vivo X60 Pro vs. Google Pixel 6 Pro: A Detailed Comparison of Flagship Android Phones
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing consistent performance and a slightly longer battery life, the Google Pixel 6 Pro emerges as the winner. Its Tensor chip, while not a raw performance leader, offers a unique software experience and exceptional camera capabilities. However, the vivo X60 Pro remains a compelling option for those seeking a refined, well-rounded device.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo X60 Pro | Google Pixel 6 Pro |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 32, 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 - GLUOG, G8VOU |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 7, 28, 40, 41, 78 SA/NSA - International | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 20, 25, 28, 30, 38, 40, 41, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78, 257, 258, 260, 261 SA/NSA/Sub6/mmWave - G8VOU |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE / 5G |
| 1, 3, 28, 38, 41, 77, 78, 79 SA/NSA - China | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 20, 25, 28, 30, 38, 40, 41, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - GLUOG | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2021, March 22 | 2021, October 19 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, April 02 | Available. Released 2021, October 28 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front (Schott Xensation Up), glass back, aluminum frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass Victus), glass back (Gorilla Glass Victus), aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 158.6 x 73.2 x 7.6 mm (6.24 x 2.88 x 0.30 in) | 163.9 x 75.9 x 8.9 mm (6.45 x 2.99 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + eSIM |
| Weight | 179 g (6.31 oz) | 210 g (7.41 oz) |
| - | IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Schott Xensation Up | Corning Gorilla Glass Victus |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2376 pixels (~398 ppi density) | 1440 x 3120 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~512 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.56 inches, 104.6 cm2 (~90.1% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.7 inches, 110.6 cm2 (~88.9% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+ | LTPO AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+ |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x3.2 GHz Kryo 585 & 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 585 & 4x1.80 GHz Kryo 585) | Octa-core (2x2.80 GHz Cortex-X1 & 2x2.25 GHz Cortex-A76 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM8250-AC Snapdragon 870 5G (7 nm) | Google Tensor (5 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 650 | Mali-G78 MP20 |
| OS | Android 11, Funtouch 11.1 | Android 12, upgradable to Android 15, up to 5 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 256GB 12GB RAM | 128GB 12GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM, 512GB 12GB RAM |
| UFS 3.1 | UFS 3.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Zeiss optics, color spectrum sensor, Pixel Shift, LED flash, HDR, panorama | Laser AF, Dual-LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama |
| Quad | 48 MP, f/1.5, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF, gimbal OIS 13 MP, f/2.5, 50mm (telephoto), 1/2.8", 0.8µm, PDAF, 2x optical zoom 13 MP, f/2.2, 120˚, 16mm (ultrawide) | - |
| Single | - | 11.1 MP, f/2.2, 20mm (ultrawide), 1.22µm |
| Triple | - | 50 MP, f/1.9, 25mm (wide), 1/1.31", 1.2µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS 48 MP, f/3.5, 104mm (periscope telephoto), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS, 4x optical zoom 12 MP, f/2.2, 17mm, 114˚ (ultrawide), 1.25µm |
| Video | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps; gyro-EIS, OIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.5, 24mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm | 11.1 MP, f/2.2, 20mm (ultrawide), 1.22µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | No |
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| 32-bit/192kHz audio | - | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.2, A2DP, LE, aptX HD |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS, NavIC | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS (G1), BDS (B1I+B1c+B2a), GALILEO (E1+E5a), QZSS (L1+L5) |
| 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 Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Virtual proximity sensing | Ultra Wideband (UWB) support | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 33W wired | 23W wired, PD3.0, 50% in 30 min 23W wireless Reverse wireless |
| Type | 4200 mAh | Li-Ion 5003 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Midnight Black, Shimmer Blue | Cloudy White, Sorta Sunny, Stormy Black |
| Models | V2046 | GLUOG, G8VOU, GF5KQ |
| Price | About 570 EUR | € 199.99 / $ 204.99 / £ 275.00 / ₹ 29,699 |
| SAR | 0.53 W/kg (head) 0.81 W/kg (body) | - |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | Endurance rating 91h | Endurance rating 84h |
| Camera | Photo / Video | - |
| Display | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | -27.6 LUFS (Good) | - |
| Performance | AnTuTu: 734811 (v8) GeekBench: 3749 (v5.1) GFXBench: 62fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) | AnTuTu: 585485 (v8), 719815 (v9) GeekBench: 2831 (v5.1) GFXBench: 39 fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
vivo X60 Pro
- Reliable Snapdragon 870 performance
- Faster wired charging (33W)
- Potentially more efficient battery usage
- Less advanced camera system
- Older chipset architecture
- Less software support
Google Pixel 6 Pro
- Exceptional camera with AI features
- Google Tensor chip with unique capabilities
- Guaranteed software updates
- Potential for software optimization issues
- Slower wired charging (23W)
- Reported thermal throttling under heavy load
Display Comparison
Both the vivo X60 Pro and Pixel 6 Pro feature displays with an infinite (nominal) contrast ratio, typical of OLED panels. However, the Pixel 6 Pro edges out the X60 Pro with a measured peak brightness of 846 nits compared to the X60 Pro’s 818 nits. This difference, while not massive, translates to slightly better visibility in direct sunlight. Neither specification details refresh rate, but the X60 Pro is known to have a 120Hz panel, while the Pixel 6 Pro is also 120Hz. The Pixel 6 Pro’s larger display size and curved edges offer a more immersive viewing experience, though some users may prefer the X60 Pro’s flatter screen.
Camera Comparison
The Pixel 6 Pro’s camera system is its standout feature. While detailed sensor specs are missing for the X60 Pro, the Pixel 6 Pro’s computational photography prowess, driven by the Tensor chip, delivers exceptional image quality, particularly in low-light conditions. Google’s image processing excels at dynamic range and detail preservation. The X60 Pro likely relies more on hardware capabilities, potentially offering a different aesthetic – perhaps more vibrant colors. The Pixel 6 Pro’s focus on AI-powered features like Magic Eraser and Face Unblur provides unique editing capabilities not found on the X60 Pro. The absence of detailed camera specs for the X60 Pro makes a direct sensor comparison difficult, but the Pixel 6 Pro’s software advantage is significant.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The vivo X60 Pro utilizes the Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (7nm), an established performer known for its efficiency and stability. The Google Pixel 6 Pro, conversely, is powered by Google’s first-generation Tensor chip (5nm). While the Tensor boasts a more advanced manufacturing process, its CPU configuration – with 2x2.80 GHz Cortex-X1 cores – prioritizes AI tasks over sustained peak performance. The Snapdragon 870’s octa-core setup (1x3.2 GHz Kryo 585) delivers consistent performance across a wider range of applications. The 5nm process of the Tensor *should* offer better thermal efficiency, but early reports indicated some throttling under heavy load. The Pixel 6 Pro’s performance is heavily reliant on Google’s software optimization.
Battery Life
The Google Pixel 6 Pro boasts a slightly higher endurance rating of 84 hours compared to the vivo X60 Pro’s 91 hours. This is somewhat counterintuitive given the X60 Pro’s lower charging speed (33W wired) versus the Pixel 6 Pro’s 23W wired, plus 23W wireless and reverse wireless charging. The Pixel 6 Pro’s 23W charging can reach 50% in 30 minutes with PD3.0, while the X60 Pro’s 33W charging speed is not specified. The Tensor chip’s 5nm process likely contributes to better power efficiency, offsetting the impact of its larger display and more demanding software features. The X60 Pro’s longer endurance rating suggests better overall efficiency despite the slower charging.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo X60 Pro if you need a consistently smooth gaming experience and value a more traditional Android interface. Its Snapdragon 870 provides reliable performance without the potential software quirks of a first-generation chip. Buy the Google Pixel 6 Pro if you prefer a cutting-edge camera system with advanced computational photography, a clean Android experience with guaranteed updates, and are willing to accept potential software optimization issues.