Nothing Phone (3a) VS Vivo Y400 Pro 5G

Both phones share the same tall form factor — nearly identical in height at around 163–164 mm — but diverge meaningfully in hand feel. The Vivo Y400 Pro 5G is noticeably slimmer at 7.7 mm versus 8.4 mm for the Nothing Phone (3a), and lighter at 182 g compared to 201 g. That 19-gram difference is tangible during extended use — it reduces wrist fatigue and makes one-handed operation more comfortable. The Y400 Pro is also narrower at 75 mm vs 77.5 mm, which compounds the ergonomic advantage, particularly for users with smaller hands.

On water resistance, both carry an IP6x rating, meaning full dust protection is guaranteed on neither — but the Y400 Pro edges ahead with IP65 versus the Nothing Phone (3a)'s IP64. The difference lies in water jet resistance: IP65 can withstand low-pressure water jets from any direction, while IP64 is rated only for water splashes. In practice, this means the Y400 Pro handles rain or accidental splashes from a tap more confidently.

Neither device has a rugged build or foldable design, so those are non-factors here. Overall, the Vivo Y400 Pro 5G holds a clear design edge: it is lighter, thinner, narrower, and carries a slightly superior IP rating — a combination that makes it the more refined and pocket-friendly of the two.

At the panel level, these two phones are virtually identical — same 6.77″ OLED screen, same 1080 x 2392 resolution, same 120Hz refresh rate, and a pixel density so close (387 vs 388 ppi) that no human eye could distinguish them. For everyday sharpness and motion smoothness, consider them equal.

Where the displays genuinely split is brightness. The Vivo Y400 Pro delivers 1300 nits of typical brightness against the Nothing Phone (3a)'s 800 nits — a 62% gap that has real consequences outdoors. Under direct sunlight, higher brightness is the single biggest factor in screen legibility, and 1300 nits places the Y400 Pro comfortably in the ″bright enough for any condition″ tier, while 800 nits can fall short on a sunny day. The trade-off runs the other way on HDR content: the Nothing Phone (3a) supports HDR10+, the more advanced standard with dynamic tone-mapping, whereas the Y400 Pro caps at HDR10. For streaming HDR video on a compatible service, the Nothing Phone (3a) can render highlight and shadow detail more precisely.

So the choice here comes down to use case. For outdoor visibility and general brightness headroom, the Vivo Y400 Pro holds a clear advantage. For HDR content consumption, the Nothing Phone (3a) has the edge. Users who spend more time outside will feel the Y400 Pro's brightness benefit daily; home media viewers will appreciate the Nothing Phone (3a)'s HDR10+ support more. Neither advantage is trivial, making this category a genuine split rather than a clean win for either side.

The Nothing Phone (3a) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, while the Vivo Y400 Pro uses the MediaTek Dimensity 7300 — both fabbed on a 4nm process, meaning thermal efficiency and power consumption are broadly comparable. The performance gap, however, is measurable. In Geekbench 6, the Nothing Phone (3a) scores 1162 single-core and 3239 multi-core, versus 1026 single-core and 2932 multi-core for the Y400 Pro. Single-core performance is what drives app launches, UI responsiveness, and everyday snappiness — a ~13% lead for the Nothing Phone (3a) is noticeable in real use. The multi-core gap (~10%) matters more for sustained workloads like video editing or gaming sessions.

RAM tells a similarly divergent story. The Nothing Phone (3a) ships with 12GB of RAM versus the Y400 Pro's 8GB — a meaningful difference for multitasking, keeping more apps alive in the background, and future-proofing against increasingly memory-hungry applications. The Y400 Pro counters with a notably faster RAM speed of 6400 MHz compared to 3200 MHz, which in theory improves memory bandwidth. In practice, though, having 50% more RAM capacity outweighs the bandwidth advantage for typical smartphone workloads.

On GPU, the clock speeds are nearly identical (~1050 MHz), so neither phone has a clear graphical edge purely from that figure. Taken as a whole, the Nothing Phone (3a) holds a clear performance advantage — stronger CPU benchmark scores, significantly more RAM, and a chip with a stronger track record in this tier all point in the same direction. The Y400 Pro is no slouch, but users who prioritize raw performance and multitasking headroom will find the Nothing Phone (3a) the more capable machine.

The rear camera systems reveal a significant gap in versatility. The Nothing Phone (3a) fields a genuine triple-camera setup — 50 MP + 50 MP + 8 MP — giving users three distinct focal perspectives to work with. The Vivo Y400 Pro, by contrast, pairs its 50 MP main sensor with a 2 MP secondary lens, which at that resolution functions primarily as a depth assistant rather than an independent imaging camera. In practical terms, the Y400 Pro is effectively a single-camera phone for actual image capture.

Two further differentiators compound this gap. The Nothing Phone (3a) includes optical image stabilization (OIS) — absent on the Y400 Pro — which meaningfully reduces blur in low-light shots and during video recording by physically compensating for hand shake. It also offers 2x optical zoom, meaning telephoto shots use the dedicated sensor rather than a cropped, degraded digital zoom. The Y400 Pro lists 0x optical zoom, so any zoom beyond 1x is purely digital. For users who regularly shoot portraits, distant subjects, or video handheld, these are day-to-day limitations rather than edge-case ones.

Video capabilities and front cameras are evenly matched — both shoot 4K at 30fps and carry 32 MP selfie cameras, though the Nothing Phone (3a)'s front aperture of f/2.2 is slightly wider than the Y400 Pro's f/2.5, an advantage in dimmer selfie conditions. Overall, the Nothing Phone (3a) holds a clear and decisive camera advantage: more usable lenses, OIS, and true optical zoom make it the substantially more capable imaging device.

Rarely does a spec group produce such a clean result: every single feature listed is identical across both phones. Both run Android 15, both support the same privacy controls — including camera/microphone permissions, location options, and app tracking blocks — and both carry the same productivity and usability features like split screen, picture-in-picture, dynamic theming, widgets, and offline voice recognition.

This is a complete tie, and the data leaves no room for nuance. Neither phone gets direct OS updates, neither supports Wi-Fi password sharing or focus modes, and both share the same set of on-device machine learning and privacy capabilities. There is no differentiator to analyze or advantage to award.

Battery is one area where the Vivo Y400 Pro pulls ahead on both dimensions that matter. Its 5500 mAh cell outpaces the Nothing Phone (3a)'s 5000 mAh by a 10% margin — enough to translate into a meaningful buffer at the end of a heavy day. For most users, the difference between these two capacities is the gap between reaching your charger comfortably and watching the battery anxiety creep in during an evening out.

The charging speed gap is even more pronounced. The Y400 Pro supports 90W fast charging, nearly double the 50W offered by the Nothing Phone (3a). In practical terms, 90W can take a depleted 5500 mAh battery to a usable level in well under 30 minutes, while 50W on a 5000 mAh battery takes considerably longer. For users with busy schedules who rely on short charging windows — a quick top-up between meetings or before heading out — this difference is felt every single day.

Neither phone offers wireless charging or a removable battery, so those are non-factors. The Vivo Y400 Pro holds a clear and well-rounded battery advantage: it stores more energy and replenishes it faster, a combination that makes it the stronger choice for power-conscious users.

Audio is another category with no daylight between the two phones. Both the Nothing Phone (3a) and the Vivo Y400 Pro offer stereo speakers and drop the 3.5mm headphone jack — a now-common trade-off in this segment. Neither supports any high-resolution Bluetooth audio codec: aptX, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive, LDAC, and aptX Lossless are all absent on both devices, meaning wireless audio is limited to standard Bluetooth quality regardless of which phone you choose. There is no FM radio on either side.

This is a complete tie. Every audio specification is identical, and there is no differentiator on which to base a recommendation. Users who prioritize high-fidelity wireless audio will find both phones equally limited in this regard.

The connectivity picture is largely shared territory — both phones offer 5G, dual SIM, Bluetooth 5.4, NFC, USB Type-C, and an identical sensor suite covering GPS, gyroscope, compass, and accelerometer. For most day-to-day use cases, these two phones are on equal footing.

The one meaningful differentiator is Wi-Fi. The Nothing Phone (3a) supports Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) in addition to Wi-Fi 4 and 5, while the Vivo Y400 Pro tops out at Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac). Wi-Fi 6 brings improved throughput, lower latency in congested environments — such as offices or apartments with many competing devices — and better power efficiency during wireless activity. It is a forward-looking advantage that becomes more relevant as Wi-Fi 6 routers proliferate. Interestingly, the Y400 Pro counters with a higher listed download speed of 3270 Mbits/s versus 2900 Mbits/s for the Nothing Phone (3a), which relates to its cellular modem capability rather than Wi-Fi. In practice, both figures far exceed what real-world networks deliver, making this difference largely theoretical.

On balance, the Nothing Phone (3a) holds a modest connectivity edge thanks to Wi-Fi 6 support — a tangible, everyday benefit for users on modern routers — while the Y400 Pro's cellular speed advantage is unlikely to matter in any practical scenario. Everything else is a tie.

This group is lean on data, and most of it is shared — both phones have a video light and neither uses sapphire glass or an e-paper display. The single differentiator is that the Vivo Y400 Pro features a curved display, while the Nothing Phone (3a) has a flat one. Curved screens create a more premium, edge-to-edge aesthetic and can feel more comfortable during extended scrolling due to the natural way the glass meets the frame. The trade-off is that curved displays are generally more prone to accidental edge touches and can make screen protectors harder to apply reliably.

Whether this counts as an advantage depends entirely on personal preference — some users actively seek out curved displays for the look and feel, while others prefer the practicality of flat glass. Based strictly on the provided data, the Vivo Y400 Pro holds a marginal and subjective edge here for users who value a more premium display form factor, but it is not a clear-cut functional advantage.