Google Pixel 6a vs. ZTE Blade V40 Design: 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 V40 Design presents a compelling option for budget-conscious buyers prioritizing basic functionality and longer battery life over raw performance.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | ZTE Blade V40 Design | 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 | LTE | 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, 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 | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | 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 | 2022, December 21 | 2022, May 11 |
| Status | Available. Released 2023, January 10 | Available. Released 2022, July 21 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), aluminum frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 163 x 74 x 8 mm (6.42 x 2.91 x 0.31 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 | 183.4 g (6.46 oz) | 178 g (6.28 oz) |
| - | IP67 dust/water resistant (up to 1m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~400 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~429 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.6 inches, 104.9 cm2 (~87.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.1 inches, 90.7 cm2 (~83.0% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | OLED, HDR |
| - | Always-on display | |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.80 GHz Cortex-X1 & 2x2.25 GHz Cortex-A76 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Unisoc Tiger T616 (12 nm) | Google Tensor (5 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MP1 | Mali-G78 MP20 |
| OS | Android 12, MyOS 12 | Android 12, upgradable to Android 15, up to 5 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | No |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM |
| UFS 2.2 | UFS 3.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 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, panorama | Dual-LED flash, Pixel Shift, Auto-HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1.12µm |
| Triple | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF 2 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 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 | Yes | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | Yes | 5.2, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, QZSS |
| Radio | Unspecified | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 3.1 |
| WLAN | Yes | 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 | 22.5W wired | 18W wired, PD3.0 |
| Type | Li-Po 4500 mAh | Li-Po 4410 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Sky Blue, Starry Black | Chalk, Charcoal, Sage |
| Models | 8046 | GX7AS, GB62Z, G1AZG, GB17L |
| Price | About 200 EUR | $ 138.99 / C$ 228.74 / ₹ 23,999 |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 94h |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
ZTE Blade V40 Design
- Significantly faster processor for smooth performance
- Superior camera quality with Google's image processing
- Brighter and more vibrant display
- Higher price point
- Slower charging speed (18W)
Google Pixel 6a
- More affordable price
- Faster charging speed (22.5W)
- Potentially longer battery life due to less demanding processor
- Significantly slower processor
- Inferior camera quality
- Less vibrant display
Display Comparison
The Pixel 6a boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching 876 nits measured, compared to an unspecified brightness for the ZTE Blade V40 Design. This translates to better visibility outdoors. While both likely utilize OLED panels (based on Pixel 6a's 'infinite' contrast ratio), the Pixel 6a's superior brightness and Google's color calibration will deliver a more vibrant and accurate viewing experience. The Blade V40 Design's display specs are minimal, suggesting a focus on cost reduction rather than visual fidelity.
Camera Comparison
While both phones likely feature multi-camera setups, the Pixel 6a’s camera system is expected to be far superior due to Google’s renowned computational photography. The Pixel 6a benefits from Google’s image processing algorithms, delivering excellent dynamic range and detail. The ZTE Blade V40 Design’s camera specs are not detailed enough to make a direct comparison, but given its price point, it’s unlikely to compete with the Pixel 6a’s image quality. The absence of OIS information for the Blade V40 Design further suggests a less sophisticated camera experience.
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 V40 Design’s Unisoc Tiger T616 (12nm). The Tensor’s Cortex-X1 prime core, clocked at 2.80 GHz, provides significantly higher single-core performance, crucial for app responsiveness and demanding tasks. The T616’s Cortex-A75 cores, at 2.0 GHz, are older architecture and less efficient. The 5nm fabrication process of the Tensor also contributes to better thermal management, reducing throttling during sustained workloads. This means the Pixel 6a will handle gaming and video editing far more effectively.
Battery Life
Both devices share an endurance rating of 94 hours, indicating similar overall battery life despite the Pixel 6a’s more powerful processor. This suggests efficient power management on the Pixel 6a. However, the ZTE Blade V40 Design’s 22.5W charging is faster than the Pixel 6a’s 18W charging, potentially allowing for quicker top-ups. The Pixel 6a also supports PD3.0, offering more versatile charging options, but the faster wattage of the ZTE device is a practical advantage for users who frequently need to recharge quickly.
Buying Guide
Buy the ZTE Blade V40 Design if you need a reliable, affordable smartphone for essential tasks like calling, texting, and light social media use, and prioritize battery longevity over demanding applications. Buy the Google Pixel 6a if you value a smooth, responsive user experience, excellent camera capabilities, and access to Google's exclusive software features, even if it means spending more and potentially sacrificing some battery life.