Vivo X200 Pro vs Google Pixel 6
Compared 2 smartphones : Vivo X200 Pro Manufactured in October, 2024, with display 6.78 with chipsetMediaTek Dimensity 9400, vs Google Pixel 6, Manufactured in October, 2021 with chipsetGoogle Tensor. Below are specs, tests, pros and cons for each device
Key Differences
Reasons to choose Vivo X200 Pro
- Larger display: 6.78in
- Higher pixel density: 452ppi
- Higher refresh rate: 120Hz
- Higher battery capacity: 6000mAh vs 4614mAh
- Newer Bluetooth version: 5.4 vs 5.2
- Supports newer USB: 3.2 vs 3.1
- Supports DisplayPort
- Infrared port
- Includes charger
Reasons to choose Google Pixel 6
- Lighter design: 207g vs 228g
Versions
| Memory Options | - 12/256 GB - 16/512 GB - 16/1024 GB |
- 8/128 GB - 8/256 GB |
Review
Display
Color accuracy, sharpness & brightness
Camera
Main & front camera tests
Performance
App & system performance
Games
3D gaming performance
Battery
Battery life, charging speed & type
Connectivity
Connectivity features
Adjust each parameter’s importance to find the best match for you.
Tests & specs
Specs & test comparisonDisplay
| Type | AMOLED | OLED |
| Size | 6.78 in | 6.4 in |
| Resolution | 1260x2800 pixels | 1080x2400 pixels |
| Aspect ratio | 20:9 | 20:9 |
| Pixel density | 452 ppi | 411 ppi |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 90 Hz |
| Adaptive refresh rate | Yes (1-120 Hz) | No |
| Max brightness | 2000 nits | 500 nits |
| HDR support | Yes Dolby Vision | Yes HDR10+ |
| Touch Sampling Rate | 300 Hz | n/a |
| Screen-to-body ratio | 90.1 % | 83.3 % |
| Features | - DCI-P3 - Always-On Display - DC dimming |
- DCI-P3 - Always-On Display |
| sRGB gamut | n/a | 99.8 % |
| PWM (Flicker) | n/a | 397 Hz |
| Response time | n/a | 5 ms |
| Contrast | n/a | ∞ Infinite |
Design & Build
| Height | 162.36 mm (6.39 in) | 158.6 mm (6.24 in) |
| Width | 75.92 mm (2.99 in) | 74.8 mm (2.94 in) |
| Thickness | 8.49 mm (0.33 in) | 8.9 mm (0.35 in) |
| Weight | 228 g (8.04 oz) | 207 g (7.3 oz) |
| Water resistance | IP69 | IP68 |
| Cooling system | Vapor chamber | n/a |
| Back panel | Glass | Glass |
| Frame | Metal | Metal |
| Colors | - White - Black - Gray - Blue |
- Black - Blue - Yellow |
| Fingerprint sensor | Yes In-Display | Yes In-Display |
Screen-to-body ratio
Performance
| Chipset | MediaTek Dimensity 9400 | Google Tensor |
| Max Frequency | 3630 MHz | 2800 MHz |
| CPU Cores | 8 (1 + 3 + 4) | 8 (2 + 2 + 4) |
| Architecture | - 4/2.4 (Cortex-A720) - 3/3.3 (Cortex-X4) - 1/3.63 (Cortex-X925) |
- 4/1.8 (Cortex A55) - 2/2.25 (Cortex A76) - 2/2.8 (Cortex-X1) |
| Process | TSMC | Samsung |
| Transistor Size | 3 nm | 5 nm |
| Neural Processor | MediaTek NPU 890 | Tensor Processing Unit |
| Graphics | Mali-G925 Immortalis MP12 | Mali-G78 MP20 |
| GPU Cores | 1536 | 1280 |
| GPU Frequency | 1612 MHz | 848 MHz |
| FLOPS | 4952.1 GFLOPS | 2170.9 GFLOPS |
| Geekbench 6 (Single-Core) | 2848 | 1363 |
| Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core) | 8363 | 3100 |
| Geekbench Compute (GPU) | 24447 | n/a |
| CPU | 600293 | 243524 |
| GPU | 1194784 | 308790 |
| Memory | 408283 | 139643 |
| UX | 443652 | 203162 |
| NanoReview Score | 2647012 | 895119 |
| Max Surface Temp. | n/a | 42.1 °C |
| Stability | 55 % | 56 % |
| Graphics Test | 112 fps | 38 fps |
| Graphics Score | 18771 | 6379 |
| Writing score | 24851 | 14383 |
| Web score | 14035 | 7690 |
| Video editing | 5794 | 6612 |
| Data manipulation | 13748 | 10293 |
| NanoReview Score | 15826 | 10663 |
Memory
| RAM Size | - 12 GB - 16 GB |
8 GB |
| Memory Type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5 |
| Memory Frequency | 5333 MHz | 3200 MHz |
| Channels | 4 | 4 |
| Storage Capacity | - 256 GB - 512 GB - 1024 GB | - 128 GB - 256 GB |
| Storage Type | UFS 4.0 | UFS 3.1 |
| Memory Card | No | No |
Software
| OS | Android 15 | Android 12 (Upgradeable to Android 15) |
| OS Size | n/a | 17.6 GB |
| UI Skin | Funtouch OS 15 | Stock Android |
Battery
| Volume | 6000 mAh | 4614 mAh |
| Max Charging Power | 90 W | 30 W |
| Battery Type | Silicon Carbon (Si/C) | Li-ion |
| Removable | No | No |
| Wireless Charging | Yes (30 W) | Yes (21 W) |
| Reverse Charging | Yes | Yes (Wireless) |
| Fast Charging | Yes (73% in 30 min) | Yes (41% in 30 min) |
| Full Charge Time | 0:46 h | 1:53 h |
| Web Browsing | 12:47 h | 07:07 h |
| Video Playback | 16:41 h | 13:13 h |
| Games | 07:44 h | 05:02 h |
| Standby Mode | 85 h | 85 h |
Main camera
| Matrix | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Photo resolution | 8192x6144 pixels | 8192x6144 pixels |
| Zoom | Optical, 3.7x | Digital |
| Flash | Dual LED | Dual LED |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| 8K Recording | Yes (Up to 30 fps) | No |
| 4K Recording | Yes (Up to 120 fps) | Yes (Up to 60 fps) |
| 1080p Recording | Yes (Up to 60 fps) | Yes (Up to 60 fps) |
| Slow Motion | 960 fps (1080p) | 240 fps (1080p) |
| Wide-angle lens | 119 ° | 114 ° |
| Lenses count | Standard: 50 MP Telephoto: 200 MP Ultra-wide: 50 MP |
Standard: 50 MP Ultra-wide: 12 MP |
| Features | - Bokeh effect - Pro mode |
- Bokeh effect - Pro mode - RAW support |
| Matrix | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Aperture | f/1.6 | f/1.9 |
| Focal length | 23 mm | 25 mm |
| Sensor | Sony LYT-818 | Samsung GN1 |
| Sensor size | 1/1.28 | 1/1.31 |
| Pixel size | 1.22 μm | 1.2 μm |
| Autofocus | Laser autofocus | Laser autofocus |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| Matrix | 200 MP | n/a |
| Aperture | f/2.7 | n/a |
| Focal length | 85 mm | n/a |
| Sensor | Samsung ISOCELL HP9 | n/a |
| Sensor size | 1/1.4 | n/a |
| Pixel size | 0.56 μm | n/a |
| Stabilization | Optical | n/a |
| Matrix | 50 MP | 12 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.0 | f/2.2 |
| Focal length | 15 mm | 17 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung S5KJN1 | Sony IMX386 Exmor RS |
| Sensor size | 1/2.76 | 1/2.9 |
| Pixel size | 0.64 μm | 1.12 μm |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
| Bokeh | n/a | 65 |
| Preview | n/a | 65 |
| Zoom | n/a | 79 |
Front camera
| Matrix | 32 MP | 8 MP |
| Photo resolution | 6528x4896 pixels | 3840x2160 pixels |
| Aperture | f/2.0 | f/2.0 |
| Focal length | 20 mm | 24 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung S5KKD1 | CMOS |
| Sensor size | 1/3.42 | n/a |
| Pixel size | 0.64 μm | 1.12 μm |
| Autofocus | No | No |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
| Video resolution | 2160p (4K) at 60 fps | 1080p (Full HD) at 30 fps |
| TOF 3D sensor | No | No |
Connectivity
| Wi-Fi version | Wi-Fi 7 (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be) | Wi-Fi 6E (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax) |
| Wi-Fi features | - Dual Band - Wi-Fi MiMO - Wi-Fi Direct - Wi-Fi Hotspot - Wi-Fi Display |
- Dual Band - Wi-Fi MiMO - Wi-Fi Direct - Wi-Fi Hotspot - Wi-Fi Display |
| Bluetooth version | 5.4 | 5.2 |
| Bluetooth features | LE | LE, A2DP |
| USB type | USB Type-C | USB Type-C |
| USB version | 3.2 | 3.1 |
| USB features | - Charging - USB Storage Mode - OTG |
- Charging - USB Storage Mode - OTG |
| DisplayPort | Yes | n/a |
| GPS | - GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS - NAVIC |
- GPS - GLONASS - Beidou - Galileo - QZSS |
| NFC* | Yes | Yes |
| Infrared Port | Yes | No |
| SIM Count* | 2 | 1 |
| SIM Type | Nano | Nano |
| SIM Mode | Dual SIM Standby | n/a |
| eSIM Support * | Yes | Yes |
| Hybrid Slot | No | No |
| 2G Bands | GSM 850/900/1800/1900 MHz | GSM Quad-band (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz) |
| 3G Bands | WCDMA B1/B2/B4/B5/B8 | UMTS/HSPA+ 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 19 |
| LTE Bands* | LTE (B1/B2/B3/B4/B5/B7/B8/B12/B17/B18/B19/B20/B26/B28/B32/B34/B38/B39/B40/B41/B42/B66) | LTE (B1/B2/B3/B4/B5/B7/B8/B12/B13/B14/B17/B18/B19/B20/B25/B26/B28/B29/B30/B32/B38/B39/B40/B41/B42/B46/B48/B66/B71) |
| LTE category | n/a | 20 |
| 5G Support | Yes | Yes |
Sound
| Speakers | Stereo | Stereo |
| 3.5 mm Jack | No | No |
| FM Radio | No | No |
| Dolby Atmos | No | No |
Other
| Class | Flagship | Flagship |
| Announced | October, 2024 yr | October, 2021 yr |
| Release Date | October, 2024 yr | October, 2021 yr |
| Launch Price ($) | 847 | 600 |
| Sensors | - Proximity Sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient Light Sensor - Compass - Fingerprint sensor |
- Barometer - Proximity Sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient Light Sensor - Compass - Fingerprint sensor |
| Charger Included | Yes 90 W | No |
Note
Vivo X200 Pro:
The black model is thinner (8.2) and lighter (223g).
*
Attention!
Config, frequencies, NFC, and other specs may vary by region.
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Vivo X200 Pro the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0