Spec-sheet comparison of these two stops at "Tensor G3 vs Snapdragon 8 Gen 3, 12 vs 12, 6.7 vs 6.8." Fine for marketing. Read what each phone reports about itself at the OS level and the two flagships turn out to be built on completely different philosophies.
Field-by-field below, pulled from actual records in our community database.
Identity fields
| Field | Pixel 8 Pro | Galaxy S24 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| MANUFACTURER | samsung | |
| BRAND | samsung | |
| PRODUCT | husky | e3qxxx |
| DEVICE | husky | e3q |
| MODEL | Pixel 8 Pro | SM-S928B |
Pixel ships friendly codenames (husky) and a human-readable MODEL. Samsung
ships opaque codenames (e3q) and the raw SKU (SM-S928B) as MODEL.
That difference actually matters for fake detection — a "Pixel 8 Pro" that reports its
MODEL as a SKU-style string is instantly suspicious.
Platform & SoC
| Field | Pixel 8 Pro | Galaxy S24 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| SOC_MODEL | zuma | SM8650 |
| SOC_MANUFACTURER | Qualcomm | |
| CPU cores | 9 (1+4+4) | 8 (1+5+2) |
| GPU | Mali-G715 MC10 | Adreno 750 |
Google refers to the Tensor G3 by its internal codename, zuma — there's no
marketing "Tensor" string anywhere in the firmware. It's an Exynos-derived chip and
SOC_MODEL admits as much. Qualcomm's SM8650 is unambiguously Snapdragon 8 Gen 3.
The 1+4+4 layout on Tensor (1 prime, 4 mid, 4 efficiency) is unique to Google's chip among 2024 flagships — a Google + Samsung Foundry decision. Anything claiming to be a Pixel 8 Pro while reporting a 1+5+2 layout is not a Pixel.
Sensors
Both phones expose 14+ sensors, but the inventories are distinct:
- Pixel 8 Pro — a built-in skin thermometer (the one that made headlines at launch), a barometer, a tri-axis hall sensor for fold detection, and the IR face-unlock cluster.
- Galaxy S24 Ultra — Samsung's rear-mounted heart-rate sensor, an S Pen detection magnetometer, an ultrasonic under-display fingerprint sensor (not optical), and the usual proximity-light combo.
Counterfeits fail this test constantly. Fake "Galaxy Ultra" units in our 2024-2025 dataset typically report 6-8 sensors and never the S-Pen-aware inventory.
Memory & storage
| Field | Pixel 8 Pro | Galaxy S24 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| RAM | 12 GB LPDDR5X | 12 GB LPDDR5X |
| FLASH | 128/256/512 GB UFS 3.1 | 256/512 GB/1 TB UFS 4.0 |
Small but real: Samsung shipped UFS 4.0 (faster sequential reads, better sustained random IO), Google stuck with UFS 3.1 on the Pixel 8 Pro. Benchmark reads roughly 2× apart. Perceptible in daily use? Barely.
Display
Pixel: 1344×2992, LTPO 1-120 Hz. S24 Ultra: 1440×3120, LTPO 1-120 Hz. Both pass Widevine L1 DRM attestation, both HDR10+. The Galaxy runs brighter in the field — sustained ~2600 nits vs ~2200 nits on the Pixel.
What the fingerprints tell you about the design
Read against each other, the two fingerprints map directly to what each company prioritised:
- Google — maximum sensor variety (skin temp, hall arrays), a custom Tensor tuned for ML, vanilla Android branding, an open and self-describing fingerprint.
- Samsung — opaque codenames, top-of-tier memory and storage, sensor inventory tied to OneUI features (S Pen, Knox, heart-rate), Qualcomm silicon wherever performance matters.
Use this for the second-hand check
Before paying for either flagship second-hand, pull the fingerprint and verify:
- SOC_MODEL matches expected —
zumafor Pixel 8 Pro,SM8650for Galaxy S24 Ultra. - Sensor count ≥ 13.
- Build tags =
release-keys, nottest-keys. - Samsung: Knox warranty bit not tripped (Settings → About → Software info).
- Pixel: Verified Boot state =
green(Settings → About → Boot).
Our Hardware Trust Score automates items 1-3 and reports any mismatches in plain English. Items 4-5 are ten-second menu checks you do yourself.
