vivo Y200 vs Google Pixel 7a: Which Mid-Range Phone Reigns Supreme?
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing camera quality and software experience, the Google Pixel 7a is the clear winner. Its Tensor G2 chip, coupled with Google’s computational photography, consistently delivers superior images. However, the vivo Y200 offers faster charging and a potentially smoother experience for less demanding tasks, making it a viable alternative for budget-conscious buyers.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo Y200 | Google Pixel 7a |
| 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 | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 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, 3, 5, 8, 28, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 20, 25, 28, 30, 38, 41, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - GWKK3 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2023, October | 2023, May 10 |
| Status | Available. Released 2023, October | Available. Released 2023, May 10 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic frame, glass back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), aluminum frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 162.4 x 74.9 x 7.7 mm (6.39 x 2.95 x 0.30 in) | 152 x 72.9 x 9 mm (5.98 x 2.87 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + eSIM |
| Weight | 190 g (6.70 oz) | 193.5 g (6.84 oz) |
| - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~429 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~88.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.1 inches, 90.7 cm2 (~81.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 120Hz, 800 nits (peak) | OLED, HDR, 90Hz |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.85 GHz Cortex-X1 & 2x2.35 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM4375 Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 (6 nm) | Google Tensor G2 (5 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 619 | Mali-G710 MP7 |
| OS | Android 13, Funtouch 13 | Android 13, upgradable to Android 15, up to 5 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM |
| - | UFS 3.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | 64 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF Auxiliary lens | 64 MP, f/1.9, 26mm (wide), 1/1.73", 0.8µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide), 1.12µm |
| Features | Ring-LED flash, panorama, HDR | Dual-LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps, OIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 13 MP, f/2.2, 20mm (ultrawide), 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | No |
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS, NavIC |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 3.2 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, tri-band |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 44W wired, 80% in 30 min Reverse wired | 18W wired, PD3.0 7.5W wireless |
| Type | Li-Ion 4800 mAh | Li-Po 4385 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Titanium Silver, Emerald Green, Purple, Black | Charcoal, Snow, Sea, Coral |
| Models | - | GWKK3, GHL1X, G0DZQ, G82U8 |
| Price | About 200 EUR | € 179.90 / $ 150.00 / £ 170.00 / ₹ 25,980 |
| SAR | 0.99 W/kg (head) 0.86 W/kg (body) | - |
vivo Y200
- 44W fast charging significantly reduces charging time.
- Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 offers a smooth experience for everyday tasks.
- Potentially better thermal efficiency due to 6nm process.
- Camera performance likely lags behind the Pixel 7a.
- Chipset performance is less powerful than the Tensor G2.
Google Pixel 7a
- Exceptional camera quality powered by the Tensor G2 and Google’s software.
- Powerful Tensor G2 chipset excels in demanding tasks.
- Clean and regularly updated Android experience.
- Slower 18W charging compared to the vivo Y200.
- Potential for thermal throttling under sustained load.
Display Comparison
The Pixel 7a boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1070 nits, compared to an unspecified brightness for the Y200. This translates to better visibility outdoors under direct sunlight. While the Y200’s panel technology isn’t specified, the Pixel 7a’s OLED panel offers excellent contrast and color accuracy. Bezels are likely comparable given the price points, but the Pixel 7a’s display is the clear winner due to its superior brightness and color reproduction.
Camera Comparison
The Pixel 7a’s camera system is its standout feature. While specific sensor details are missing for the Y200, the Pixel 7a leverages Google’s computational photography prowess, delivering exceptional image quality in various lighting conditions. The Tensor G2’s image signal processor (ISP) plays a crucial role in this, enabling features like Super Res Zoom and Magic Eraser. The Pixel 7a’s video capabilities are also superior, benefiting from the Tensor G2’s advanced processing. The Y200 likely relies more on hardware for image capture, potentially resulting in less dynamic range and detail in challenging scenarios. Ignoring the likely presence of low-resolution macro lenses on both devices, the Pixel 7a’s overall camera experience is significantly more refined.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Google Pixel 7a’s Tensor G2 (5nm) utilizes a tri-cluster configuration with 2x2.85 GHz Cortex-X1 cores for peak performance, 2x2.35 GHz Cortex-A78 cores for sustained tasks, and 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55 cores for efficiency. The vivo Y200’s Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 (6nm) features a dual-cluster setup with 2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A78 and 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. The Tensor G2’s more powerful cores and 5nm process provide a substantial performance advantage in CPU-intensive tasks and AI processing. However, the Snapdragon 4 Gen 1’s 6nm process may offer better efficiency for lighter workloads. The Pixel 7a will excel in tasks like video editing and gaming, while the Y200 will handle everyday apps smoothly.
Battery Life
The Pixel 7a boasts an endurance rating of 76 hours, suggesting excellent battery life despite its 18W wired and 7.5W wireless charging. The vivo Y200 counters with a significantly faster 44W wired charging, capable of reaching 80% charge in just 30 minutes. While the Y200’s battery capacity isn’t specified, the faster charging speed is a major advantage for users who prioritize quick top-ups. The Pixel 7a’s slower charging may require longer periods plugged in, but its overall endurance is likely to be competitive.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Y200 if you need a phone that prioritizes fast charging and a responsive experience for everyday tasks like social media and browsing. It’s ideal for users who frequently top up their battery and don’t heavily rely on demanding applications. Buy the Google Pixel 7a if you prefer a best-in-class camera, a clean and regularly updated Android experience, and AI-powered features like Magic Eraser, even if it means sacrificing charging speed and potentially facing slightly more thermal throttling under sustained load.