We tested the Pixel 11’s Tensor G6 chip, and the results are brutal

Affiliate links on Android Authority may earn us a commission. Learn more.

I’ll be frank, my hopes for the Tensor G6 were mixed coming into the launch of the Pixel 11 series . Google has made meaningful upgrades to the CPU and TPU for traditional app and AI workloads, respectively, while switching to what should be a more efficient modem. But pairing the Pixel 11 Pro with just 12GB of RAM , down from 16GB last year, undermines its high-end AI credentials. Meanwhile, Google has dropped a CPU core from its configuration, reducing the benefits of its more modern architecture.

While we can’t blame Google for the current state of the global RAM supply chain, its decision to switch to yet another mid-range graphics chip is harder to defend. Still, now that we have the phone in hand (and managed to get around Google blocking benchmarks via the Play Store), we’ve been able to run our usual suite of benchmarks to get a feel for where the Pixel 11 series falls in the performance pecking order.

To start our dive into the new Tensor G6, let’s look at performance over the last few years to help frame how the Pixel series has improved. Starting on the CPU side, the Tensor G6 moves up to an Arm C1-Ultra at 4.11GHz for the big core, four Arm C1-Pro cores at 3.38GHz for multitasking power, and two Arm C1-Pro cores at 2.65GHz for energy efficiency. While that’s one less core than last year, the Tensor G6 has skipped ahead two CPU generations this time, which, in theory, should lead to a rather significant performance jump compared to the Tensor G5. Unfortunately, the benchmark results are more of a mixed bag.

According to Geekbench 6, single-core performance is up by around 18%, and multi-core performance gains are in the region of 21%. That’s an undoubtedly welcome boost and a very promising generational gain. The chip is certainly fast enough to ensure the Pixel 11 series feels very responsive for everyday and even more demanding tasks. However, if you were hoping for performance approaching that of Samsung’s Exynos 2600 , you may be disappointed.

The Exynos uses similar CPU cores at even more conservative clock speeds, yet its larger core count gives it a substantial advantage. My Galaxy S26 Plus scores 18% and 51% higher in single- and multi-core tests, respectively, than the Pixel 11 Pro XL. There are a couple of possible explanations for Google’s performance deficit: more aggressive thermal management, or perhaps smaller cache sizes. We know Arm’s powerhouse cores love big caches, but Google appears to be trying to save as much silicon area as possible.

But it’s the graphics situation that reveals Google’s stark lack of progress in one of mobile’s most popular commuting use cases. According to 3DMark’s Wild Life and Wild Life Extreme tests, peak performance has increased by about 7% to 10% compared to last year’s processor, depending on the exact test. Again, that’s a welcome boost and could be enough to turn somewhat wobbly frame rates into a mostly locked 60 fps. But it isn’t enough to transform the Pixel 11 into a top-performing gaming phone capable of sustaining 120 fps in the latest titles.

Unfortunately, that’s about as good as the news gets for prospective Pixel gamers. Looking at the stress-test results suggests that over longer gaming sessions, particularly in warm climates, there may not be much to tell between the Pixel 11 and Pixel 10 series after just a few minutes of intensive gameplay. Performance actually dips to below last year’s GPU after just a few minutes of 3DMark’s stress test, indicating that those higher GPU clocks aren’t particularly sustainable in the long term. Still, real games often take longer to heat up a handset, and we see rival flagships drop performance far more quickly.