vivo X50 5G vs. Google Pixel 4a 5G: A Deep Dive into the Snapdragon 765G Experience
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing software experience and consistent camera performance, the Google Pixel 4a 5G is the better choice. However, the vivo X50 5G’s significantly faster 33W charging offers a tangible benefit for those who frequently need to top up their battery quickly.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo X50 5G | Google Pixel 4a 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 - International | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 - International | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 46, 48, 66, 71 |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 28, 41, 77, 78, 79 SA/NSA - International | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 28, 41, 66, 71, 77, 78 Sub6, mmWave (market dependant) |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| 1, 3, 41, 77, 78, 79 SA/NSA - China | - | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2020, June 01. Released 2020, June 06 | 2020, September 30 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2020, November 05 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, glass back, aluminum frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 159.5 x 75.4 x 7.6 mm (6.28 x 2.97 x 0.30 in) | 153.9 x 74 x 8.2 mm (Sub-6) or 8.5 mm (Sub-6 and mmWave) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + eSIM |
| Weight | 174.5 g (6.17 oz) | 168 g (5G Sub-6); 171 g ( 5G Sub-6 and mmWave) (5.93 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2376 pixels (~398 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~413 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.56 inches, 104.6 cm2 (~87.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.2 inches, 95.7 cm2 (~84.1% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 90Hz, HDR10+ | OLED, HDR |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Prime & 1x2.2 GHz Kryo 475 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver) | Octa-core (1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Prime & 1x2.2 GHz Kryo 475 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM7250 Snapdragon 765G 5G (7 nm) | Qualcomm SM7250 Snapdragon 765G 5G (7 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 620 | Adreno 620 |
| OS | Android 10, Funtouch 10.5 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 14 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM |
| UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 12.2 MP, f/1.7, 27mm (wide), 1/2.55", 1.4µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS 16 MP, f/2.2, 107˚ (ultrawide), 1.0µm |
| Features | Color spectrum sensor, Dual-LED dual-tone flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama |
| Quad | 48 MP, f/1.6, (wide), PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/2.5, 50mm (telephoto), 1/2.8", 0.8µm, PDAF, 2x optical zoom 8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚, 16mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm 5 MP (macro) | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.5, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | Yes |
| 35mm jack | No | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| 24-bit/192kHz audio | - | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX HD |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, QZSS, BDS |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C, OTG | USB Type-C 3.1 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Virtual proximity sensing | - | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 33W wired | 18W wired, PD2.0 |
| Type | 4200 mAh | Li-Po 3885 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Glaze Black, Frost Blue, Pink | Just Black, Clearly White |
| Models | V2001A, 2005 | GD1YQ, G025I, G025E, G025H, G6QU3 |
| Price | About 440 EUR | About 140 EUR |
vivo X50 5G
- Significantly faster 33W charging
- Potentially more vibrant display
- Likely more RAM (based on typical vivo configurations)
- Software experience may be less refined
- Potential for bloatware
Google Pixel 4a 5G
- Clean, bloatware-free Android experience
- Exceptional camera performance (especially in low light)
- Guaranteed software updates
- Slower 18W charging
- Potentially less vibrant display
Display Comparison
Both phones utilize LCD panels, but details beyond that are limited in the provided data. The vivo X50 5G’s brand positioning suggests a focus on display quality, potentially offering higher peak brightness and more accurate color calibration. However, without specific nit ratings or color gamut coverage, it’s difficult to definitively state a winner. The Pixel 4a 5G likely prioritizes color accuracy over sheer vibrancy, aligning with Google’s software-focused approach. Bezels are likely comparable given the similar price points.
Camera Comparison
While both phones share the same chipset, their camera systems likely differ significantly in image processing. Google’s Pixel phones are renowned for their computational photography, leveraging software algorithms to produce exceptional image quality, particularly in challenging lighting conditions. The vivo X50 5G, while potentially having a higher megapixel count (not specified in the data), likely relies more on hardware capabilities and potentially a more saturated color profile. Without sensor size or aperture information, it’s difficult to assess low-light performance, but Google’s software advantage is a strong indicator of superior image quality overall.
Performance
Both the vivo X50 5G and Google Pixel 4a 5G are powered by the Qualcomm SM7250 Snapdragon 765G 5G (7 nm) chipset, featuring the same octa-core CPU configuration (1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Prime, 1x2.2 GHz Kryo 475 Gold, and 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver). This means raw processing power will be nearly identical. Performance differences will likely stem from RAM management and software optimization. Google’s streamlined Android experience typically results in smoother multitasking and faster app launches. Thermal management is also a factor; while the 765G isn’t a power-hungry chip, sustained loads could lead to throttling, and the Pixel’s simpler design might offer slightly better heat dissipation.
Battery Life
The most significant hardware difference lies in charging speed. The vivo X50 5G boasts 33W wired charging, while the Pixel 4a 5G is limited to 18W with PD2.0 support. This translates to a substantially faster charging experience for the vivo X50 5G. While battery capacity isn’t specified, the faster charging speed allows the vivo to recover from low battery levels much quicker. The Pixel 4a 5G’s PD2.0 support ensures compatibility with a wider range of chargers, but it won’t match the vivo’s speed. The real-world impact is that the vivo X50 5G is more forgiving if you forget to charge overnight.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo X50 5G if you need exceptionally fast charging and appreciate a more vibrant, saturated display. It’s ideal for users who prioritize quick power-ups and multimedia consumption. Buy the Google Pixel 4a 5G if you prefer a clean, bloatware-free Android experience, Google’s computational photography prowess, and guaranteed software updates. It’s the better option for photography enthusiasts and those seeking long-term software support.