Nothing Phone 3 VS Nothing Phone (3a)

The most consequential difference in this group is water protection. The Nothing Phone 3 carries an IP68 rating, meaning it can withstand full submersion in water — a meaningful real-world safety net for drops in sinks, pools, or rain. The Nothing Phone (3a), rated IP64, is only protected against water splashes and sprays from any direction, but offers no submersion protection whatsoever. For users who are rough on their devices or live in wetter climates, this is not a trivial gap.

On physical form, the two phones trade blows. The Phone (3a) is noticeably lighter at 201 g versus 218 g for the Phone 3, and meaningfully slimmer at 8.4 mm thick compared to 9 mm. That said, the Phone (3a) has a larger footprint — wider at 77.5 mm and taller at 163.5 mm — so the weight and thickness advantage does not necessarily translate to a more pocketable device overall. Neither model is rugged-certified or foldable, putting them squarely in the standard slab category.

Overall, the Phone 3 holds a clear edge in design durability thanks to its superior IP68 waterproofing. The Phone (3a) counters with a lighter, thinner profile, which may appeal to users who prioritize comfort in hand over protection. But for most buyers, submersion-grade water resistance is the harder spec to compromise on.

Both phones share a solid OLED foundation — 120Hz refresh rate, 800 nits typical brightness, HDR10+ support, and Always-On Display — so the baseline experience is comparable. Where they diverge sharply is pixel density. The Nothing Phone 3 resolves its display at 460 ppi versus 387 ppi on the Phone (3a), a difference clearly visible when reading fine text, viewing detailed photos, or using small UI elements. The Phone 3's higher resolution panel is one of its most tangible everyday advantages.

The touch sampling rate gap is equally striking. The Phone 3's 1000Hz touch sampling — versus just 240Hz on the Phone (3a) — means the screen registers input far more frequently per second, translating to noticeably snappier responsiveness in fast-paced games and precise gestures. For casual users this difference is minor, but for gamers or power users, it matters. The Phone 3 also ships with branded damage-resistant glass, which the Phone (3a) lacks entirely — an omission that raises long-term durability concerns for the screen.

The Phone (3a) does score a surprising win in contrast ratio at 5,000,000:1 compared to the Phone 3's 1,000,000:1, which on paper should yield deeper blacks and more vivid highlights. Its panel is also marginally larger at 6.77 inches. Still, these advantages don't offset the Phone 3's lead in sharpness, touch responsiveness, and screen protection. On balance, the Phone 3 holds a clear display edge for users who prioritize visual fidelity and input precision.

The chipset gap between these two phones is substantial. The Nothing Phone 3 runs on the Snapdragon 8s Gen 4 — a flagship-tier processor — while the Phone (3a) uses the mid-range Snapdragon 7s Gen 3. The benchmark numbers make this concrete: the Phone 3 scores 2,084,000 on AnTuTu versus 816,384 on the Phone (3a), and its Geekbench 6 multi-core result of 6,833 is more than double the Phone (3a)'s 3,239. In practice, this translates to faster app launches, smoother sustained performance under heavy load, and a noticeably more capable experience in GPU-intensive games.

Memory tells a similar story. The Phone 3 pairs its chip with 16 GB of RAM running at 4800 MHz and a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s — nearly three times the Phone (3a)'s 25.6 GB/s. Higher bandwidth means data moves between the CPU, GPU, and memory far faster, reducing bottlenecks in complex workloads like video editing or multitasking with many apps open. The Phone 3 also ships with 512 GB of storage versus 256 GB on the Phone (3a), doubling local capacity for media and files.

One nuance worth noting is TDP: the Phone 3's chip draws 12.5W against the Phone (3a)'s 5W, meaning the raw performance comes at the cost of more heat and potentially faster battery drain under load. That said, the performance advantage is so decisive across every measurable dimension that the Phone 3 wins this category outright — it is simply in a different performance class.

At first glance both phones appear closely matched — triple rear cameras, OIS, phase-detection autofocus, and 4K video. But the details reveal meaningful differences. The Nothing Phone 3 fields a triple-50 MP system across all three lenses, while the Phone (3a)'s third camera drops to just 8 MP — a significant resolution gap that will affect the quality of shots taken with the auxiliary lens, particularly in detail-heavy scenes. The Phone 3 also offers 3x optical zoom versus 2x on the Phone (3a), giving it a longer effective reach without degrading to digital interpolation.

Video capability is another area where the Phone 3 pulls ahead. It supports 4K at 60fps, whereas the Phone (3a) is capped at 4K at 30fps — a difference that matters for capturing fast motion smoothly or producing more cinematic footage. Additionally, the Phone 3 can shoot in RAW format, which is absent on the Phone (3a). RAW capture gives photographers full post-processing control over exposure, white balance, and noise reduction — a significant advantage for enthusiasts who edit their shots.

The front camera gap — 50 MP on the Phone 3 versus 32 MP on the Phone (3a) — rounds out a consistent pattern. Across nearly every camera dimension, the Phone 3 offers higher resolution, greater zoom reach, more capable video, and more advanced capture options. The Phone 3 is the clear winner in this category, and the gap is wide enough to be relevant for anyone who treats the camera as a primary reason to choose a phone.

This is the most evenly matched category in the entire comparison. Both phones run Android 15, share the same privacy feature set — including location controls, camera/microphone permissions, and app tracking blocking — and support the same productivity and usability features: split-screen, Picture-in-Picture, widgets, offline voice recognition, dynamic theming, and multi-user mode. For the vast majority of software-driven decisions, these two phones are functionally identical.

Digging through the full spec list, the only concrete difference is Wi-Fi password sharing, which the Nothing Phone 3 supports and the Phone (3a) does not. This feature allows users to share their network credentials with nearby contacts without reading out a password — a minor but genuinely convenient quality-of-life capability, particularly in household or office settings.

Given how little separates them, this category is essentially a tie. The Phone 3's Wi-Fi password sharing edge is real but too narrow to swing a purchasing decision on its own. Users choosing between these two phones should treat software as a non-factor and focus their attention on the hardware differences covered in other categories.

Battery capacity is close but not equal. The Nothing Phone 3 packs a 5150 mAh cell versus 5000 mAh in the Phone (3a) — a 150 mAh difference that is unlikely to translate into a meaningfully longer day on a single charge. Where the gap becomes more relevant is charging speed: the Phone 3 supports 65W wired fast charging against the Phone (3a)'s 50W, meaning the Phone 3 will recover from a low battery noticeably faster, a practical advantage for users with unpredictable schedules.

The more decisive differentiator is wireless charging. The Phone 3 supports it; the Phone (3a) does not. Wireless charging is fundamentally a convenience feature — dropping a phone on a pad overnight or at a desk removes the friction of plugging in daily. Its absence on the Phone (3a) is not a critical flaw, but for users already embedded in a wireless charging ecosystem, it is a real step down. Both phones ship without a charger in the box, so neither has an advantage there.

Taken together, the Phone 3 holds a clear edge in this category. Its advantages — faster wired charging and wireless charging support — are both tangible in daily use, even if the raw capacity difference is negligible. The Phone (3a) covers the essentials adequately, but it lacks the charging versatility that increasingly defines a premium battery experience.

On the surface, these two phones share the same audio hardware foundation: stereo speakers, no 3.5mm headphone jack, and three microphones each. For speaker-based listening and voice capture, the experience should be comparable. But wireless audio codec support tells a very different story. The Nothing Phone 3 supports aptX, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive, and LDAC — the full suite of high-resolution Bluetooth audio codecs — while the Phone (3a) supports none of them.

This matters specifically for users with high-quality Bluetooth headphones or earbuds. Standard SBC and AAC codecs, which the Phone (3a) falls back to, compress audio more aggressively and introduce higher latency. LDAC, developed by Sony, transmits up to three times more data than standard Bluetooth audio, preserving significantly more detail from high-resolution tracks. aptX Adaptive goes further still, dynamically adjusting bitrate and reducing latency for both music and gaming. For casual listeners on budget earbuds, the difference may be imperceptible — but for anyone with capable wireless audio hardware, the Phone 3 is the only one of the two that can actually leverage it.

The verdict here is unambiguous: the Phone 3 wins the audio category decisively. The codec gap is not a marginal difference — the Phone (3a) has no high-fidelity wireless audio support at all. Users who invest in quality Bluetooth audio gear should factor this in heavily.

Both phones cover the connectivity essentials confidently — 5G, NFC, USB-C, Wi-Fi 6, GPS, Galileo, and a full sensor suite including gyroscope, accelerometer, and compass. For most users, this shared baseline means day-to-day connectivity is essentially equivalent. The meaningful differences emerge when looking at the ceiling rather than the floor. The Nothing Phone 3 adds Wi-Fi 7 support, the latest wireless standard offering significantly higher throughput and lower latency than Wi-Fi 6 on compatible routers — a future-proofing advantage that will matter more as Wi-Fi 7 infrastructure becomes widespread.

Bluetooth follows the same pattern. The Phone 3 ships with Bluetooth 6 versus Bluetooth 5.4 on the Phone (3a). The newer version brings improved connection reliability, more precise device positioning via Channel Sounding, and better power efficiency — benefits that compound over the device's lifetime. The Phone 3 also supports eSIM alongside its dual physical SIM slots, while the Phone (3a) is limited to two physical SIMs only. eSIM enables instant carrier switching without handling a physical card, a genuine convenience for frequent travelers or anyone wanting to maintain separate personal and work lines digitally.

Cellular download speed reinforces the gap: 4200 Mbps on the Phone 3 versus 2900 Mbps on the Phone (3a), reflecting the more capable modem in the flagship chipset. Across every connectivity dimension — Wi-Fi generation, Bluetooth version, SIM flexibility, and peak download speed — the Phone 3 holds a consistent and meaningful advantage, positioning it noticeably better for the next several years of wireless standards evolution.

This group offers no differentiating information between the two phones. The Nothing Phone 3 and the Nothing Phone (3a) are identical across every spec provided here: both have a video light, neither uses sapphire glass, and neither features a curved or e-paper display. This is a complete tie — the data in this category simply does not factor into a purchasing decision between these two devices.