Motorola Droid X2 Review - A Droid X with Tegra 2
by Brian Klug on July 7, 2011 8:31 AM ESTPerformance
The X2 is powered by a 1.0 GHz Tegra 2 SoC which consists of two Cortex-A9 CPUs and NVIDIA’s ULP GeForce GPU. Anand has already detailed the architecture pretty thoroughly in our Optimus 2X review, which was the first handset to be built around Tegra 2, so if you’re interested check that out. Since then Tegra 2 has scored a lot of Motorola design wins, starting with the Atrix, the Xoom, and hopefully the unreleased Bionic.
I’ve also gone ahead and borrowed a Motorola Droid X from a friend, which I then proceeded to wipe (don’t worry, they’re used to this kind of behavior) and install the 2.3.3 update on. I then re-ran our benchmarks and updated things to give a better perspective of what the performance delta looks like right now with the X2 running 2.2.2 and the X running 2.3.3, both of which are current as of this writing.
First up are our web benchmarks, which primarily test JavaScript and page rendering. We’re still running SunSpider 0.9, though we’ll soon switch to 0.9.1 and report that alongside. JavaScript performance on Motorola’s themed browser is actually very good, and comes in nearly at the top of our charts, alongside the Optimus 2X.
Flash is next, and here the X2 delivers very good performance that’s on par with the Optimus 2X, even though we’re dealing with a qHD screen compared to WVGA.
GLBenchmark 2.0 is a regular in our benchmarking section, and the X2 gets a run through this test as well. Performance is pretty close to the Atrix but just behind it, perhaps due to the Atrix having 1 GB of LPDDR2 compared to the X2’s less inspiring 512 MB of LPDDR2.
Next is BaseMark ES2.0, which is a slightly updated version of 3DMarkMobile ES2.0. Here we run at the default resolution, which is VGA, and thus get a picture without being constrained to just native resolution constantly.
The Android port of Quake 3 is what we sort of started all of this with, and we’re still running it even if it’s starting to hit vsync in parts. The results look strange here until you realize that this is a qHD phone, not WVGA.
Next up is Linpack, which added a multi-threaded version of the benchmark earlier this week. I’ve run it on all the dual core devices I could get my hands on.
Last up is Quadrant which will be depreciated pretty soon as it’s at the framerate cap in its 3D tests, has overall little to no documentation for most of the subtests, and generally is woefully out of date. The X2 does extremely well in the I/O test thanks to it using EXT3 for most partitions.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
72 Comments
View All Comments
HangFire - Thursday, July 7, 2011 - link
Far be it from me to defend Apple, but this has little to do with them. The popularity of streaming media- made possible by WiFi, 3G, 4G, and pocketable 720P level resolution screens, has made phones mini media devices, and as for viewing media on screens, the bigger the better.I like a small phone, and a large TV screen. The market is in the process of discovering just what compromise people want, and don't want, in terms of size.
Anyway, the current 3.5" screen iPhone is smaller (and more phone-like) than these 4.3" mini-tablets.
jonup - Friday, July 8, 2011 - link
I was not bad talking Apple so no point to defend them. I was inferring to the fact that the iPhone revolutionalized/popularized the "mini media devices". I was just a little facetious but thats my style. ;pThat said I am left with virtually no upgrade options unless I want to spend $1000+.
strikeback03 - Thursday, July 7, 2011 - link
Did you retest the talk time for the original X? Or is your friend's X an early one? I got mine at the beginning of March, and the web browsing tests look similar to what I would expect from my phone (what do you set the screen brightness to?) but I don't think it could get anywhere near 8.9 hrs of calling. I'm used to seeing it drop 10% for 15-20 minutes of calling.jmcb - Thursday, July 7, 2011 - link
Being in a good or bad reception area will have an effect on battery life. Are you in a bad reception area?Brian Klug - Thursday, July 7, 2011 - link
I'm definitely aware of how much of a difference that can make, and we always test in moderate to good coverage areas. In this particular test area, VZW signal (both 1x and EVDO) are above -70 dBm, which is pretty good. I believe there's a screenshot or two that show -70 dBm and -65 dBm.-Brian
strikeback03 - Friday, July 8, 2011 - link
My Elixir icon shows less helpful stuff like "65%", so not sure what kind of reception in dBm I'm seeing. Though on further reading I doubt it would hit the WiFi browsing time either, with the screen on at my standard 12% brightness and all radios off I don't think it would last almost 9 hrs.strafejumper - Thursday, July 7, 2011 - link
I see the Motorola Droid 3 is up for order now on Verizon!Is the Droid 3 the next version of the phone in this review? Or a different animal?
If its the next in the same line its pretty funny that by the time a good review comes out for the phone the next one is already available to order!
Maybe with android phones if you wait for a thorough review you will be outdated before you have the phone in hand!
http://www.engadget.com/2011/07/07/motorola-droid-...
strikeback03 - Thursday, July 7, 2011 - link
It is more or less they same phone in a different form factor. Same as the Droid 2 and Droid X were closely related.strikeback03 - Thursday, July 7, 2011 - link
MY apologies, Droid 3 isn't Tegra 2, it is OMAP 4430. Brain fart. Anyway, it is still more a supplement than a replacement to the Droid X2LoneWolf15 - Friday, July 8, 2011 - link
Actually, the Droid 3 replaces the Droid 2, just as the Droid X2 replaces the Droid X.For those of us who still like tactile keyboards (like myself), the Droid 3 is the preferable phone.