Vivo X200 Pro vs Google Pixel 9 Pro
84
out of 100
VS
74
out of 100
Here we compared two flagship smartphones: the 6.78-inch Vivo X200 Pro (with MediaTek Dimensity 9400) that was released on October 14, 2024, against the Google Pixel 9 Pro, which is powered by Google Tensor G4 and came out 2 months before. On this page, you will find tests, full specs, strengths, and weaknesses of each of the devices.
Select the amount of RAM to evaluate performance and value for money more precisely
Key differences
Reasons to consider the Vivo X200 Pro
- 76% better performance in AnTuTu Benchmark (2825K versus 1606K)
- Comes with 1300 mAh larger battery capacity: 6000 vs 4700 mAh
- Shows 13% longer battery life (24:55 vs 22:07 hours)
- Newer Bluetooth version (v5.4)
- Supports higher wattage charging (90W versus 27W)
- Waterproof body (IP69 classification)
- Has a 0.48 inch larger screen size
- Has 2 SIM card slots
- Has a built-in infrared port
Reasons to consider the Google Pixel 9 Pro
- The rear camera has a 5x optical zoom
- Has 33% more RAM: 16GB versus 12GB
- Delivers 14% higher peak brightness (2317 against 2039 nits)
- More recent OS version: Android 17 versus 16
- 10% higher pixel density (495 vs 452 PPI)
- Weighs 29 grams less
Review
Display
Screen quality, color accuracy, brightness
Camera
Photo and video recording quality
Performance
CPU and memory performance (apps, system)
Gaming
Capabilities for playing modern games
Battery
Battery life, charging type and speed
Connectivity
Networks, ports, data transmission
Scores with a red asterisk (*) are approximate and may change in the future as we gather more data.
Select your primary usage scenario to get a more accurate DeviceFacts Score
Value for money (Beta)
Tests and specifications
Comparison table of technical specifications and testsDisplay
| Type | AMOLED | OLED |
| Size | 6.78 inches | 6.3 inches |
| Resolution | 1260 x 2800 pixels | 1280 x 2856 pixels |
| Aspect ratio | 20:9 | 20:9 |
| PPI | 452 ppi | 495 ppi |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 120 Hz |
| Adaptive refresh rate | Yes (1-120 Hz) | Yes (1-120 Hz) |
| Max rated brightness | 2000 nits | 3000 nits |
| Max rated brightness in HDR | 4500 nits | 2000 nits |
| HDR support | Yes, Dolby Vision | Yes, HDR10+ |
| Touch sampling rate | 300 Hz | - |
| Screen protection | Armor Glass | Gorilla Glass Victus 2 |
| Screen-to-body ratio | 90.1% | 87.1% |
| Display features | - DCI-P3 - Always-On Display - DC Dimming |
- DCI-P3 - Always-On Display |
| RGB color space | - | 99.1% |
| PWM | - | 240 Hz |
| Response time | - | 2 ms |
| Contrast | - | ∞ Infinity |
Screen space comparison
X200 Pro
6.78″ (20:9 ratio) = 17.2 in2
Pixel 9 Pro
6.3″ (20:9 ratio) = 14.9 in2
~15% more screen space
Peak brightness test (auto)
Design and build
| Height | 162.36 mm (6.39 inches) | 152.8 mm (6.02 inches) |
| Width | 75.92 mm (2.99 inches) | 72 mm (2.83 inches) |
| Thickness | 8.49 mm (0.33 inches) | 8.5 mm (0.33 inches) |
| Weight | 228 g (8.04 oz) | 199 g (7.02 oz) |
| Waterproof | IP69 | IP68 |
| Advanced cooling | Vapor chamber | Vapor chamber |
| Rear material | Glass | Glass |
| Frame material | Metal | Metal |
| Colors | White, Black, Gray, Blue | White, Black, Gray, Pink |
| Fingerprint scanner | Yes, in-display | Yes, in-display |
| Repairability | - | Good (3.39/5) |
| Drop resistance | - | Excellent (A) · 270 drops |
Screen-to-body ratio
Performance
| Chipset | MediaTek Dimensity 9400 | Google Tensor G4 |
| Max clock | 3620 MHz | 3100 MHz |
| CPU cores | 8 (1 + 3 + 4) | 8 (1 + 3 + 4) |
| Architecture | - 4 cores at 2.4 GHz: Cortex-A720 - 3 cores at 3.3 GHz: Cortex-X4 - 1 core at 3.62 GHz: Cortex-X925 |
- 4 cores at 1.92 GHz: Cortex-A520 - 3 cores at 2.6 GHz: Cortex-A720 - 1 core at 3.1 GHz: Cortex-X4 |
| L3 cache | 12 MB | - |
| Manufacturing | TSMC | Samsung |
| Lithography process | 3 nanometers | 4 nanometers |
| Neural processor (NPU) | MediaTek NPU 890 | Yes |
| Graphics | Immortalis-G925 MC12 | Mali-G715 MP7 |
| GPU shading units | 1536 | 896 |
| GPU clock | 1612 MHz | 940 MHz |
| FLOPS | ~4952.1 GFLOPS | ~1684.4 GFLOPS |
Benchmarks
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
Compute Score (GPU)
| Compute Score (GPU) | 21444 | 10088 |
| Single-core score | 2686 | 1268 |
| Multi-core score | 8366 | 4471 |
AnTuTu Benchmark 11
| CPU | 900074 | 593578 |
| GPU | 972096 | 419286 |
| Memory | 345330 | 209607 |
| UX | 607687 | 383767 |
| Total score | 2825187 | 1606238 |
| Samples | [22 tests] | [2 tests] |
3DMark Steel Nomad Light
| Stability | 61% | 78% |
| Graphics test | 18 FPS | 8 FPS |
| Graphics score | 2371 | 1047 |
3DMark Solar Bay
| Graphics test | 40 FPS | - |
| Section 1 | 44 FPS | - |
| Section 2 | 41 FPS | - |
| Section 3 | 34 FPS | - |
| Graphics score | 10432 | - |
3DMark Wild Life Extreme
| Stability | 65% | - |
| Graphics test | 36 FPS | - |
| Graphics score | 6122 | - |
PCMark 3.0
| Web score | 13701 | 10518 |
| Video editing | 5803 | 7606 |
| Photo editing | 35653 | 20039 |
| Data manipulation | 13567 | 13898 |
| Writing score | 23556 | 17296 |
AnTuTu 11 Ranking List (#133rd place)
Recent User Tests
Vivo X200 Pro
| Date | Benchmark | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 📘 2026-09-12 (Oussama barhmate) | AnTuTu 12 | 3135000 |
| 📘 2026-08-01 -> Dlack | AnTuTu 11 | 2847396 |
| 📘 2026-08-01 (Dlack) | AnTuTu 11 | 2847396 |
| 📘 2026-07-31 (Xarvis) | Geekbench 6 GPU | 23591 |
| 📘 2026-07-31 (Xarvis) | Geekbench 6 CPU | 2432 / 8113 |
Google Pixel 9 Pro
| Date | Benchmark | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 📘 2026-06-09 (danyages) | AnTuTu 11 | 1606238 |
| 📘 2026-03-05 (Sashka2005) | AnTuTu 11 | 1499601 |
| 📘 2024-10-16 (notReal) | Geekbench 6 CPU | 1268 / 4471 |
Memory
| RAM size | 12 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |
| Memory clock | 5333 MHz | - |
| Channels | 4 | 4 |
| Storage size | 256 GB | 128 GB |
| Storage type | UFS 4.0 | UFS 3.1 |
| Memory card | No | No |
Software
| Operating system | Android 15 (Can be upgraded to Android 16) | Android 14 (Can be upgraded to Android 17) |
| ROM | Funtouch OS 16 | Stock Android |
| OS size | - | 28.8 GB |
| OS updates | 3 years | 7 years |
| Security updates | 3 years | 7 years |
Battery
| Capacity | 6000 mAh | 4700 mAh |
| Max charge power | 90 W | 27 W |
| Battery type | Silicon-Carbon (Si/C) | Li-Po |
| Replaceable | No | No |
| Wireless charging | Yes (30 W) | Yes (12 W) |
| Reverse charging | Yes | Yes, (wireless) |
| Bypass charging | Yes | No |
| Fast charging | Yes (73% in 30 min) | Yes (56% in 30 min) |
| Full charging time | 0:46 hr | 1:24 hr |
| Battery cycles | - | 1000 cycles |
| Web browsing | 12:47 hr | 10:12 hr |
| Watching video | 16:41 hr | 12:40 hr |
| Gaming | 07:44 hr | 06:23 hr |
| Standby | 85 hr | 96 hr |
General battery life
Main camera
| Matrix | 50 megapixels | 50 megapixels |
| Image resolution | 8192 x 6144 | 8160 x 6144 |
| Zoom | Optical, 3.7x | Optical, 5x |
| Flash | Dual LED | Dual LED |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| 8K video recording | Up to 30FPS | Up to 30FPS |
| 4K video recording | Up to 120FPS | Up to 60FPS |
| 1080p video recording | Up to 60FPS | Up to 60FPS |
| Slow motion | 240 FPS (1080p) | 240 FPS (1080p) |
| Angle of widest lens | 119° | 123° |
| Lenses | 1) Standard: 50 MP 2) Telephoto: 200 MP 3) Ultrawide: 50 MP |
1) Standard: 50 MP 2) Telephoto: 48 MP 3) Ultrawide: 48 MP |
| Camera features | - Bokeh mode - Pro mode |
- Bokeh mode - Pro mode - RAW support |
| Image resolution | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Aperture | f/1.6 | f/1.7 |
| Focal length | 23 mm | 25 mm |
| Sensor | Sony LYT-818 | Samsung GN1 |
| Sensor size | 1/1.28" (≈ 0.78 inch) | 1/1.31" (≈ 0.76 inch) |
| Pixel size | 1.22 micron | 1.2 micron |
| Autofocus | Laser autofocus | Laser autofocus |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| Image resolution | 200 MP | 48 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.7 | f/2.8 |
| Focal length | 85 mm | 113 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung ISOCELL HP9 | Samsung S5KGM5 |
| Sensor size | 1/1.4" (≈ 0.71 inch) | 1/2.55" (≈ 0.39 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.56 micron | 0.7 micron |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| Image resolution | 50 MP | 48 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.0 | f/1.7 |
| Focal length | 15 mm | 12 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung S5KJN1 | Samsung S5KGM5 |
| Sensor size | 1/2.76" (≈ 0.36 inch) | 1/2.55" (≈ 0.39 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.64 micron | 0.7 micron |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
Selfie camera
| Megapixels | 32 megapixels | 42 megapixels |
| Image resolution | 6528 x 4896 | 3648 x 2736 |
| Aperture | f/2.0 | f/2.2 |
| Focal length | 20 mm | 18 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung S5KKD1 | Sony IMX858 |
| Sensor size | 1/3.42" (≈ 0.29 inch) | 1/2.51" (≈ 0.4 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.64 micron | 0.7 micron |
| Autofocus | No | Phase autofocus |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
| Video resolution | 2160p (4K) at 60 FPS | 2160p (4K) at 60 FPS |
| Depth sensor (TOF 3D) | No | No |
Connectivity
| Wi-Fi standard | Wi-Fi 7 (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be) | Wi-Fi 7 (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be) |
| 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 | 5.3 |
| Bluetooth features | LE | LE |
| USB type | USB Type-C | USB Type-C |
| USB version | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| USB features | - Charging - USB-Storage mode - OTG |
- Charging - USB-Storage mode - OTG |
| DisplayPort | Yes | Yes |
| GPS | GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, NAVIC | GPS, GLONASS, Galileo |
| NFC* | Yes | Yes |
| Infrared port | Yes | No |
| Number of SIM* | 2 | 1 |
| Type of SIM card | Nano | Nano |
| Multi SIM mode | Standby | Standby |
| eSIM support* | Yes | Yes |
| Hybrid slot | No | No |
| 5G support | Yes | Yes |
Sound
| Speakers | Stereo | Stereo |
| Headphone audio jack | No | No |
| FM radio | No | No |
| Dolby Atmos | No | No |
Speakers test
Max loudness
Other
| Category | Flagship | Flagship |
| Announced | October 2024 | August 2024 |
| Release date | October 2024 | September 2024 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $847 | $999 |
| Successor | - Vivo X300 Pro | - Google Pixel 10 Pro |
| SAR (head) | - | 0.99 W/kg |
| SAR (body) | - | 1.37 W/kg |
| Sensors | - Proximity sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient light sensor - Compass - Fingerprint |
- Barometer - Proximity sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient light sensor - Compass - Fingerprint |
| Bundled charger | Yes, 90 W | Not included |
Further details
Notes on X200 Pro:
- The black model is thinner (8.2 mm) and lighter (223g).
*Disclaimer! NFC, GSM network support, and some other specs can be different depending on the country.
Conclusion
After analyzing all the data, we think that the Vivo X200 Pro is definitely a better buy.
Cast your vote
Total votes: 26