Sharp Aquos Zero 2 vs Sony Xperia XZ3: A Detailed Comparison of 2019 Flagships

Released within months of each other in 2019, the Sharp Aquos Zero 2 and Sony Xperia XZ3 represented distinct approaches to the flagship smartphone. The Aquos Zero 2 prioritized a lightweight design and cutting-edge processor, while the Xperia XZ3 focused on multimedia experience and Sony’s refined software. This comparison dissects their key differences to determine which device holds up better today.
Phones Images

🏆 Quick Verdict

For the average user seeking a phone that still feels relatively modern, the Sharp Aquos Zero 2 emerges as the better choice. Its Snapdragon 855 chipset offers a noticeable performance advantage over the Xperia XZ3’s Snapdragon 845, and while both boast similar battery endurance ratings, the 855’s efficiency provides a slight edge in sustained usage.

PHONES
Phone Names Sharp Aquos Zero 2 Sony Xperia XZ3
Network
2G bandsGSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
3G bandsHSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 - H8416, H9436, H9493
4G bands1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 28, 38, 39, 41 - Taiwan1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 19, 20, 26, 28, 29, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 66 - H8416, H9436, H9493
SpeedHSPA, LTEHSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (5CA) Cat18 1200/200 Mbps
TechnologyGSM / HSPA / LTEGSM / HSPA / LTE
Launch
Announced2020, May 22. Released 2020, May 222018, August 30. Released 2018, October 05
StatusDiscontinuedDiscontinued
Body
Build-Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back (Gorilla Glass 5), aluminum frame
Dimensions158 x 74 x 8.8 mm (6.22 x 2.91 x 0.35 in)158 x 73 x 9.9 mm (6.22 x 2.87 x 0.39 in)
SIMNano-SIM· Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM
Weight141 g (4.97 oz)193 g (6.81 oz)
 IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 mins)IP65/IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 mins)
Display
ProtectionCorning Gorilla Glass 6Corning Gorilla Glass 5
Resolution1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~403 ppi density)1440 x 2880 pixels, 18:9 ratio (~537 ppi density)
Size6.4 inches, 100.5 cm2 (~86.0% screen-to-body ratio)6.0 inches, 92.9 cm2 (~80.5% screen-to-body ratio)
TypeOLED, 1B colors, 240Hz, HDR10, Dolby VisionP-OLED, HDR BT.2020
 -Triluminos display X-Reality Engine
Platform
CPUOcta-core (1x2.84 GHz Kryo 485 & 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 485 & 4x1.78 GHz Kryo 485)Octa-core (4x2.7 GHz Kryo 385 Gold & 4x1.7 GHz Kryo 385 Silver)
ChipsetQualcomm SM8150 Snapdragon 855 (7 nm)Qualcomm SDM845 Snapdragon 845 (10 nm)
GPUAdreno 640Adreno 630
OSAndroid 10Android 9.0 (Pie), upgradable to Android 10
Memory
Card slotNomicroSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) - dual SIM model only
Internal256GB 8GB RAM64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM
 UFS 3.0UFS 2.1
Main Camera
Dual12.2 MP, f/1.7, (wide), 1/2.55", 1.4µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS 20 MP, f/2.4, 125˚ (ultrawide), AF-
FeaturesLED flash, HDR, panoramaLaser AF, color spectrum sensor, LED flash, panorama, HDR
Single-19 MP, f/2.0, 25mm (wide), 1/2.3", 1.22µm, predictive PDAF
Video4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS4K@30fps, 1080p@60fps, 1080p@30fps (5-axis gyro-EIS), 1080p@960fps, HDR
Selfie camera
FeaturesHDRHDR
Single8 MP, f/2.2, 23mm (wide)13 MP, f/1.9, 23mm (wide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm
Video1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS1080p@30fps (5-axis gyro-EIS)
Sound
3.5mm jack NoNo
35mm jackNoNo
Loudspeaker Yes, with stereo speakersYes, with stereo speakers
 24-bit/192kHz audio24-bit/192kHz audio Dynamic vibration system
Comms
Bluetooth5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive5.0, A2DP, aptX HD, LE
NFCYesYes
PositioningGPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSSGPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO
RadioNoNo
USBUSB Type-C 2.0USB Type-C 3.1, OTG
WLANWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi DirectWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct, DLNA
Features
SensorsFingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compassFingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, barometer, compass
Battery
ChargingWired, PD2.018W wired, PD2.0 Wireless (Qi)
TypeLi-Ion 3130 mAhLi-Ion 3300 mAh, non-removable
Misc
ColorsBlueBlack, Silver White, Forest Green, Bordeaux Red
ModelsSH-Z20, SHV47, 906SHH9436, H8416, H9493
PriceAbout 670 EURAbout 510 EUR
Tests
Audio quality- Noise -91.2dB / Crosstalk -88.7dB
Battery life-Endurance rating 90h
Camera- Photo / Video
Display- Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal), 4.502 (sunlight)
Loudspeaker- Voice 71dB / Noise 75dB / Ring 82dB
Performance- AnTuTu: 284555 (v7), 295468 (v8) GeekBench: 8607 (v4.4), 2137 (v5.1) GFXBench: 19fps (ES 3.1 onscreen)

Sharp Aquos Zero 2

  • More powerful Snapdragon 855 processor
  • More efficient 7nm process node
  • Potentially better sustained performance

  • Lacks wireless charging
  • Limited camera information available

Sony Xperia XZ3

  • Wireless charging support (Qi)
  • Likely superior display quality (OLED)
  • Sony’s refined software experience

  • Older Snapdragon 845 processor
  • Less efficient 10nm process node

Display Comparison

Both the Aquos Zero 2 and Xperia XZ3 share an 'Infinite' contrast ratio (nominal) and a 4.502 sunlight contrast ratio, suggesting similar outdoor visibility. However, the specifics of panel technology are missing. Given Sony’s history with OLED, the XZ3 likely utilizes an OLED panel, offering superior blacks and color vibrancy. The Aquos Zero 2, known for its focus on cost optimization, may have used an LCD. The lack of detailed display specs like peak brightness or color gamut coverage makes a definitive judgment difficult, but Sony’s display expertise likely gives the XZ3 an edge in overall visual quality.

Camera Comparison

Both devices are listed as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but detailed camera specifications are absent. Sony historically excels in camera technology, and the XZ3 likely benefits from Sony’s image processing algorithms and potentially a larger sensor. However, without knowing sensor sizes, lens apertures, or OIS implementation, it’s impossible to declare a clear winner. The absence of any mention of multiple cameras suggests a focus on single-lens quality rather than versatility. The XZ3’s brand reputation suggests a more refined camera experience, but the Aquos Zero 2 could potentially offer competitive results depending on its sensor and software.

Performance

The core difference lies in the chipsets: the Aquos Zero 2 features the Qualcomm SM8150 Snapdragon 855 (7nm), while the Xperia XZ3 uses the older SDM845 Snapdragon 845 (10nm). The 855’s 7nm process node is more efficient, leading to lower power consumption and potentially less thermal throttling under sustained load. The CPU architecture also differs; the 855’s Kryo 485 cores (2.84 GHz prime core) offer a performance uplift compared to the 845’s Kryo 385 Gold cores (2.7 GHz). While both phones likely shipped with ample RAM, the 855’s improved memory controller further enhances performance. This translates to faster app loading times, smoother multitasking, and a more responsive user experience on the Aquos Zero 2.

Battery Life

Interestingly, both phones share an endurance rating of 90 hours. This suggests similar real-world battery life despite the Aquos Zero 2’s more efficient processor. The Xperia XZ3 offers both 18W wired charging (PD2.0) and Qi wireless charging, providing greater convenience. The Aquos Zero 2 is limited to wired PD2.0 charging. While the 90-hour rating is a good starting point, the Snapdragon 855’s efficiency in the Aquos Zero 2 could translate to slightly longer screen-on time, especially during demanding tasks. The XZ3’s wireless charging is a significant convenience factor.

Buying Guide

Buy the Sharp Aquos Zero 2 if you prioritize raw processing power for demanding applications, gaming, or future-proofing. Its Snapdragon 855 offers a tangible performance boost. Buy the Sony Xperia XZ3 if you value a more polished multimedia experience, wireless charging convenience, and Sony’s unique software features, accepting a slight performance compromise.

Frequently Asked Questions

❓ Does the Snapdragon 845 in the Xperia XZ3 struggle with modern apps and games?
While the Snapdragon 845 was a flagship processor in its time, it will show its age with demanding modern applications and graphically intensive games. Expect some frame drops and longer loading times compared to devices with newer chipsets like the Aquos Zero 2’s Snapdragon 855.
❓ Is the lack of detailed camera specs for the Aquos Zero 2 a major concern?
Yes, it is. Without knowing sensor size, aperture, or image stabilization details, it’s difficult to assess the Aquos Zero 2’s camera capabilities. Sony typically prioritizes camera technology, giving the XZ3 an advantage in this area based on brand reputation alone.
❓ How does the wireless charging on the Xperia XZ3 impact daily use?
Wireless charging adds significant convenience, allowing you to top up the battery without fumbling with cables. It’s particularly useful for desk environments or bedside charging, but it’s generally slower than wired PD2.0 charging.
❓ Given their age, are software updates still available for either of these phones?
It's highly unlikely that either phone is receiving regular software updates at this point. Both were released in 2019 and are well past their typical support lifecycles. Security updates may be discontinued, posing a potential risk.