A Snapdragon-powered Pixel sounds amazing. Here’s why it’s a terrible idea

It’s been roughly five years since Google first dropped Snapdragon silicon in Pixel phones in favor of its Tensor processors. I think it’s fair to say this move has been a double-edged sword for the company. Sure, there’s been good everyday performance, capable on-device AI, and great camera capabilities. But the transition also brought modem issues, heating problems, and uncompetitive peak performance.

This state of affairs has led enthusiasts to urge Google to return to Snapdragon silicon, and it seems like an intriguing idea at first. But the more I thought about this possibility, the more I realized this probably wouldn’t be a great move for Pixel phones.

Our own benchmarks over the years have consistently shown that Google’s Tensor-powered Pixel phones lag behind rival devices (see above). That means switching to Snapdragon silicon would definitely bring major peak performance gains. There’s also been no shortage of battery life complaints since the first Tensor-powered Pixel landed in 2021.

Why not switch to Snapdragon silicon, then? It’s simple: any performance and efficiency gains delivered by Qualcomm’s chips would absolutely come at a premium.

Qualcomm’s high-end Snapdragon chips have long had a reputation for being very expensive. The Snapdragon 865 and Snapdragon 8 Elite are among the most prominent examples of Qualcomm chips that saw price hikes. However, it’s long been rumored that the upcoming Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6 Pro will also get a hefty increase. In fact, Qualcomm has just confirmed that it’s pushing up chip prices across the board.

If Google switches to flagship Snapdragon silicon, it simply wouldn’t be able to insulate Pixel buyers against price hikes in the same way that it can right now. A look back at earlier Tensor-powered Pixels reveals how aggressive Google could get relative to the competition. The Pixel 6 and Pixel 7 launched at $599, while the Galaxy S21 and S22 retailed for $799, and the OnePlus 9 started at $729. Prefer the Pro phones? Well, the Pixel 6 Pro and 7 Pro launched at $899, beating the $999 Galaxy S21 Plus and S22 Plus, let alone the Ultra line.

It’s really only with the Pixel 9 and 10 series that Google’s pricing has come into line with Samsung and Apple devices, but the Pixel 10 Pro XL still undercuts the Galaxy S26 Ultra. Another major disadvantage for Google is its lack of Samsung and Apple’s economies of scale. That is, Samsung and Apple’s huge production orders mean they can often get parts at a discount compared to Google’s relatively small production run for Pixels. In other words, if Google and Samsung made the same phone, Google would likely have a more expensive parts bill.

You only need to look at Google’s earlier Snapdragon-powered Pixels to see how whacky pricing can be. The Pixel 3 and Pixel 3 XL launched at ludicrous prices of $799 and $899, respectively, back in 2018. The Pixel 4 and Pixel 4 XL maintained this pricing. To put that in perspective, the Galaxy S9 and S9 Plus launched at $720 and $840, respectively. You can’t pin the blame solely on Qualcomm’s chip pricing, since Google was ultimately responsible for setting those prices. However, it says a lot that the $699 Pixel 5 switched to a mid-range Snapdragon chip rather than the apparently expensive Snapdragon 865.

Furthermore, an exclusive 2024 leak suggests that Google was targeting a $65 price for the Pixel 11’s Tensor G6 chip, a long way off the $190 to $250+ price tags for rival chips. I doubt Google has reached this goal, given TSMC’s widely reported 2nm price hikes, but this target certainly hints at Tensor chips that are significantly cheaper than high-end Snapdragon processors.

Google has heavily promoted the Tensor line’s on-device AI silicon over the years, hinting that it enables AI features that aren’t possible on rival handsets. I’m not sure whether that’s really the case in 2026, as some metrics suggest that chips like the Dimensity 9500 and Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 can match or beat the Tensor G5. We also know that recent Snapdragon and MediaTek processors support the Gemini Nano v3 model, which is a requirement for Gemini Intelligence.

Nevertheless, Google’s custom silicon approach means it has full control over the TPU design and other associated parts. By contrast, I’d argue that neither MediaTek nor Qualcomm can fully satisfy every OEM with a single processor. Perhaps Google’s biggest advantage on the AI front is that it creates the most popular on-device AI models on smartphones in the first place. This means it has deep in-house expertise regarding AI and related developments. One stark illustration of this is the Tensor G5’s Matformer model architecture, which nests a smaller AI model within a larger one to achieve the best balance of performance, responsiveness, and efficiency. It’s no wonder Google was quick to embrace AI features such as content summaries, voice recording with speaker labels, live translation for calls, and the Pixel Screenshots app.

I’d argue that Qualcomm and MediaTek have a meaningful advantage over Tensor silicon in video capture, though. Qualcomm and other rivals have long offered features like 8K recording and 4K/120fps slow-motion capture. Meanwhile, the latest Snapdragon chip also supports the Advanced Professional Video codec (APV) for pro-tier video capture, object eraser in videos, and advanced audio recording capabilities.

By contrast, the Pixel 10 phones still don’t support on-device 8K video capture or 4K/120fps video, with Google turning to its cloud-based Video Boost feature for the former. Tensor-powered Pixel phones also miss out on 4K portrait video seen on other handsets. On the flip side, the Pixel 10 devices are the only phones capable of AV1 capture, enabling high-quality video capture at a smaller file size. No other mobile chipmaker supports this useful feature in 2026.

I reckon neither Google’s Tensor chips nor Snapdragon processors hold a clear advantage in photography, though. The latest Snapdragon chips enjoy impressive features, such as massively increased dynamic range, multi-frame image processing at extremely high resolutions, and real-time image segmentation.

Google has followed MediaTek and Qualcomm by tightly coupling AI silicon with the image signal processor, yielding capabilities such as 100x Pro Zoom. I’m not a fan of the generative AI zoom trend, with these images appearing particularly messy when people are involved, but it’s still a technologically impressive feature. Toss in features like Add Me, Best Take, and Camera Coach, and it’s clear that Tensor won’t leave most people wanting on the imaging front.

Early Tensor-powered Pixel phones suffered from a variety of significant issues. Perhaps the most notable problem on the Pixel 6 series was poor cellular reception, as many users reported weak or no signal in environments where other phones worked just fine. I think it’s fair to say that if these phones were powered by Snapdragon chips, they would almost certainly not have suffered from these serious reception problems. Score one for a Snapdragon-powered Pixel.

Heating was an early problem, too, as users found that gaming, video capture, GPS, or even charging could cause a phone to heat up. I can attest to heating problems on my old Pixel 7 Pro: the phone displayed heat-related warnings at the drop of a hat when summer arrived. Unfortunately, the uncomfortable truth is that Qualcomm has produced its share of overheating chips. The worst offenders include 2022’s Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 and last year’s Snapdragon 8 Elite — not a good omen for the Pixel 7 series or Pixel 10 range. The Pixel 10’s GPU benchmarks also reveal surprisingly stable performance and fairly tame average temperatures, albeit with uncompetitive peak performance. So a cooler Pixel isn’t guaranteed with a switch to Snapdragon power.

Then there are the battery defects. Some Pixel 4a and Pixel 6a units experienced overheating batteries, prompting Google to issue battery-nerfing updates and take other remedial measures. This saga still resulted in at least five Pixel 6a devices catching fire. Even some Pixel 7a units experienced battery swelling, forcing Google to institute a battery replacement program.

Google hasn’t issued a technical explanation for these issues, so it’s entirely possible these problems were due to the batteries themselves, the phones’ construction, or something else altogether. It’s also possible that high internal temperatures adversely affected the batteries and the glue holding them in place, but that’s just speculation. Nevertheless, the fact that the Snapdragon-toting Pixel 4a had battery issues showed that these problems weren’t restricted to Tensor-powered handsets.

One of the biggest reasons I’m not completely sold on Google switching to Snapdragon is that this could lead to a fundamental overhaul of the Pixel A-series. And it almost certainly wouldn’t be for the better.

Up until this year, Google had always used the previous flagship’s processor in its Pixel A phone. That means the Pixel 7a used the Pixel 7’s processor, the Pixel 8a used the Pixel 8’s chipset, and you get the picture. We saw a change in 2026: the Pixel 10a used the Tensor G4 chip seen in the Pixel 9a and Pixel 9 series rather than the Pixel 10’s Tensor G5 chip. But we’re living in special times. Either way, this trend means you’re always getting a $500 phone with great performance.

Google would have to throw this strategy out the window if it used flagship Snapdragon processors in its high-end Pixel phones, since those chips are usually too expensive for most mid-range phones. So where does that leave the Pixel A series? The company could switch to one-year-old or two-year-old Snapdragon flagship processors. However, these chips would still command a premium, while older processors would throw a spanner in the works of software updates. Could Google still offer seven years of updates with a Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 in 2026?

The company could theoretically adopt non-Elite Snapdragon 8-series chips, but there’s no guarantee they would be cheaper than Google’s Tensor SoCs, either. Our own testing also shows that the Nothing Phone 3, which packs a Snapdragon 8s Gen 4, runs hotter than the Pixel 10 series. Alternatively, Google could switch to mid-range Snapdragon chips, such as the Snapdragon 7 series, but these processors might not deliver the AI power and overall performance it wants for mid-range Pixels. And again, you’d be at the mercy of Qualcomm when it comes to price increases.

Enthusiasts would also miss one cool feature if Google decided to switch to Snapdragon power. Yes, Linux Terminal wouldn’t be available on Snapdragon Pixels, as Qualcomm’s processors don’t support the tech necessary for this tool in the first place. It remains the sole holdout in 2026, as MediaTek, Google, and Samsung all offer the requisite support. For the uninitiated, Linux Terminal lets you run a Linux environment and full-fledged desktop apps on your phone. Pair your supported phone to an external monitor via desktop mode, and you’ve got the closest thing to a proper PC setup.

I’d even argue that Google might not have had the motivation to develop Linux Terminal support in the first place if it hadn’t switched from Tensor chips. And that would be a blow to any plans for serious, long-term convergence between Google’s mobile and computing platforms. In fact, the Googlebook platform is effectively Chrome OS rebuilt on Android’s foundations. It’s therefore not a stretch to imagine that Google’s work on Linux Terminal functionality will play a part in the new platform, as Linux app support was a selling point on some Chromebooks.

Tensor-powered Pixels endured a rough start, with heating issues, connectivity challenges, disappointing battery life, and underwhelming performance compared to the rest of the industry. Some of these issues have been addressed in recent years, but I can understand why people might look to Snapdragon processors as the cure-all for Google’s woes. Unfortunately, this is far from the truth.

Pixel phones with modern Snapdragon chips would benefit from far more horsepower, better gaming support, superior video capture capabilities, and better modem support, but there are significant downsides. Qualcomm’s high-end processors are expensive, which means these reimagined Pixel devices would almost certainly be more expensive.

History also shows that Snapdragon silicon isn’t immune to overheating, suggesting that Snapdragon-toting Pixel phones could run hot in some years. Throw in significant disruptions for the Pixel-A series and the lack of Linux Terminal support, and the argument for Snapdragon over Tensor isn’t nearly as strong as it was a few years ago.