Phone storage showdown 2019 - Who is price-gouging you the most - Android

There are plenty of essential components that make up every smartphone and phone storage is one of them. After all, what good is a phone if you can’t fit all your apps, photos, and videos on it?

While cloud services are wonderful, it’s still a pain to hit your local storage limit and have to wade through your files to see what’s hogging space. Plus, in the age of 4K 60fps video and stunning 3D games, the need for more local storage is higher than ever.

More memory comes at a premium, however, and many OEMs are guilty of charging well over the odds for higher storage models. With this article, we wanted to give a thumbs up to the least storage stingy phone makers in 2019 and drop a mighty thumbs down to the worst storage gougers!

Phone storage showdown: The ground rules

Before we get into all the juicy stats there are a few significant rules we had to put in place to ensure the results made any kind of sense. Here are the rules:

• Only phones released in 2019 are eligible.
• All phones must have flagship core specs (i.e. Snapdragon 855 Plus, 855, Kirin 990, 980).
• All prices are launch prices. No discounts.
• Phone models with more RAM but identical storage are not counted.
• No 5G phones. The price hike is real.
• OEMs must have more than one eligible phone to be considered.
• No special or limited edition models.

To keep this analysis as concise as possible, this list is based only on US models and pricing. Where possible all calculations are using US dollars. For those phones that aren’t available in the US, we’ve taken the official price in euros and converted to dollars. Likewise, while there may be storage configurations available for some phones that aren’t included here, that is because they are not officially available in the US or Europe.

The ranking also takes into account unquantifiable extras, namely whether or not each manufacturer offers expandable storage or includes the latest Universal Flash Storage standard, UFS 3.0.

As for the calculations, we’ve worked out how much each gigabyte costs per dollar for each eligible phone and an average for each OEM based on 2019 flagship releases. We’ve also looked at the amount each OEM charges per extra GB for upgraded models that otherwise have identical specs (e.g. the Google Pixel 4 64GB and 128GB variants).

More storage comes at a premium, but is everyone playing fair?

Please be aware that this is an imperfect ranking designed squarely for those who care for about storage. The $/GB ratio heavily favors relatively expensive phones with enormous storage capacities and punishes phones with lower cost price and average storage. This is why we’ve also assessed the average price per extra GB where possible to give all of the brands a fairer shake. However, as you’ll see from the results, only seven of the ten OEMs actually sell devices with multiple storage options.

In addition, the ranking is designed to explicitly ignore other obviously major cost factors such as display and build quality, battery size, camera tech, fancy extra hardware features etc.. This is a nerdy list about storage for storage nerds like us!

At the end of the list you’ll also find a bunch of ranking tables just for fun. Want to know which phone that has the worst dollar per GB ratio? Keep reading!

10. Google

• Average $/GB — $10.34
• Average price per additional GB — $1.56

Google brings up the rear for storage gouging in every metric. The only exception is the worst $/GB ratio for individual phones, but even then the 64GB variants of the Pixel 4 and Pixel 4 XL slot into third and fourth on the naughty list.

This article was partly inspired by the Pixel 4’s dismal storage options and the eye-watering $100 price hike levied at buyers to upgrade from 64GB to 128GB. I expected to see Google languishing towards the back, perhaps even at the bottom, but honestly it wasn’t even close.

Our verdict: Google Pixel 4 XL review: Untapped potential

For every additional gigabyte on its top models, Google is charging $1.56, which is four cents away from being double the next worst OEM and over three times more than the most generous phone maker on this list. To put that into context, a report from this year suggests a single gigabyte costs just $0.08 to buy. That means Google is making a straight profit of $95 with every 128GB Pixel 4 or Pixel 4 XL.

Yikes.

9. Apple

• Average $/GB — $7.52
• Average price per additional GB — $0.78

Be honest, you expected Apple to be at the bottom, didn’t you?

The OG storage gouger escapes complete humiliation due to Google’s unchecked avarice, but Apple is no saint.

Surprisingly, the Cupertino giant would actually be much higher on this list save for one small problem: those pricey 64GB models. The entry level models for the $999 iPhone 11 Pro and $1,099 iPhone 11 Pro Max take the top spots for the worst $/GB, respectively.

Apple also charges a flat fee of $50 for every extra 64GB, which is still half what Google charges, but is the third highest overall.

If Apple ever decides to raise its minimum storage to 128GB (which it absolutely should be on the Pro series, come on now), it would rocket up this list as the 256GB iPhone 11 and 512GB iPhone 11 Pro are actually quite competitive in overall $/GB, with the latter even breaking the top ten.

8. Sony

• Average $/GB — $6.83
• Average price per additional GB — n/a

Sony takes the last spot in the bottom three almost by default.

On the plus side, Sony’s Xperia phones have always come with expandable storage. That means you can always add extra storage by buying a relatively cheap MicroSD card.

Unfortunately, that extra cost for the card comes on top of an already hefty premium for just 128GB storage and no sign of any higher storage options. Neither the Xperia 1 or Xperia 5 crack the bottom ten, but together the average $/GB puts Sony just behind Apple.

7. Huawei

• Average $/GB — ~$5.80
• Average price per additional GB — ~$0.80

Despite being the second-worst price gouger on average, Huawei sneaks in ahead of Sony in this ranking thanks to the variety of storage options, UFS 3.0 on the Mate 30 and Mate 30 Pro, and a respectable $/GB average.

Nano memory sucks.

Huawei would’ve risen a few more places save for one fatal flaw: Nano memory. Huawei’s proprietary storage solution has failed to catch on with other OEMs and the actual cards retail at around double the price of equivalent MicroSD cards. Of course, Huawei can’t actually use MicroSD cards in its phones so… that’s awkward.

6. Xiaomi