Nothing Phone (4a) Pro vs Vivo X300 Ultra | TechTalkTown
Nothing Phone (4a) Pro vs Vivo X300 Ultra
Nothing Phone (4a) Pro
Nothing
8.5
The $499 phone to beat
Vivo X300 Ultra
Vivo
8.7
The video and zoom monster
Nothing Phone (4a) Pro
What Reviewers Agree On
The new metal unibody makes the 4a Pro look and feel more premium than Nothing's own £799 Phone 3 — the slimmest, most 'pro'-feeling Nothing yet.
The 6.83-inch 1.5K 144Hz AMOLED is the best display Nothing has ever shipped, with strong real-world outdoor visibility around its realistic 1,600-nit figure.
The dual 50MP main plus 50MP 3.5x periscope-telephoto system is rare flagship-tier camera hardware at $499 and the single biggest reason to buy.
Nothing OS 4.1 on Android 16 is clean, bloat-free and has some of the best design consistency of any Android UI, Google included.
At $499 — the exact price of a Pixel 10a — it's outstanding value, with several reviewers preferring it outright to the 10a.
Pros & Cons
Nothing Phone (4a) Pro
Pros
The new metal unibody makes the 4a Pro look and feel more premium than Nothing's own £799 Phone 3 — the slimmest, most 'pro'-feeling Nothing yet.
The 6.83-inch 1.5K 144Hz AMOLED is the best display Nothing has ever shipped, with strong real-world outdoor visibility around its realistic 1,600-nit figure.
The dual 50MP main plus 50MP 3.5x periscope-telephoto system is rare flagship-tier camera hardware at $499 and the single biggest reason to buy.
Nothing OS 4.1 on Android 16 is clean, bloat-free and has some of the best design consistency of any Android UI, Google included.
Detailed Comparison
Display
Nothing Phone (4a) Pro
A 6.83-inch 1.5K AMOLED at 144Hz with 2,160Hz PWM dimming — reviewers agree it's the best screen Nothing has built, with realistic outdoor brightness around 1,600 nits. The headline 5,000-nit peak, though, only materialises with special HDR test files; everyday brightness is far lower.
Nothing's best-ever display: a 144Hz panel with 1,600 nits of outdoor brightness and a claimed 5,000 nits peak; the main camera is solid too with nice detail and well-reproduced colours.
A claimed 1,600-nit outdoor brightness is realistic — no major visibility issues outdoors even in strong sunshine, putting it among the best affordable phones, and Nothing OS has some of the best design consistency of any Android UI.
The 4,500-nit HDR peak was only validated with specific HDR test files, not actual video playback — real-world output is around 700 nits in SDR and 1,550–1,600 in HDR.
The '5,000-nit peak brightness' spec means nothing in practice — a marketing figure pulled from a single-pixel measurement.
TechTalkTown may earn a commission from purchases made through links below. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. This does not influence our reviews. Learn more.
50W wired charging beats anything Google, Apple or Samsung offer below £500.
Deal Breakers
Only 3 years of OS updates (6 years of security patches) — well behind the 7 years Google and Samsung give at this price.
No wireless charging at all — sacrificed for the metal back.
The battery is only an 80mAh increase over last year and runs marginal next to 6,000–7,000mAh budget rivals.
Measured brightness (~700 nits SDR, ~1,550 HDR) is nowhere near the 5,000-nit headline.
The camera is inconsistent — low-light and deep zoom are merely average rather than class-leading.
Vivo X300 Ultra
What Reviewers Agree On
The camera system — twin ~1-inch 200MP main and 200MP 85mm periscope plus a large ultrawide — is the best-equipped on any 2026 phone and the entire reason the device exists.
Video is class-leading: 4K 120fps 10-bit Log with Dolby Vision recorded on-device (no SSD), 8K30 across the rear cameras, and 4K 60fps on every lens including the selfie.
Battery life is genuinely strong — roughly 16 hours active-use score, ~7h heavy screen-on time, and 13–14 hour days with charge to spare, on the 6,600mAh cell.
The Zeiss 200mm/400mm telephoto extenders deliver real, usable optical reach (8.7x and 17.4x) with surprisingly good handheld stabilisation.
100W wired charging refills the big battery in roughly 46–50 minutes, with 40W wireless on top.
The 6.82-inch 144Hz LTPO AMOLED is among the best displays available, hitting ~1,900 nits in auto and ~3,300 nits peak.
Deal Breakers
The 35mm (~1.5x) default main focal length is polarising — many reviewers find it too tight/zoomed versus the usual 24mm.
It heats up quickly under sustained camera or gaming load and throttles to roughly 60–65% stability in prolonged stress tests.
The full experience needs the expensive Photography Kit — the global bundle approaches €2,600 and the 200mm lens isn't in every box.
Notebookcheck found it 'hardly better than the X300 Pro in camera performance despite top-notch hardware', and Linus preferred Oppo's less over-sharpened processing.
It launched in China first with a rocky early software state (fixed via updates), and global availability/pricing is limited and steep.
At $499 — the exact price of a Pixel 10a — it's outstanding value, with several reviewers preferring it outright to the 10a.
50W wired charging beats anything Google, Apple or Samsung offer below £500.
Cons
Only 3 years of OS updates (6 years of security patches) — well behind the 7 years Google and Samsung give at this price.
No wireless charging at all — sacrificed for the metal back.
The battery is only an 80mAh increase over last year and runs marginal next to 6,000–7,000mAh budget rivals.
Measured brightness (~700 nits SDR, ~1,550 HDR) is nowhere near the 5,000-nit headline.
The camera is inconsistent — low-light and deep zoom are merely average rather than class-leading.
Vivo X300 Ultra
Pros
The camera system — twin ~1-inch 200MP main and 200MP 85mm periscope plus a large ultrawide — is the best-equipped on any 2026 phone and the entire reason the device exists.
Video is class-leading: 4K 120fps 10-bit Log with Dolby Vision recorded on-device (no SSD), 8K30 across the rear cameras, and 4K 60fps on every lens including the selfie.
Battery life is genuinely strong — roughly 16 hours active-use score, ~7h heavy screen-on time, and 13–14 hour days with charge to spare, on the 6,600mAh cell.
The Zeiss 200mm/400mm telephoto extenders deliver real, usable optical reach (8.7x and 17.4x) with surprisingly good handheld stabilisation.
100W wired charging refills the big battery in roughly 46–50 minutes, with 40W wireless on top.
The 6.82-inch 144Hz LTPO AMOLED is among the best displays available, hitting ~1,900 nits in auto and ~3,300 nits peak.
Cons
The 35mm (~1.5x) default main focal length is polarising — many reviewers find it too tight/zoomed versus the usual 24mm.
It heats up quickly under sustained camera or gaming load and throttles to roughly 60–65% stability in prolonged stress tests.
The full experience needs the expensive Photography Kit — the global bundle approaches €2,600 and the 200mm lens isn't in every box.
Notebookcheck found it 'hardly better than the X300 Pro in camera performance despite top-notch hardware', and Linus preferred Oppo's less over-sharpened processing.
It launched in China first with a rocky early software state (fixed via updates), and global availability/pricing is limited and steep.
144Hz refresh (vs 120Hz on the regular 4a) and 1,600 nits white brightness / 5,000 nits peak, marketed as 66% brighter than the Phone (3a) series — though there's no extra output on a small 10% window.
High-frequency PWM dimming makes it better suited to users sensitive to screen flicker, although slight flickering is still present.
Vivo X300 Ultra
A 6.82-inch 144Hz LTPO AMOLED, now flat rather than quad-curved. Lab measurements put real brightness near 1,900 nits in auto and ~3,300 nits on a small window — among the best panels on any phone — and reviewers single out content consumption and clarity as standouts.
We measured a maximum of over 1,900 nits in auto-brightness mode and over 3,300 nits when lighting up a smaller portion of the screen.
Consuming content, scrolling the web, pixel-peeping and zooming in on text — it doesn't get any clearer, or with the 144Hz any smoother, than the display on the X300 Ultra.
It delivers an excellent max brightness of around 1,935 nits with a 75% white pattern and a peak of 3,328 nits with a 10% pattern.
Vivo has gone with a flat display this time, a clear shift from the quad-curved style of the X200 Ultra.
It's a 6.82-inch AMOLED with a claimed 4,500-nit HDR peak that can reach that figure in a one-person window watching HDR content; PWM sits around 3.5% at max brightness, better for flicker-sensitive users.
An absolutely stunning display with terrific, bass-heavy stereo speakers to match.
Cameras
Nothing Phone (4a) Pro
The headline value play: a 50MP Sony LYT-710 main with OIS, a true 50MP 3.5x periscope telephoto (80mm) with OIS, and an 8MP ultrawide — flagship-tier hardware Samsung and Apple don't put in phones at this price. Output is characterful and the telephoto is a genuine win, but reviewers consistently flag inconsistency, average low-light and a gimmicky 140x digital zoom.
Triple rear system: 50MP Sony LYT-710 main (f/1.9, OIS), 8MP ultrawide, and a 50MP periscope telephoto with 3.5x optical zoom (80mm, f/2.9, OIS).
Both the main and periscope-zoom cameras are 50MP and deliver strong results for this price range; the zoom in particular stands out from competitors and even allows for extreme digital zoom.
Having a proper dedicated telephoto shooter is a genuine love, although the camera experience itself is a little bit inconsistent at times.
It's not clinically the best camera, but the shots have a bit more soul to them.
Low-light performance isn't the best, and image quality when you zoom right in isn't the best out there — not bad, just not class-leading.
The 140x zoom headline grabs attention, but in use it's more about how far the camera can push digitally than something you'd rely on day-to-day.
Not super impressed by the camera or the giant protruding bumps the lenses sit in.
Vivo X300 Ultra
The reason the X300 Ultra exists: a near-1-inch 200MP 35mm main (Sony Lytia 901), a 200MP 85mm periscope, and the best ultrawide sensor on the market, tuned with Zeiss. Reviewers near-universally rate it the best-equipped camera phone of 2026 — with two important caveats: the 35mm default is divisive, and on raw image quality it's only marginally ahead of the cheaper X300 Pro.
At the center is a 200MP main that's nearly a 1-inch sensor (Sony Lytia 901), backed by a 200MP 85mm-equivalent periscope telephoto — the phone is focused on camera quality and, even more so, video.
Featuring three extra-large image sensors, the X300 Ultra's uncompromising camera hardware earned a solid rating — but it's hardly better than the cheaper X300 Pro in actual camera performance despite the top-notch hardware.
I'm not sure I've seen better results from even 1-inch sensors — it's so close to 1-inch and the 35mm focal length makes for more cinematic-looking shots; the 85mm periscope is the sweet spot for portraits.
It still holds the record for the best portrait-mode photos on a smartphone, especially at 85mm and 135mm; the 14mm ultrawide is sharp edge to edge.
Performance
Nothing Phone (4a) Pro
The Snapdragon 7 Gen 4 with UFS 3.1 storage is a clear, tangible step up from the Phone (3a) generation — Nothing claims +27% CPU, +30% GPU and +65% AI. It's a perfectly capable everyday chip that feels noticeably quicker, but it's explicitly not a gaming powerhouse and warms up under sustained heavy load.
Backed by OS optimisations and a custom CPU scheduler, the chipset delivers 27% better CPU, 30% better GPU and 65% better AI performance than the Nothing Phone (3a); storage is 147% faster in reads and 380% faster in writes.
Snapdragon 7 Gen 4 is a perfectly acceptable chip across the board, and the upgrade to UFS 3.1 makes this feel noticeably quicker compared to the Nothing Phone (3a) and prior.
The CPU performance difference between the 4a Pro and the vanilla 4a is not massive, but it is still very much notable.
Available in 8GB+128GB, 8GB+256GB and 12GB+256GB configurations, all running near-stock AOSP-style Nothing OS.
Like most phones in this segment, it shows some basic heat build-up during really extensive tasks like gaming or 4K editing in high-end software, though it stays responsive while gaming.
It's by no means a top-notch gaming phone, although the processor is better than the regular 4a's and squeezes out a bit more performance and FPS.
Vivo X300 Ultra
Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 plus Vivo's custom imaging silicon delivers flagship benchmark numbers and strong gaming, but the camera-heavy hardware runs hot — sustained stress tests show roughly 60–65% stability and the camera app warms it up fast.
At the heart is Qualcomm's current flagship Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, supplemented by Vivo's custom VS1 and V3-Plus imaging chips.
It boots in 16 seconds (vs 21s for the S26 Ultra and 19s for the iPhone 17 Pro Max) and posts an AnTuTu score over 3,800,000, stronger than Samsung.
In a prolonged stress test it throttled CPU performance to about 60% of peak — in line with other high-powered flagships — and 3DMark stability landed around 63–66%.
It gets a bit hot after 30–40 minutes of gaming, but with no throttling even past an hour and never uncomfortable to hold; boost mode at max graphics gives around 4 hours of Wuthering Waves on a full charge.
Native 120fps gaming with smooth/very-high graphics in many titles, with temperature barely crossing 35°C and power draw around 4W in battle-royale modes.
Battery & Charging
Nothing Phone (4a) Pro
The ~5,080mAh cell reliably gets through a day and endurance improved across all of GSMArena's tests versus the 3a Pro — but it's only an 80mAh bump over last year and looks small next to 6,000–7,000mAh budget rivals. 50W wired charging is the trade-off win; there is no wireless charging at all.
Endurance has improved across the board in all tests compared to last year's Nothing Phone (3a) Pro; with a 68W USB-PD charger the phone peaked at around 42W.
The review unit gets through a day without problems, but it'll certainly be into the red and close to done after about 15 hours of use; the OnePlus 15R has a much meatier battery to last longer.
It's only an 80mAh increase over last year — small fry next to budget rivals like the Poco M8 Pro, which uses silicon-carbon tech to reach 6,500mAh.
50W wired charging is very respectable at this price — besting anything Google, Apple or Samsung offers below £500.
Because the processor isn't power-hungry and the battery is large for the chip, real-world battery life is excellent.
Roughly 13 hours of continuous playback at maximum brightness in a streaming test — impressive for what Nothing is doing at this price.
Vivo X300 Ultra
Vivo grew the silicon-carbon cell 10% to 6,600mAh while keeping the body the same size. Real-world endurance is strong — ~16h active-use score, ~7h heavy screen-on, 13–14 hour days with charge to spare — and 100W wired refills it in under an hour, with 40W wireless.
Vivo increased the battery by 10% to 6,600mAh despite the phone being practically the same size on paper.
In our battery test it earned an active-use score of almost 16 hours; 100W charging took it 0–66% in 30 minutes and a full charge in 46 minutes, plus 40W wireless. A charger is in the box except in Europe.
On the China version I'm finishing entire 13–14 hour days with 25–30% left; the global version keeps the 6,600mAh cell so battery life should comfortably last 12–13 hours of heavy use.
Getting nearly 7 hours of screen-on time with very heavy usage from the 6,600mAh silicon-carbon unit, with 100W wired and 40W wireless charging support.
After a 4-hour heavy-usage simulation the phone still had ~45% battery left, which is solid by today's standards, and 100W wired charging takes about 45 minutes to full.
Comparing it directly with the Oppo Find X9 Ultra, even though the Vivo looks great at a glance you could edit the Oppo image and get better detail because the Vivo isn't all over-sharpened and crusty.
Schools the Galaxy S26 Ultra in zoom quality without an excessive camera count — shaping up to be one of the best camera phones not just for 2026 but 2027 and 2028.
The 35mm main is divisive — many feel 24mm is better for phone photography and that 35mm is too tight; cropping to 23–28mm shows a noticeable detail drop.
Under sustained camera/imaging load the front reached ~46.8°C and the back ~45.2°C, and around 47°C the refresh rate drops slightly though not all the way to 60Hz.
In a head-to-head charge race against the Oppo Find X9 Ultra (80W), the Vivo on 100W finished first at 50 minutes 20 seconds to the Oppo's 52:39.