876fi I always wondered whether there is a difference in terms of quality/capability for video output between a USB-C cable that I got with my DELL display and the Pixel original USB-C cable. The former one is thick and stiff, and the later one is thin and flex. Does this matter whatsoever?
The included cable is likely USB 2.0 like it was for previous generations (it looks the same and there's no indication they changed it).
Thickness can matter, but it also depends on the materials used and other details. As a general rule, you can assume that a thicker cable will have thicker wires inside, but it could also be down to insulation thickness and material as well as braiding.
Some cables have ticker wires for e.g. the power lines. There's also a difference in which of the USB-C pins are connected and what chips are used in the cable (yes, cables have chips).
Also, a lot of the brand cables are not really good. Some are. Some will have a higher voltage drop and resistance. Some are just incorrectly designed and some are just poor quality.
I found Ugreen and Anker to do well in online lab test reviews and Baseus to do poorly. I wish we had more of those tests, because many brands and models haven't been tested yet. I personally prefer Ugreen on the basis of lab test reviews, both chargers and cables.
And beware, most 100 or 240 W cables are actually USB 2.0. If it says "480 Mpbs", "USB 2.0" or just outright doesn't mention transfer speed - then you can be sure it's only USB 2.0. Personally, I think it's wise to invest in a proper high-speed cable when investing in 240 W cables, to make the purchase last as long as possible.
My Pixel 8 Pro can transfer at higher speeds than USB 2.0 and you need that for SSDs, hubs, docks etc. as well.
Unfortunately, marketing tricks people into buying a bunch of crap. :/