Conclusion & End Remarks

We’re are the end of 2019 and the Pixel 4 is amongst the last devices released this generation. I’ll be fully honest here and say that the expectations for the phone for me weren’t all that great, something quite unfortunate to say for any product but just a fact of reality given Google’s Pixel track record of hit and miss. What Google needed to provide was not just being able to deliver on their vision of a camera-centric phone, but also be able to execute on all the other core aspects that make a phone. So, did Google manage it this time around?

Design-wise, the Google Pixel 4 is quite different from what we’ve seen from the recent competition. Much like previous iterations of Pixel devices, there’s a certain uniqueness about the industrial design of the phone that doesn’t match up with other phones in the market. The Pixel 4 in particular is unique in terms of its frame and the finish of this detail. The matte back glass (On the white & orange variants, the black on is glossy) along with the matte frame make for an interesting in-hand feel that makes it stand out from the standard glossy and slippery designs out there. I think it works well for the phone. What I didn’t like about it is that the ergonomics have regressed this year. No longer having a rounded off back means the phone feels thicker and bigger in the hand.

Google’s choice of going with a regular larger “forehead” design works well, at least certainly a lot better than past notch designs. Google has populated this area with a variety of sensors, the two most notable functions being the device’s face unlock hardware as well as the new Project Soli radar. The face unlock is well implemented and is fast, but I would have wished Google had also gone for an optional fingerprint scanner. It feels like this design decision was made in 2017 or early 2018 in response to Apple and before under-screen fingerprint sensors started to become the standard.

Project Soli, other than facillitating the face unlock function response time, feels like a gimmick. It’s been attempted and implemented in the past, and even LG’s recent attempt in the G8 was honestly underwhelming and quite pointless. Google’s promotional videos of Project Soli certainly aren’t representative of how it’s implemented in the Pixel 4, and its uses are extremely limited.

The screen of the Pixel 4 is a major feature thanks to its 90Hz refresh rate. On the Pixel 4 XL we tested, it worked quite flawlessly, although there’s concerns about Google’s power management and how it currently automatically switches to 60Hz when under 75% brightness. It’s easy to force the phone 90Hz all the time and the battery hit is (In the grand scheme of things) minor.

The display panel itself is good, although it’s definitely not an “A+ grade” as Google wants to promote it as. The first hurdle is that it doesn’t get very bright and maxes out at 436 nits – quite significantly below any other flagship this year. Colour calibration is adequate enough and definitely an improvement over past Pixel devices, but with still some evident issues such as non-linear gamma or in our case a green tint to the colour balance.

Performance of the Pixel 4 was excellent, but nothing that differed too majorly from other good implementations of the Snapdragon 855. GPU performance was average and also in line with what we’ve seen from other S885 phones. It’s just a pity that Google is on this weird product cycle where they release their newest flagships at the tail-end of a SoC generation. I’m having a hard time justifying Pixel phones at their price range knowing well that you’re not getting the fullest return on investment over initial lifetime of a device.

The camera on the Pixel 4 is inarguably its main selling point. Google has made definitive improvements to the camera quality with the newer generation sensor and the new HDR+ algorithm – the most notable change being that the new camera no longer has such a poor grip on shadows, and showcases improved dynamic range. Whilst it was meant to be a feature of the Pixel 4, Google’s new colour balance algorithm this time around had more misses than hits, with a tendency of producing too warm pictures.

In low-light, the new camera sensor upgrade is again visible as it’s able to achieve lower noise levels when having to capture more of a scene when in lack of light. In general, while the upgrades are good and healthy, it’s naturally not as big an upgrade and jump compared to when Google first introduced Night Sight.

The telephoto module of the Pixel 4 is ok. The quality is good, but sometimes suffers from a lack of dynamic range as well as inaccurate colour balance. Super-zoom is a positive feature of the camera, but I feel like Google is maybe overstating its use and quality impact. In general, the Pixel 4’s camera is about equivalent to a 2.5x telephoto module in terms of the spatial resolution it’s able to produce in zoomed in images.

The problem for me is, that I have a hard time actually really differentiating the Pixel cameras to what other vendors are offering. Google has some edges here and there in the processing, but sometimes also falls behind. Generally, I feel that Google hasn’t caught up with Samsung, Huawei and Apple in the capture experience. The choice of going with a telephoto module instead of a wide-angle is I think a mistake for the average user. When you’re the only company in 2019 to not adopt a UWA module, it should give you pause to think.

Finally, the biggest draw-back of the Pixel 4 series in our testing was the battery life. There’s no mistake whom to blame here: adopting 90Hz whilst still featuring second-rate display panels and combining this with stagnant or even smaller battery capacities is a deadly combination for battery life, and there shouldn’t be any surprises that the Pixel 4s don’t fare well. In our testing with the 4 XL, the absolute end results are still somewhat adequate and the phone is still useable, but it just doesn’t compete with any other 2019 flagship. The regular Pixel 4 is likely a disaster.

Overall, the Pixel 4 frankly feels more like a device that would have been extremely successful if it had been released in 2018. Google releasing the phone this late in 2019 for prices of $799 for the regular version and $899 for the XL version just doesn’t make much sense. Those are also 64GB base variant versions by the way, you’ll have to pay an extra $100 for the 128GB models. I just can’t rationalise recommending the phones to anyone at their current price and given their compromises – Google has to either design and execute better, or give up on pretending they’re competing in the premium flagship segment and launch with prices about 25-30% lower.

Video Recording & Speaker Evaluation
Comments Locked

159 Comments

View All Comments

  • brucethemoose - Friday, November 8, 2019 - link

    The cost difference between 64GB and 128GB of smartphone flash has to be trivial these days. Its hard to believe anyone is still doing it, much less that Google and Apple are doing it in $800 flagships.
  • crimson117 - Friday, November 8, 2019 - link

    It's because the 64GB is priced lower to get you in the door, so they can upsell the 128GB to you for ~$50 more of mostly profit.
  • Jcaro14 - Friday, November 8, 2019 - link

    Yeah this phone is not for you, if you are looking for the latest hardware design you should stick with Samsung, Huawei, or Xiaomi. The Pixel is design for the best Android Software experience. I'm if you had one you would understand but since you just go by what the tech snobs say, sadly you won't be able to experience this awesome software experience that the Pixel provides.
  • Andrei Frumusanu - Friday, November 8, 2019 - link

    The Pixels are not the best "Android" experience, they're outright a Google experience.

    Most of the Pixel only features are geographically or language limited. If you're not using any of those features then the Pixel lineup is no any better at Android than say a Samsung device.
  • Pooppoot - Saturday, November 9, 2019 - link

    I disagree as someone who has used both and most Android devices! To me the Pixel line offers the "best" Android experience! It's a subjective matter though.
  • Quantumz0d - Monday, November 11, 2019 - link

    Wrong. I've also used Pixel 3a and it's nothing vs a custom skin or even a barebone Lineage OS.

    AOSP is being degraded with every Pixel revision. Pixel uses proprietary System UI and they offloaded a lot of Android's AOSP apps to their own - Messaging, Phone, Browser all are EOLed in AOSP. Pixel System UI has the worst customization features ever. And even their latest Recorder app is using Scoped Storage, thus once you record you do not see it in your Filemanager/filesystem which is BULLSHIT and can be shared from app (WTF?) plus no icon pack support too or the garbage launcher. Nova decimates that to oblivion.

    Best is subjective, I like LG because of no bloat (Smartworld and one more app that's all) vs others like Samsung because it has all the things you need from time location, notification dots numbering on status bar customization to even notification transparency on lockscreen, Plus AOD watch faces and all. OnePlus offers faster Android UX. Mind you all these are proprietary and beat Pixel user experience a.k.a Google Experience ( dumbed down experience )

    So yeah there's no Best, old times Nexus used to have the best Android experience with it's pure Stock AOSP skin. Then there was Cyanogen Mod with insane customizations and free themes, halcyon days of Android. Lineage OS and it's derivatives like Resurrection Remix have tons of features in built and there are lot of ROMs which massively improve on UX and speed / customization like Potato ROM.
  • s.yu - Wednesday, November 13, 2019 - link

    I had to work with an S4 Lite 4 years ago for a few months because my phone at the time got stolen, and it lagged to the point of being unusable so I said what the hell and flashed Cyanogen, however it continued to lag without notable improvement.
  • generalako - Friday, November 8, 2019 - link

    .
  • generalako - Friday, November 8, 2019 - link

    I'm not a tech snob, but a long-time Pixel user. Hardware DOES MATTER when I pay $800.

    Quality control DOES MATTER.I RMAed two different Pixel 2's and thre different 2 XL's. I RMAed three different Pixel 3's and two different 3 XL's. That's unacceptable for a flagship phones. The number of widespread QC issues in this series of phone is unprecedented -- as someone who buys and tests flagships, and also sell them, I have never seen anything like it.

    Battery DOES MATTER. Medicore battery size for the size and thickness, and battery life for battery size being mediocre as well, leading to bad battery life, generation after generation, is unacceptable.

    Display DOES MATTER. Going with a mix of Samsung OLED and shitty and cheap LG OLED, treating their calibrations differently, is unacceptable. As is bad calibraiton (especially gamma -- how can you provide black crush like this, year after year!?). As using LG OLED full of grain and color uniformity issues. It's like they're ordering the cheapest units they can get their hands on, from both LG and Samsung.

    RAM DOES MATTER. When they can't prove themselves by good RAM management, but instead bad, then 4GB is not enough and impedes on actual user experience. 6GB as well over time.

    Storage DOES MATTER. Spotify downloads alone take up 32GB. And when they decide to completely abandon the customers with free original backup on photos, this becomes even more important.

    And on and on it goes. I used Pixels for years because, as you point out, software smoothness and consistency is important for user experience. But none of it excuses all the other range of issues they have, nor does it justify the price tag they have. Pixel 3a gives me Pixel UI smoothness as well, for example, and it costs $400

    I actually jumped to the 3a from the 3, due to all the issues I had, and consider it an overall superior unit. Even Pixel 2 was a superior unit, as the Pixel 3 regressed in display quality, battery life and even smoothness (for some reason).

    Don't forget that Google was doing the superior software schtick with Nexuses as well: Nexus 5 is one of the best phones every made, Nexus 7 v2 the best tablet ever made, precisely for this reason. But they were cheap units. Likewise, Pixel 3a is Google's best Pixel ever, and Chromecast, Home Mini, etc. are their best products. Problem is that Google wants to make "flagship" units where it provides mostly same low-quality, but for 2-3x the price. That's unacceptable. You know that.
    Pixel 4 isn't a $800 device just as the Pixel Slate wasn't a $1000 device.
    I can't believe I waited so long for this device and was naive enough to think that maybe Google would learn. But they never do.
  • s.yu - Saturday, November 9, 2019 - link

    In their argument, the BOE panels are probably cheaper?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now