Xiaomi Mi 9T vs Google Pixel 3a XL: A Detailed Comparison of Mid-Range Champions
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Xiaomi Mi 9T emerges as the stronger choice. Its significantly brighter 646-nit display and more powerful Snapdragon 730 chipset offer a more responsive and visually engaging experience, outweighing the Pixel 3a XL’s software advantages. However, Pixel purists will still appreciate the streamlined Android experience.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Xiaomi Mi 9T | Google Pixel 3a XL |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 38, 40, 41, 66, 71 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (3CA) Cat11 600/75 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE |
| - | CDMA2000 1xEV-DO | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2019, June 12. Released 2019, June 12 | 2019, May 07. Released 2019, May 15 |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back, aluminum frame | Glass front (Asahi Dragontrail), plastic back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 156.7 x 74.3 x 8.8 mm (6.17 x 2.93 x 0.35 in) | 160.1 x 76.1 x 8.2 mm (6.30 x 3.00 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + eSIM |
| Weight | 191 g (6.74 oz) | 167 g (5.89 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 | Asahi Dragontrail Glass |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~403 ppi density) | 1080 x 2160 pixels, 18:9 ratio (~402 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.39 inches, 100.2 cm2 (~86.1% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.0 inches, 92.9 cm2 (~76.3% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, HDR | OLED |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 470 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 470 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz 360 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 360 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SDM730 Snapdragon 730 (8 nm) | Qualcomm SDM670 Snapdragon 670 (10 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 618 | Adreno 615 |
| OS | Android 9.0 (Pie), upgradable to Android 11, MIUI 12.1 | Android 9.0 (Pie), upgradable to Android 12 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM |
| UFS 2.0 | eMMC 5.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama | Dual-LED flash, Pixel Shift, HDR, panorama |
| Single | - | 12.2 MP, f/1.8, 28mm (wide), 1/2.55", 1.4µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS |
| Triple | 48 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF 8 MP, f/2.4, 53mm (telephoto), 1/4.0", 1.12µm, PDAF, 2x optical zoom 13 MP, f/2.4, 12mm (ultrawide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/120/240fps, 1080p@960fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60/120fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | Motorized pop-up 20 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/3.4", 0.8µm | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| 24-bit/192kHz audio | - | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX HD |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0 |
| 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, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 18W wired, PD2.0 |
| Type | Li-Po 4000 mAh, non-removable | Li-Po 3700 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Carbon black, Red flame, Glacier blue | Just Black, Clearly White, Purple-ish |
| Models | M1903F10G | G020C, G020G, G020F, G020A, G020B, G020D |
| Price | About 460 EUR | About 290 EUR |
| SAR | 1.19 W/kg (head) 1.18 W/kg (body) | - |
| SAR EU | 1.34 W/kg (head) 1.51 W/kg (body) | - |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Audio quality | Noise -93.5dB / Crosstalk -93.8dB | Noise -90.8dB / Crosstalk -94.8dB |
| Battery life | Endurance rating 100h | Endurance rating 98h |
| Camera | Photo / Video | - |
| Display | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) | Contrast ratio: infinite |
| Loudspeaker | -25.3 LUFS (Very good) | Voice 79dB / Noise 77dB / Ring 91dB |
| Performance | AnTuTu: 211915 (v7), 257146 (v8) GeekBench: 6863 (v4.4), 1703 (v5.1) GFXBench: 13fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) | AnTuTu: 159110 (v7), 176612 (v8) GeekBench: 5176 (v4.4), 1307 (v5.1) GFXBench: 11fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Xiaomi Mi 9T
- Brighter and more vibrant display (646 nits)
- More powerful Snapdragon 730 chipset
- Better value for money
- MIUI software can be bloated
- Camera software not as refined as Pixel
Google Pixel 3a XL
- Clean and bloatware-free Android experience
- Excellent computational photography
- PD2.0 charging support
- Dimmer display (451 nits)
- Less powerful Snapdragon 670 chipset
Display Comparison
The most immediately noticeable difference lies in the displays. The Xiaomi Mi 9T boasts a peak brightness of 646 nits, making it significantly more usable outdoors and in bright environments compared to the Pixel 3a XL’s 451 nits. Both feature an 'infinite' contrast ratio, typical of AMOLED panels, but the Mi 9T’s higher brightness translates to a more dynamic and vivid image. While neither display is confirmed to have high refresh rates, the brightness difference is a substantial advantage for the Mi 9T, especially for users who frequently consume video content or use their phones outdoors.
Camera Comparison
Both phones offer capable cameras, but approach image processing differently. The Pixel 3a XL leverages Google’s renowned computational photography algorithms to produce excellent images, particularly in challenging lighting conditions. However, the Mi 9T, while lacking the same software prowess, benefits from a potentially larger sensor (details not provided in context data) and a more versatile camera system. The Pixel 3a XL’s strength lies in its consistent image quality and ease of use, while the Mi 9T offers more flexibility for creative shooting. Without specific sensor size data, it's difficult to definitively declare a camera winner, but the Pixel's software is a significant advantage.
Performance
Under the hood, the Xiaomi Mi 9T’s Snapdragon 730 (8nm) offers a clear performance advantage over the Pixel 3a XL’s Snapdragon 670 (10nm). The 730’s Kryo 470 cores, clocked at up to 2.2 GHz, outperform the 670’s Kryo 360 cores (2.0 GHz). The 8nm process node of the SDM730 also contributes to better thermal efficiency, potentially reducing throttling during sustained workloads. While both phones are capable of handling everyday tasks, the Mi 9T will exhibit smoother performance in demanding applications and games. The SDM670's 10nm process, while theoretically more efficient, is offset by the architectural improvements in the 730.
Battery Life
Both devices achieve similar endurance ratings – 100 hours for the Mi 9T and 98 hours for the Pixel 3a XL. This suggests comparable real-world battery life despite the lack of specific mAh capacities. Both support 18W wired charging, but the Pixel 3a XL adds support for PD2.0, potentially offering slightly faster charging with compatible chargers. The Mi 9T’s slightly higher endurance rating likely stems from the more efficient Snapdragon 730 chipset and optimized power management.
Buying Guide
Buy the Xiaomi Mi 9T if you need a brighter, more vibrant display for media consumption, demand smoother performance for gaming and multitasking, and prioritize value for money. Buy the Google Pixel 3a XL if you prefer a clean, bloatware-free Android experience with Google’s exceptional computational photography, and are less concerned with raw processing power or display brightness.