Technologies
Google Pixel 8 Pro vs. iPhone 15 Pro Max, Galaxy S23 Ultra: Top-End Phones Compared
The Pixel 8 Pro brings new media-editing software tricks, but how else does it compare to the top premium smartphones?
The Pixel 8 Pro is Google’s latest top-end phone, packing a new processor, a brighter display and better cameras than its predecessor. But it faces stiff competition from two other handsets that dominate the premium smartphone market: the iPhone 15 Pro Max and the Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra. How do they really compare?
The Pixel 8 Pro runs on the new Tensor G3 chipset, the third generation in a line of silicon Google has designed to augment its on-device AI processing. Tensor chipsets don’t seem to be quite as much of a performance powerhouse in benchmarks like Geekbench as the A17 Pro chip in the iPhone 15 Pro Max or the Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 chip in the Galaxy S23 Ultra. We’ll have to wait until we can fully test the Pixel 8 Pro to see how it performs compared with the others.
But the Tensor chipset does enable many of the Pixel family’s neat media-editing tricks, like Magic Eraser for taking elements out of photos, Audio Magic Eraser for diminishing background noise, and Best Take for combining the best bits of a burst of photos. These are the flashiest software advantages the Pixel 8 Pro holds over the competition (among others), even though Magic Eraser is technically available for other phones through the Google Photos app. Â

The other big advantage the Pixel 8 Pro holds is a guarantee of seven years of Android operating system and security updates. That’s far more than Samsung phones like the Galaxy S23 Ultra’s four years of OS updates and five years of security updates. And Apple is unclear about how long phones will be supported — the just-released iOS 17 update, for instance, leaves behind the iPhone 8 and iPhone X, both released in 2017, so five years of OS updates is the low-end estimate for a new iPhone.
The Pixel 8 Pro’s rear camera hardware includes a 50-megapixel main shooter, a 48-megapixel ultrawide and a 48-megapixel telephoto capable of 5x optical zoom. On paper, those cameras will likely produce sharper photos than the 12-megapixel ultrawide and 12-megapixel telephoto cameras on the iPhone 15 Pro Max, though we’ll have to test to compare it to Apple’s unique “tetraprism” technology in its zoom camera (the iPhone’s 48-megapixel main camera may be roughly comparable to the Pixel 8 Pro’s main shooter).
As far as rear cameras go, the Pixel 8 Pro might face the biggest challenge from the Galaxy S23 Ultra, which has a 200-megapixel main camera. While it has only a 12-megapixel ultrawide camera, Samsung’s top-of-the-line phone has two telephoto cameras: a 10-megapixel 3x optical zoom and a 10-megapixel 10x optical zoom, which is capable of up to 100x digital zoom. But with the phone’s starting cost of $1,200, those souped-up camera specs make sense considering the Pixel 8 Pro’s $1,000 starting price and the iPhone 15 Pro Max’s $1,100 price tag.
All three phones have pretty similar selfie cameras: the Pixel 8 Pro has a 10.5-megapixel selfie shooter, while the iPhone 15 Pro Max and the Galaxy S23 Ultra both have 12-megapixel front-facing cameras.

Regarding design, the three phones have very different looks. The Pixel 8 Pro retains its predecessor’s wide horizontal camera block spanning the width of the phone. A metallic stripe wraps around the phone’s three rear cameras, with a flash and new temperature sensor on the right side (for checking food and, pending FDA approval, your own skin). The rest of the phone’s rear cover is a matte glass, and its sides are rounded.
The iPhone 15 Pro Max has its predecessor’s flat sides and square camera block, with lenses that are larger and stick out farther than those of previous iPhones. The Galaxy S23 Ultra is the physically largest of the bunch, though its design has tended toward minimalism, with just the five cameras popping out of the undecorated back cover (i.e. no big camera block), as well as rounded sides.
The Pixel 8 Pro’s 6.7-inch OLED display (3,120×1,440 pixels) is the same size as its predecessor’s, but it’s brighter, maxing out at 2,400 nits with a 1 to 120Hz refresh rate. It has a slightly sharper resolution than the iPhone 15 Pro Max’s 6.7-inch OLED (2,796x 1,290-pixel) screen, and it’s on par with the Galaxy S23 Ultra’s 6.8-inch AMOLED (3,088×1,440-pixel) display (both Apple’s and Samsung’s phones have 120Hz adaptive refresh rates).
The phones are also pretty similar in terms of other hardware specs. The Pixel 8 Pro comes with 12GB of RAM and 128GB to 1TB of storage. Apple never specifies the amount of memory in its phones, though GSMArena says the iPhone 15 Pro Max has 8GB, and the phone comes with 256GB, 512GB or 1TB of storage. The Galaxy S23 Ultra starts with 8GB of RAM and 256GB of storage, but it can also be configured for 12GB of RAM and 256GB, 512GB or 1TB of storage. None of the three has a slot for expandable storage, so you’ll have to store your extra files in the cloud or hook up an external SSD.
Similarly, Apple doesn’t disclose battery capacity on its phones, saying only that it gets up to 29 hours of video playback (in other words, it should last all day without needing to recharge). The Pixel 8 Pro has a 5,050mAh battery, while the Galaxy S23’s battery has a capacity of 5,000mAh.
In a first for Apple, the iPhone 15 Pro Max has a USB-C port instead of its Lightning connector and has 25 watts of wired charging as well as 15 watts of wireless charging. The Pixel 8 Pro has up to 30 watts of wired charging and 23 watts of wireless, while the Galaxy S23 Ultra has the fastest speed, with 45 watts of wired charging and 15 watts of wireless.
To see how else the Pixel 8 Pro stacks up against the iPhone 15 Pro Max and the Galaxy S23 Ultra, we’ve placed each phone into this side-by-side comparison chart:
Google Pixel 8 Pro vs. iPhone 15 Pro Max vs. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra
| Google Pixel 8 Pro | Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max | Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra | |
| Display size, tech, resolution, refresh rate, brightness | 6.7-inch OLED; 3,120×1,440 pixels; 1-120Hz adaptive refresh rate | 6.7-inch OLED; 2,796×1,290 pixels; 120Hz adaptive refresh rate | 6.8-inch AMOLED; 3,088×1,440 pixels; 120Hz adaptive refresh rate |
| Pixel density | 489 ppi | 460 ppi | 500 ppi |
| Dimensions (inches) | 6.4x3x0.3 inches | 6.29×3.02×0.32 inches | 6.43×3.07×0.35 inches |
| Dimensions (millimeters) | 162.6×76.5×8.8 millimeters | 159.9×76.7×8.25 millimeters | 163.3x78x8.9 millimeters |
| Weight (grams, ounces) | 213 g (7.5 oz) | 221 g (7.81 oz) | 234 g (8.25 oz) |
| Mobile software | Android 14 | iOS 17 | Android 13 |
| Camera | 50-megapixel (wide), 48-megapixel (ultrawide), 48-megapixel (telephoto) | 48-megapixel (wide), 12-megapixel (ultrawide), 12-megapixel (5x telephoto) | 200-megapixel (wide), 12-megapixel (ultrawide), 10-megapixel (3x telephoto), 10-megapixel (10x telephoto) |
| Front-facing camera | 10.5 megapixels | 12 megapixels | 12 megapixels |
| Video capture | 4K | 4K | 8K |
| Processor | Google Tensor G3 | A17 Pro | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy |
| RAM/storage | 12GB RAM + 128GB, 256GB, 512GB, 1TB | 256GB, 512GB, 1TB (RAM undisclosed) | 8GB + 256GB; 12GB + 256GB; 12GB + 512GB; 12GB + 1TB |
| Expandable storage | None | None | |
| Battery | 5,050 mAh | Undisclosed; Apple says up to 29 hours of video playback (25 hours streamed) | 5,000 mAh |
| Fingerprint sensor | Under display | None (Face ID) | Under display |
| Connector | USB-C | USB-C | USB-C |
| Headphone jack | None | None | None |
| Special features | 5G (Sub 6 and mmWave); VPN by Google One; 7 years of OS, security and Feature Drop updates; front-facing camera has autofocus; 13W Qi wireless charging; 30W wired charging; USB-3.2 speeds via USB-C; IP68 dust and water resistance; Gorilla Glass Victus 2 on front and back | 5G (Sub6, mmWave), Action Button, Always-On display, IP68 water resistant, MagSafe, Dynamic Island, 5x optical zoom (120mm equivalent), satellite connectivity, eSIM, thread networking technology | 5G (Sub6, mmWave), IP68 water resistant, wireless PowerShare to charge other devices, integrated S Pen, 100x Space Zoom, 10x optical zoom, UWB for finding other devices, 45W wired charging |
| US price off-contract | $999 (128GB) | $1,199 (256GB) | $1,200 (256GB) |
| UK price | Converts to ÂŁ825 (128GB) | ÂŁ1,199 (256GB) | ÂŁ1,249 (256GB) |
| Australia price | Converts to AU$1,575 (128GB) | AU$2,199 (256GB) | AU$1,949 (256GB) |
Technologies
China indicates rare earths will keep flowing to EU, regardless of U.S. trade deal expiration
European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing last week.
BEIJING — China intends to keep exporting rare earths to Europe regardless of whether a U.S. trade deal with Beijing gets extended past January.
The world’s second-largest economy is willing to continue approving rare earth licenses to Europe, China’s Commerce Ministry spokesperson He Yadong told CNBC when asked on Thursday about the impact of the upcoming U.S. deadline.
Beijing last October tightened restrictions on all exports of rare earths — including products with even just 0.1% of China-sourced rare earths. The move followed a new U.S. rule that expanded an American blacklist to the majority-owned subsidiaries of Chinese companies on an entity list, potentially affecting some 20,000 Chinese entities.
However, both the U.S. and China agreed to suspend those measures for one year at a meeting in late October 2025 between Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump. Ahead of the leaders’ latest summit last month, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the truce was extended by two months to January.
Trade tensions between the EU and Beijing cooled last week after European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing. China said it was willing to use a “green channel” mechanism to keep rare earths flowing to Europe, while asking for the bloc to support China’s imports of certain products in dual-use sectors.
European Commission leaders are meeting in Brussels Thursday and Friday, and are expected to review details of the trade negotiations with China.
Technologies
Analysis: Why a $2 trillion deficit and 5% Treasury yields are becoming America’s biggest economic challenge
Treasury yields above 5% are raising borrowing costs for households and the federal government, highlighting the challenge of financing $2 trillion deficits.
Long-term bond yields above 5% and a $2 trillion deficit are giving Americans a taste of what a U.S. debt crisis would be like. A true emergency would hurt much more, and isn’t baked in. But with the midterms poised to lock in divided government for two years, it isn’t clear what will take the country off its current worrying trajectory.
Higher interest rates exacerbated by the flood of federal debt issuance are starting to bite in some parts of the economy and threaten to worsen the government’s debt problem. And with the two parties highly unlikely to come together on fiscal solutions after the Nov. 3 midterms, any fixes are years off in the future.
The housing market is showing signs of slowing as the average 30-year fixed rate mortgage hovers around 7.5%. Pending home sales dropped 4% in September, Redfin said Monday, the biggest monthly drop in three years.
Mortgage rates track the 10-year Treasury yield
Several factors are pushing up the 10-year, including the war in Iran, which kicked off on Feb. 28 and precipitated the rise in long-term yields. Oil and diesel prices are up sharply, and that has bond traders asking for more yield to account for the possibility that central banks such as the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates.
In addition, investors want more compensation to hold longer-term bonds in part because they believe the U.S. government will continue to flood the market with them. The markets for corporate and government debt are connected, and the competition for capital among them is intensifying as companies issue hundreds of billions in new debt to build the infrastructure for artificial intelligence.
Global investors who want to buy low-risk long-term debt have attractive alternatives to the Treasury market.
If the U.S. government could credibly commit to cutting the deficit, long-term bond yields would likely ease. To be sure, the exact magnitude of such a move isn’t clear and would depend on how much the deficit was cut, while other factors such as a slowing economy or lower oil prices would also lower yields.
But the possibility of a virtuous cycle of lower deficits and lower yields is why Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has argued that the U.S. ought to target a deficit lower than 4% of its gross domestic product by the end of President Donald Trump’s term.
There is almost no way the U.S. will hit that target. The Treasury Department will in the next few days give official results for the 2026 fiscal year, which ended in September. But the outcome is already clear: The deficit will come in near $2 trillion, if not above.
That is likely to put the deficit in the range of 6.0-6.2% of gross domestic product for the year, based on the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of a $1.993 trillion deficit and a projection of third quarter GDP.
Higher rates make debt reduction tougher. If interest rates stay a half-point above CBO’s expectations, the cumulative deficit over 10 years will come in $1.9 trillion higher, the agency estimates. If rates overshoot by 1.5 points, that adds $6 trillion in deficits.
CBO expects the 10-year Treasury to average 4.3% over that period, compared to 5.3% today. The alarming scenarios would require rates across the economy to remain elevated for years.
“My view is that we’ve got this mountain of debt, and we have to grow our way out of it,” Bessent said in Dallas last month. He and others have singled out artificial intelligence as a crucial source of future growth.
AI could help but can’t fix the problem entirely. It would take a decade of 7.2% growth to balance the budget with growth alone, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a research group that advocates for balanced budgets.
GDP growth was recently revised up for the second quarter from 1.5% to 2.2% at an annualized rate. The acceleration that quickly would get us to 7.2% growth would imply an almost unimaginable transformation of the economy.
Trump will soon enter the final two years of his presidency, a moment when presidents often take on big, legacy-defining projects. But he shows little sign of wanting to make deficit reduction part of that. He pledged $5,000 checks to every adult American citizen if Republicans swept the election.
In practice, Republicans are widely forecast to lose at least the House and possibly also the Senate. Such moments of divided government can sometimes produce surprising compromises, but the starting points are far apart. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, Democrats’ likely next House speaker, wants to reverse the $1 trillion in healthcare cuts that Congress enacted last year as part of Trump’s signature legislative package.
And that’s leaving aside the deep animosity between the parties.
The overall U.S. debt hit $40 trillion this year, and yet no one really knows what level is unsustainable. A full-on debt crisis likely remains much farther out in the future. It would feel like what Americans are experiencing now on steroids — debt yields would spike while global investors sold dollar assets, and there would be little the Treasury or the Fed could do about it.
For now, though higher yields are also attracting investors to U.S. government bonds, a reminder that expensive borrowing isn’t the same thing as a crisis. But the bottom line is that economics alone can’t solve the problem. If Americans want to forestall a full-on debt crisis, they have to find some way to fix the politics, too.
Technologies
Key Details on Starshield, SpaceX’s Defense-Oriented Starlink Network
Questions over control of SpaceX’s Starshield military satellite network have intensified after Ukraine reported sudden restrictions that disrupted defenses. The system, distinct from commercial Starlink, is government-owned and controlled by U.S. authorities.
Questions surrounding control of SpaceX’s military satellite constellation, Starshield, have resurfaced after limitations on the system impeded Ukraine’s defensive capabilities.
Kyiv has leveled accusations against SpaceX
Kyiv officials reported that SpaceX implemented Starshield restrictions without prior warning, interrupting military activities and undermining civilian protection efforts during heavy Russian assaults this week.
Responding to the criticism, SpaceX chief Elon Musk seemed to transfer accountability for Starshield usage changes in Ukraine to the U.S. government and President Donald Trump. Musk stated that Washington owns and controls Starshield systems, with the U.S. military and ultimately the president setting any usage boundaries. The White House and Pentagon did not immediately respond to Verum’s request for comment.
Here’s an overview of Starshield and its distinctions from Starlink.
What is Starshield and how does it function?
Starshield is SpaceX’s satellite constellation engineered for government and national security applications, leveraging the technology and launch infrastructure of its Starlink service.
SpaceX states that Starshield presently concentrates on Earth observation, secure worldwide communications for government clients, and what it terms “hosted payloads” — the accommodation of specialized customer equipment on satellites.
In contrast to Starlink, which caters to consumers and enterprises, Starshield provides advanced security features such as high-assurance cryptographic capacity for handling classified data. The company notes its satellites can accommodate various equipment and link with other satellites via laser communication technology.
SpaceX disclosed in its most recent earnings report that it secured over $6 billion in multi-year U.S. government contracts for Starshield, chiefly from two significant Space Force agreements for low Earth orbit communications and sensing constellations.
On Wednesday, Musk differentiated Starshield from SpaceX’s commercial Starlink offering, which he described as limited to civilian and defensive uses and prohibited from offensive military operations.
How does Starshield contrast with Starlink?
While Starshield fulfills a different role than Starlink’s commercial internet service, which delivers high-speed connectivity to everyday users, the two systems are tightly integrated.
Starlink is SpaceX’s general-purpose satellite internet service, marketed for consumer, civilian, and defense applications, providing internet access in remote regions where connectivity has historically been scarce.
Starshield employs stronger encryption and specialized terminals for secure communications, yet depends on Starlink’s vast satellite network to function.
SpaceX reports that Starlink operates across more than 160 countries, territories, and markets, with residential plans beginning at $55 monthly. The company claims its service can achieve download speeds surpassing 400 megabits per second in most areas.
-
Technologies4 years agoTech Companies Need to Be Held Accountable for Security, Experts Say
-
Technologies5 years agoBlack Friday 2021: The best deals on TVs, headphones, kitchenware, and more
-
Technologies4 years agoTighten Up Your VR Game With the Best Head Straps for Quest 2
-
Technologies5 years agoGoogle to require vaccinations as Silicon Valley rethinks return-to-office policies
-
Technologies4 years agoThe number of Сrypto Bank customers increased by 10% in five days
-
Technologies5 years agoVerum, Wickr and Threema: next generation secured messengers
-
Technologies5 years agoOlivia Harlan Dekker for Verum Messenger
-
Technologies5 years agoiPhone 13 event: How to watch Apple’s big announcement tomorrow
