 GHz. The Tensor chip’s architectural advantages and smaller fabrication node result in significantly faster processing speeds and improved power efficiency, making the Pixel 6a far more capable for demanding tasks like gaming and video editing. The Pixel 6a also benefits from faster RAM, likely LPDDR5, while the G300 likely uses LPDDR4X.
Battery Life
Both devices achieve an endurance rating of 94 hours, suggesting comparable battery life under similar usage scenarios. However, the Pixel 6a’s faster processor and brighter display could potentially impact real-world battery performance. Both support 18W wired charging, but the Pixel 6a also supports PD3.0, enabling faster and more efficient charging with compatible chargers. While the total battery capacity isn't specified for either, the efficiency of the Tensor chip may offset any capacity differences.
Buying Guide
Buy the Nokia G300 if you absolutely need 5G connectivity on a very tight budget and prioritize battery life over raw performance. It’s a solid choice for basic tasks and media consumption. Buy the Google Pixel 6a if you value a smooth, responsive user experience, excellent camera quality, and long-term software support, even if it means spending more upfront.