Google Pixel 7a vs. Yezz Art 2 Pro: A Deep Dive into Performance and Value
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Google Pixel 7a is the superior choice. Its significantly more powerful Tensor G2 chipset, coupled with Google’s image processing, provides a smoother, more capable experience. While the Yezz Art 2 Pro offers a lower price point, the performance gap is substantial, impacting everything from app loading times to camera quality.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Yezz Art 2 Pro | Google Pixel 7a |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 900 / 1900 / 850 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 2, 3, 4, 7, 12, 17, 28 | 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, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 20, 25, 28, 30, 38, 41, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - GWKK3 |
| Speed | HSPA 21.1/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | 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 | 2021, April. Released 2021, July | 2023, May 10 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2023, May 10 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, aluminum back, aluminum frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), aluminum frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 164.2 x 76.3 x 8.8 mm (6.46 x 3.00 x 0.35 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 | 188 g (6.63 oz) | 193.5 g (6.84 oz) |
| - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Asahi Glass | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~269 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~429 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.53 inches, 102.9 cm2 (~82.2% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.1 inches, 90.7 cm2 (~81.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | OLED, HDR, 90Hz |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55 & 4x1.2 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.85 GHz Cortex-X1 & 2x2.35 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Unisoc SC9863A (28 nm) | Google Tensor G2 (5 nm) |
| GPU | IMG8322 | Mali-G710 MP7 |
| OS | Android 11 | Android 13, upgradable to Android 15, up to 5 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | No |
| Internal | 64GB 3GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM |
| - | UFS 3.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 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 | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Dual-LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama |
| Triple | 16 MP, f/2.0, 1/2.8", AF 2 MP 2 MP | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps, OIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 13 MP, f/2.0 | 13 MP, f/2.2, 20mm (ultrawide), 1.12µm |
| Video | - | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.2, A2DP, LE | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS, NavIC |
| Radio | Stereo FM radio, recording | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 3.2 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, tri-band |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 10W wired, PD | 18W wired, PD3.0 7.5W wireless |
| Type | Li-Ion 5000 mAh | Li-Po 4385 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Graphite Black, Arctic Blue | Charcoal, Snow, Sea, Coral |
| Models | - | GWKK3, GHL1X, G0DZQ, G82U8 |
| Price | About 120 EUR | € 179.90 / $ 150.00 / £ 170.00 / ₹ 25,980 |
| SAR | 0.40 W/kg (head) 0.74 W/kg (body) | - |
Yezz Art 2 Pro
- Significantly faster processor (Tensor G2)
- Superior camera quality and features
- Long-term software support from Google
- Higher price point
- May not have expandable storage
Google Pixel 7a
- Lower price
- Potentially longer battery life due to less demanding hardware
- Compact and lightweight design (assumed)
- Slow processor (Unisoc SC9863A)
- Inferior camera performance
- Limited software updates
Display Comparison
The Pixel 7a boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1070 nits, compared to an assumed lower brightness on the Yezz Art 2 Pro (typical of budget devices). This translates to better visibility outdoors. While the Yezz Art 2 Pro’s display specifications are not provided, it’s unlikely to feature advanced technologies like LTPO for variable refresh rates, which the Pixel 7a may incorporate, further enhancing smoothness and power efficiency. The Pixel 7a’s display is likely to have superior color accuracy and viewing angles.
Camera Comparison
The Pixel 7a’s camera system is a major advantage. While specific sensor details aren’t provided, Google’s computational photography prowess, powered by the Tensor G2’s image signal processor (ISP), elevates image quality significantly. The Pixel 7a excels in low-light photography and offers features like Magic Eraser and Photo Unblur. The Yezz Art 2 Pro’s camera, while functional, will likely struggle in challenging lighting conditions and lack the advanced software features found on the Pixel 7a. The absence of OIS on the Yezz Art 2 Pro will also result in less stable videos and potentially blurrier photos.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Google Pixel 7a’s Tensor G2, fabricated on a 5nm process, is in a different league than the Yezz Art 2 Pro’s Unisoc SC9863A (28nm). The Tensor G2’s octa-core configuration, featuring Cortex-X1 and A78 cores, delivers substantially higher CPU and GPU performance. The Unisoc SC9863A’s Cortex-A55 cores, while efficient, are significantly less powerful. This difference impacts everything from app launch speeds to multitasking and gaming. The 5nm process of the Tensor G2 also contributes to better thermal management, reducing the likelihood of performance throttling under sustained load. The Pixel 7a likely utilizes faster LPDDR5x RAM, further boosting performance.
Battery Life
The Pixel 7a has an endurance rating of 76 hours, suggesting good battery life despite not having the largest capacity. Its 18W wired charging with PD3.0 and 7.5W wireless charging offer convenient options. The Yezz Art 2 Pro’s 10W wired charging is considerably slower. While the Yezz Art 2 Pro’s battery capacity isn’t specified, the less efficient Unisoc chipset will likely result in shorter battery life compared to the Pixel 7a. The faster charging speed of the Pixel 7a mitigates any potential capacity disadvantage.
Buying Guide
Buy the Yezz Art 2 Pro if you need a basic smartphone for essential tasks like calls, texts, and light web browsing, and your budget is extremely limited. You're willing to accept slower performance and a less refined camera experience. Buy the Google Pixel 7a if you prioritize a smooth user experience, excellent camera capabilities, and access to Google’s AI features, even if it means spending more upfront. You value long-term software support and a phone that can handle demanding applications.