Sharp Aquos V vs Google Pixel 7a: A Generational Showdown

The Google Pixel 7a represents a modern mid-range experience, while the Sharp Aquos V, released in 2017, offers a glimpse into flagship performance from a bygone era. This comparison isn't about a direct contest of specs, but rather assessing whether the Aquos V’s older hardware can still deliver a compelling experience against Google’s custom silicon and software optimization.
Phones Images

🏆 Quick Verdict

For the vast majority of users, the Google Pixel 7a is the superior choice. Its Tensor G2 chipset provides a more responsive and future-proof experience, coupled with a significantly better camera system and modern features. While the Aquos V offers a nostalgic look at older flagship power, the Pixel 7a’s efficiency and software support are invaluable.

PHONES
Phone Names Sharp Aquos V Google Pixel 7a
Network
2G bandsGSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
3G bandsHSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100
4G bands1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 13, 20, 38, 401, 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-1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 20, 25, 28, 30, 38, 41, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - GWKK3
SpeedHSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (2CA) Cat9 450/50 MbpsHSPA, LTE, 5G
TechnologyGSM / HSPA / LTEGSM / 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
Announced2019, November. Released 2019, November2023, May 10
StatusDiscontinuedAvailable. Released 2023, May 10
Body
Build-Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), aluminum frame, plastic back
Dimensions157 x 76 x 9 mm (6.18 x 2.99 x 0.35 in)152 x 72.9 x 9 mm (5.98 x 2.87 x 0.35 in)
SIMNano-SIM + Nano-SIMNano-SIM + eSIM
Weight173 g (6.10 oz)193.5 g (6.84 oz)
 -IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min)
Display
ProtectionCorning Gorilla Glass 5Corning Gorilla Glass 3
Resolution1080 x 2160 pixels, 18:9 ratio (~409 ppi density)1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~429 ppi density)
Size5.9 inches, 89.8 cm2 (~75.3% screen-to-body ratio)6.1 inches, 90.7 cm2 (~81.8% screen-to-body ratio)
TypeIPS LCDOLED, HDR, 90Hz
 -Always-on display
Platform
CPUOcta-core (4x2.35 GHz Kryo & 4x1.9 GHz Kryo)Octa-core (2x2.85 GHz Cortex-X1 & 2x2.35 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55)
ChipsetQualcomm MSM8998 Snapdragon 835 (10 nm)Google Tensor G2 (5 nm)
GPUAdreno 540Mali-G710 MP7
OSAndroid 9.0 (Pie)Android 13, upgradable to Android 15, up to 5 major Android upgrades
Memory
Card slotmicroSDXC (uses shared SIM slot)No
Internal64GB 4GB RAM128GB 8GB RAM
 -UFS 3.1
Main Camera
Dual13 MP, f/2.0, PDAF, OIS 13 MP B/W64 MP, f/1.9, 26mm (wide), 1/1.73", 0.8µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide), 1.12µm
FeaturesLED flash, HDR, panoramaDual-LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama
Video4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps (gyro-EIS)4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps, OIS
Selfie camera
FeaturesHDRHDR, panorama
Single8 MP, f/2.013 MP, f/2.2, 20mm (ultrawide), 1.12µm
Video1080p@30fps (gyro-EIS)4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps
Sound
3.5mm jack YesNo
35mm jackYesNo
Loudspeaker YesYes, with stereo speakers
Comms
Bluetooth5.0, A2DP, LE5.3, A2DP, LE
NFCNoYes
PositioningGPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, QZSSGPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS, NavIC
RadioNoNo
USBUSB Type-C 2.0USB Type-C 3.2
WLANWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi DirectWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, tri-band
Features
SensorsFingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compassFingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer
Battery
Charging-18W wired, PD3.0 7.5W wireless
TypeLi-Ion 3090 mAh, non-removableLi-Po 4385 mAh
Misc
ColorsBlackCharcoal, Snow, Sea, Coral
ModelsSH-C02GWKK3, GHL1X, G0DZQ, G82U8
PriceAbout 210 EUR€ 179.90 / $ 150.00 / £ 170.00 / ₹ 25,980

Sharp Aquos V

  • Potentially lower purchase price
  • Familiar Qualcomm Snapdragon platform
  • May offer expandable storage (typical for the era)

  • Outdated chipset and software
  • Poor long-term software support
  • Inferior camera performance
  • Less efficient battery life

Google Pixel 7a

  • Modern and efficient Tensor G2 chipset
  • Excellent camera system with computational photography
  • Guaranteed software updates
  • Bright and vibrant display
  • Fast charging and wireless charging

  • Higher purchase price
  • Google's software experience isn't for everyone

Display Comparison

The Pixel 7a boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1070 nits, compared to an estimated (based on the era) 400-500 nits for the Aquos V. This translates to far better visibility outdoors. While the Aquos V likely had a respectable panel for its time, the Pixel 7a’s brightness and likely OLED technology (not specified, but standard for this price point) offer superior contrast and color accuracy. The Pixel 7a’s refresh rate is also likely higher, contributing to smoother scrolling and animations.

Camera Comparison

The Pixel 7a’s camera system is a clear winner. While specific sensor details aren’t provided for the Aquos V, it’s unlikely to match the Pixel 7a’s image processing capabilities. Google’s Tensor G2 includes dedicated image processing hardware, enabling features like Super Res Zoom and Magic Eraser. The Pixel 7a excels in low-light photography and video recording, leveraging computational photography to produce stunning results. The Aquos V’s camera, while adequate for its time, will lack the dynamic range and detail of the Pixel 7a.

Performance

The core difference lies in the chipset architecture. The Aquos V’s Snapdragon 835, built on a 10nm process, features an octa-core CPU with Kryo cores. While powerful for 2017, it’s dwarfed by the Pixel 7a’s Google Tensor G2, fabricated on a more efficient 5nm node. The Tensor G2’s CPU configuration – 2x2.85 GHz Cortex-X1, 2x2.35 GHz Cortex-A78, and 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55 – offers both peak performance and improved power efficiency. The Cortex-X1 cores provide a substantial performance uplift, particularly in demanding tasks. The Aquos V will struggle with modern, resource-intensive applications and games, while the Pixel 7a handles them with ease.

Battery Life

The Pixel 7a’s endurance rating of 76 hours suggests excellent battery life, despite a likely smaller capacity than the Aquos V (spec not provided). This is due to the Tensor G2’s 5nm efficiency and Google’s software optimizations. The Pixel 7a supports 18W wired charging with PD3.0 and 7.5W wireless charging, offering convenient charging options. The Aquos V likely had slower charging speeds and lacked wireless charging capabilities. The combination of efficiency and charging options gives the Pixel 7a a significant advantage.

Buying Guide

Buy the Sharp Aquos V if you prioritize a potentially lower upfront cost and are comfortable with an older device that may lack long-term software support. It's suitable for users who primarily need basic smartphone functionality and aren't demanding gamers or heavy multitaskers. Buy the Google Pixel 7a if you value a smooth, modern Android experience, a class-leading camera, and guaranteed software updates. It’s ideal for photography enthusiasts, social media users, and anyone who wants a reliable and capable daily driver.

Frequently Asked Questions

❓ Is the Snapdragon 835 in the Aquos V still capable of running modern apps?
While the Snapdragon 835 was a flagship processor in 2017, it will struggle with many modern, resource-intensive applications and games. Expect slowdowns, lag, and potential compatibility issues. It's best suited for basic tasks like calling, texting, and browsing.
❓ How does the Google Tensor G2 handle thermal throttling under sustained load?
The Tensor G2's 5nm process and Google's thermal management algorithms are designed to mitigate throttling. While some throttling may occur during extended gaming sessions, it's generally well-controlled, maintaining consistent performance for longer periods than the Aquos V's Snapdragon 835.
❓ Will the Sharp Aquos V receive any further software updates?
It is highly unlikely that the Sharp Aquos V will receive any further software updates. Being a device released in 2017, it has likely reached its end-of-life in terms of software support, leaving it vulnerable to security risks and lacking new features.