Google Pixel 6a vs. ZTE Blade A75: A Detailed Comparison
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Google Pixel 6a is the superior choice, offering a dramatically faster processor and a significantly better camera experience. However, the ZTE Blade A75 provides a compelling option for those prioritizing extreme budget-friendliness and basic smartphone functionality.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | ZTE Blade A75 | Google Pixel 6a |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 48, 66, 71 - GX7AS, GB62Z (USA/Canada) |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 20, 25, 28, 30, 38, 40, 41, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - GX7AS (USA/Canada) |
| 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, 30, 40, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 - G1AZG (International) | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2024, September | 2022, May 11 |
| Status | Available. Released 2024, September | Available. Released 2022, July 21 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), aluminum frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 163.6 x 74.9 x 8.6 mm (6.44 x 2.95 x 0.34 in) | 152.2 x 71.8 x 8.9 mm (5.99 x 2.83 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + eSIM |
| Weight | 205.5 g (7.27 oz) | 178 g (6.28 oz) |
| - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1612 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~266 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~429 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.6 inches, 105.4 cm2 (~86.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.1 inches, 90.7 cm2 (~83.0% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 120Hz | OLED, HDR |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 & 3x Cortex-A76 & 4x Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.80 GHz Cortex-X1 & 2x2.25 GHz Cortex-A76 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Unisoc T760 (6 nm) | Google Tensor (5 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 | Mali-G78 MP20 |
| OS | Android 13 | Android 12, upgradable to Android 15, up to 5 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM |
| - | UFS 3.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | 50 MP, f/1.8, 27mm (wide), AF Auxiliary lens | 12.2 MP, f/1.7, 27mm, (wide), 1/2.55", 1.4µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS 12 MP, f/2.2, 17mm, 114˚ (ultrawide), 1.25µm |
| Features | LED flash, HDR | Dual-LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama |
| Single | - | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1.12µm |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps; gyro-EIS, OIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.2, A2DP, LE | 5.2, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes (market/region dependent) | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, QZSS |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 3.1 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 10W or 18W wired (market/region dependent) | 18W wired, PD3.0 |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 4410 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black, Mint Green | Chalk, Charcoal, Sage |
| Models | Z2357N | GX7AS, GB62Z, G1AZG, GB17L |
| Price | About 170 EUR | $ 138.99 / C$ 228.74 / ₹ 23,999 |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 94h |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
ZTE Blade A75
- Significantly faster processor with Google Tensor
- Superior camera performance with Google's image processing
- Faster charging with PD3.0 support
- Higher price point
- May not offer expandable storage
Google Pixel 6a
- Extremely affordable price
- Acceptable battery life
- Functional for basic smartphone tasks
- Slow processor and limited performance
- Inferior camera quality
- Potentially slower software updates
Display Comparison
The Pixel 6a boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching 876 nits measured, compared to the ZTE Blade A75’s unspecified brightness. This makes the Pixel 6a far more usable outdoors in direct sunlight. While both likely utilize LCD panels given their price points, the Pixel 6a’s infinite (nominal) contrast ratio suggests better black levels. The Blade A75’s display specifications are minimal, suggesting a focus on cost reduction rather than visual fidelity. Bezels are likely larger on the ZTE device, further diminishing the viewing experience.
Camera Comparison
The Pixel 6a’s camera system is a clear winner, leveraging Google’s renowned computational photography. While specific sensor details are missing for both, the Pixel 6a benefits from Google’s image processing pipeline, delivering exceptional image quality in various lighting conditions. The ZTE Blade A75 likely features a more basic camera setup, prioritizing affordability over advanced features like optical image stabilization (OIS). The absence of detailed camera specs for the Blade A75 suggests a focus on basic image capture rather than high-quality photography. Ignoring the likely inclusion of low-resolution macro lenses on both devices, the Pixel 6a’s software processing will be the defining factor.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Google Pixel 6a’s Google Tensor (5nm) is a substantial leap ahead of the ZTE Blade A75’s Unisoc T760 (6nm). The Tensor’s Cortex-X1 prime core, clocked at 2.80 GHz, provides significantly higher peak performance than the A76-based cores in the Unisoc chip. The 5nm fabrication process of the Tensor also contributes to better power efficiency. While the Unisoc T760 is adequate for everyday tasks, the Tensor enables smoother multitasking, faster app loading, and a more responsive user experience, particularly in demanding applications. The Pixel 6a’s performance advantage will be most noticeable in gaming and video editing.
Battery Life
Both devices achieve an endurance rating of 94 hours, suggesting similar real-world battery life despite potential differences in battery capacity. However, the Pixel 6a supports 18W wired charging with PD3.0, offering faster and more efficient charging compared to the ZTE Blade A75’s 10W or 18W (region dependent) charging. The Pixel 6a’s faster charging capability translates to less downtime and quicker top-ups, a significant convenience factor. While both phones offer comparable endurance, the Pixel 6a’s charging speed provides a practical advantage.
Buying Guide
Buy the ZTE Blade A75 if you need a functional smartphone for essential tasks like calls, texts, and light social media, and your budget is extremely limited. You'll appreciate its affordability and acceptable battery life. Buy the Google Pixel 6a if you prioritize performance for gaming and demanding apps, a superior camera system with Google's computational photography, and guaranteed software updates for years to come. The Pixel 6a delivers a flagship experience at a mid-range price.