Moto X CPU benches

[briankariu]

I dunno if its marketing PR or something thats got people thinking that the moto x is benching good scores.
Anyway, this article on engadget has CPU benches (not GPU). It's performance is half of the high end silicones.
Moto X preview: A Google phone assembled with you, the user, in mind

 

[ryanr509]

Good thing benchmarks mean next to nothing. But it is good to see how these new chips are performing. As long as the phone performs smoothly then there is nothing to worry about.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[Premium1]

And now watch as all those who said, its better it beat all those high end phones in some benchmark( and yea I know it was GPU test and also pushing less than half the pixels of the high end devices)

 

[Lanzeelus]

Here's more benchmarks:

Performance preview: The Moto X sports a great GPU, respectable CPU | Ars Technica

The Moto X wins in every single GPU benchmark. It's the GPU that is so powerful in the Moto X, and even the CPU is no slouch. The "overall" benchmarks utilize every core, something that is not even close to indicative of real life apps (It's not even a matter of devs being lazy, it's a matter of mobile apps simply not needing 4 different threads to complete simple tasks). The browser benchmarks Sunspider and Kraken are generally good for testing the pure power of a single core, and the Moto X doesn't just compete with the S4 here, it edges it out. Even with the S4 being clocked higher.

And now watch as all those who said, its better it beat all those high end phones in some benchmark( and yea I know it was GPU test and also pushing less than half the pixels of the high end devices)

Doesn't matter. Onscreen GPU tests would theoretically be more telling, since that's the resolution the phone will be running in actual usage. That's the point of using a 720p screen. Far better performance with far better battery life, at the cost of a little screen sharpness that the vast majority of people will never even notice. Even so, the Moto X wins in offscreen rendering of 1080p too.

Honestly benchmarks barely matter. First of all, benchmarks can be cheated. It was very kind of Samsung to remind us of that with another one of their cool features: their S-BenchmarkBooster.

Octa-core Samsung Galaxy S4 caught cheating on GPU benchmarks - GSMArena Blog

What matters is the actual user experience. The Galaxy S4 dominated benchmarks for the longest time, yet it infamously lags and stutters more than any other flagship phone. Hell, the Galaxy S3 runs more fluidly. It is evident through videos and experiences from the people who have the phone that the Moto X is blazing fast, and a perfectly smooth experience. That's all anyone needs to know. Plus it performs perfectly while achieving 24 hour battery life? Advantage: Moto X

 

[briankariu]

Hmmn, ok. The GPU is pretty badass. But which parts of Android OS use GPU acceleration? Most apps dont. Games may profit from this, but then the CPU will bottleneck the GPU.
At the end of the day, a dual core is just that, a dual core. No matter the optimisations done, it wont beat a quad core device.
So if the HTC One/ S4 has a better proc, same GPU, better screen, more storage options and same price....you see where am going with this? Please stop saying that this is a high end device. Give it the class it deserves, mid range
Also as a side note, Samsung paid a dev to astroturf the other day for their product. Remember that.

 

[Lanzeelus]

Last I checked, the entire OS was GPU accelerated, and most apps that use even slightly up-to-date APIs (so most apps that are actually worth using) most likely do as well. These aren't Android 2.X days anymore. The GPU will do a significant amount of work loading the GUI. Also, an optimized dual core can easily beat an unoptimized quad core, especially in this scenario, since the Moto X technically has more than a dual core. It also has two extra dedicated cores that handle all of the low power processes, taking that off of the main processor's shoulders. On a normal quad core, these processes would probably take up the resources of the one or two cores that are actually in use, with the 3rd and 4th core most likely never kicking in to help because there isn't any code designed to call for it. If apps only utilize two cores, the quad core processor most likely won't perform any better than a dual core processor. The difference is that they won't have a contextual core and a language processing core to take any of the load off, so in this scenario, the Moto X has the superior hardware. And it's not something that only applies on paper. It's very clear that the Moto X outperforms both the One and the S4 in real life experience, all while consuming significantly less battery life. Speaking of which, is 24 hours of battery life a "mid-range" spec? I sure as hell don't think so.

I see no reason to not consider the Moto X a high-end device. It performs like one, the experience is a high-end experience, and in many ways, it outclasses other high-end phones on the market. You could actually argue that the Moto X is an overall better package than the S4 and the One. It offers similar to better performance, better battery life, a solid camera, a gorgeous screen, a solid and ergonomic design, and unique and useful features that other phones cannot even efficiently replicate due to a lack of dedicated hardware.

 

[Paisley]

I still say it's mid-high. The HTC One Mini that is about to come out, is midrange, and this one has a faster processor, better GPU, extra cores, a larger screen, a better camera, great software, better battery, double the ram, etc, etc, etc.

HTC One Mini official specs | Android Central

And not only is this above midrange device better in every way to the best midrange device coming out (htc mini), but Moto X was smart to come out with something that higher number of regular people who want a great phone would prefer to a high end larger phone that doesn't have the features that make MotoX such a smart phone. It is a phone that many people can use who do not want the 'has everything and nothing new but the specs' htc one/s4. If i had to get the htc mini i would be so sad, it is midrange. It would do the job, and i could have a bit of fun, but that's about it.

The mini will prolly be around $99, the highest end is $199. I said before, it's maybe $50 overpriced if you're pricing relative to the cost to make the phone, but that all best spec phone is not something i would carry, so i'm spending $50 more in theory, but even though i'm kinda on a budget (not even kind of) the $50 is nothing compared to having a midrange $99 htc mini, or carrying a device that can have all the specs it wants but i want nothing to do with it. Therefore it is well *worth* the $199.

 

[anon(847090)]

I dunno if its marketing PR or something thats got people thinking that the moto x is benching good scores.
Anyway, this article on engadget has CPU benches (not GPU). It's performance is half of the high end silicones.
Moto X preview: A Google phone assembled with you, the user, in mind

If you are comparing it with Samsung. please dont Samsung caught boosting benchmark performance numbers on Exynos devices (updated)

 

[JHBThree]

Hmmn, ok. The GPU is pretty badass. But which parts of Android OS use GPU acceleration? Most apps dont. Games may profit from this, but then the CPU will bottleneck the GPU.
At the end of the day, a dual core is just that, a dual core. No matter the optimisations done, it wont beat a quad core device.
So if the HTC One/ S4 has a better proc, same GPU, better screen, more storage options and same price....you see where am going with this? Please stop saying that this is a high end device. Give it the class it deserves, mid range
Also as a side note, Samsung paid a dev to astroturf the other day for their product. Remember that.

Uh, it does beat a quad core device. Several in fact. It beats all of the original S4 pro quad cores.