Philips PH2 vs Google Pixel 6a: A Deep Dive into Budget Smartphone Choices
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user, the Google Pixel 6a emerges as the stronger choice. While the Philips PH2 offers a potentially longer battery life due to its efficient chipset, the Pixel 6a’s significantly more powerful Google Tensor processor and superior display brightness deliver a far more responsive and enjoyable user experience.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Philips PH2 | 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 | LTE | 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 / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| CDMA2000 1x | 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, December 08. Released 2021, December 13 | 2022, May 11 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2022, July 21 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, glass back, plastic frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), aluminum frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 156.2 x 75.3 x 9 mm (6.15 x 2.96 x 0.35 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 | 170 g (6.00 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 1520 pixels, 19:9 ratio (~271 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~429 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.21 inches, 96.3 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 (1x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 3x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.80 GHz Cortex-X1 & 2x2.25 GHz Cortex-A76 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Unisoc Tiger T310 (12 nm) | Google Tensor (5 nm) |
| GPU | PowerVR GE8300 | Mali-G78 MP20 |
| OS | Android OS, HMS (Huawei Mobile Services) | Android 12, upgradable to Android 15, up to 5 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | No |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM |
| eMMC 5.1 | UFS 3.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | 13 MP, (wide), AF 2 MP | 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 | 5 MP | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps; gyro-EIS, OIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 5 MP | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1.12µm |
| Video | - | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | 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, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, QZSS |
| Radio | Unspecified | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 3.1 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n, hotspot | 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, PD3.0 |
| Type | Li-Ion 3900 mAh | Li-Po 4410 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black, Blue, Gold | Chalk, Charcoal, Sage |
| Models | S702 | GX7AS, GB62Z, G1AZG, GB17L |
| Price | About 110 EUR | $ 138.99 / C$ 228.74 / ₹ 23,999 |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 94h |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
Philips PH2
- Potentially longer battery life due to efficient chipset
- Likely more affordable price point
- Simple and functional Android experience
- Significantly weaker performance compared to the Pixel 6a
- Display likely lacks brightness and color accuracy
- Limited camera capabilities
Google Pixel 6a
- Powerful Google Tensor processor for smooth performance
- Bright and vibrant display for immersive viewing
- Excellent camera with Google’s computational photography
- May have slightly shorter battery life than the PH2
- Higher price point
- Potential for software bloat (though minimal with Pixel)
Display Comparison
The Google Pixel 6a boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 876 nits, compared to the Philips PH2’s unspecified brightness. This difference is crucial for outdoor visibility. While the PH2’s display specs are limited, the Pixel 6a’s ‘Infinite’ (nominal) contrast ratio suggests a superior viewing experience with deeper blacks and more vibrant colors. The Pixel 6a’s display is likely to offer a more immersive experience for media consumption and gaming.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specifications for the Philips PH2, a direct comparison is difficult. However, the Pixel 6a benefits from Google’s renowned computational photography. While sensor size and aperture data are missing for the PH2, the Pixel 6a’s image processing capabilities, powered by the Tensor chip, will likely deliver superior image quality, especially in challenging lighting conditions. The Pixel 6a’s focus on software optimization will likely result in more consistent and pleasing photos.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Google Pixel 6a’s Google Tensor (5nm) is a substantial upgrade over the Philips PH2’s Unisoc Tiger T310 (12nm). The Tensor’s octa-core configuration, featuring Cortex-X1 and A76 cores, provides significantly more processing power for demanding tasks. The PH2’s quad-core setup, while efficient, will struggle with multitasking and graphically intensive applications. The 5nm fabrication process of the Tensor also translates to better thermal efficiency, reducing the likelihood of throttling during sustained workloads. The Pixel 6a is the clear winner for users who prioritize speed and 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 charging speeds than the PH2’s unspecified charging capabilities. While the PH2’s Unisoc chipset is more power-efficient, the Pixel 6a’s faster charging can mitigate any potential battery life differences, providing more convenience for users on the go.
Buying Guide
Buy the Philips PH2 if you prioritize maximizing battery life above all else and need a functional smartphone for basic tasks like calls, messaging, and light web browsing. You'll appreciate its efficiency and potentially lower price point. Buy the Google Pixel 6a if you value performance, a vibrant display, and a refined software experience. The Tensor chip provides a smoother experience for demanding apps, gaming, and Google’s AI-powered features, making it ideal for users who want a more capable and versatile device.