The ASUS ROG Phone III Review: A 144Hz 6000mAh Beast With Caveats
by Andrei Frumusanu on August 28, 2020 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Mobile
- Smartphones
- Snapdragon 865
- ROG Phone III
GPU Performance & Power
GPU performance of the ROG Phone III should be its very strong-point, as that’s the primary selling point of the device. The new Snapdragon 865+ promises 10% better performance than the regular Snapdragon 865, and we’ve seen quite a few excellently performing S865 devices over the last few months.
How will the ROG3 be able to distinguish itself from the crowd with its fancy cooling solutions, given that the crowd already performs that well?
Starting off with Basemark GPU 1.2, we’re off to some odd results.
In the default mode (LV1), the phone’s peak performance is right about where expect it to be, roughly 10% faster than Snapdragon 865 devices in the market. What’s rather disappointing is the phone’s sustained performance figures which are significantly worse than other phones in the market.
I noted that the phone didn’t really get hot at all in its default operating mode, with peak skin temperature not exceeding 37°C which is very conservative. I decided to also test the gaming performance in its X-Modes;
At LV2, the phone gets notably hotter and is allowed to reach up to around 45°C peak skin temperatures, with sustained performance getting a nice boost. However, versus the competition, these results are still a tad disappointing as it still lags behind LG, Xiaomi and OnePlus phones, all of which are actually cooler.
Finally, in LV3 mode with the AeroCooler connected, the phone gets a slight sustained performance boost, finally taking the top place amongst Android devices, albeit with only a sliver of a margin.
GFXBench Aztec High showcases a similar performance raking, with the default mode ROG3 performing very conservatively, requiring the AeroCooler to be able to keep up with other phones in the market.
| GFXBench Aztec High Offscreen Power Efficiency (System Active Power) |
||||
| Mfc. Process | FPS | Avg. Power (W) |
Perf/W Efficiency |
|
| iPhone 11 Pro (A13) Warm | N7P | 26.14 | 3.83 | 6.82 fps/W |
| iPhone 11 Pro (A13) Cold / Peak | N7P | 34.00 | 6.21 | 5.47 fps/W |
| Galaxy S20 Ultra (Snapdragon 865) | N7P | 20.35 | 3.91 | 5.19 fps/W |
| iPhone XS (A12) Warm | N7 | 19.32 | 3.81 | 5.07 fps/W |
| Reno3 5G (Dimensity 1000L) | N7 | 11.93 | 2.39 | 4.99 fps/W |
| iPhone XS (A12) Cold / Peak | N7 | 26.59 | 5.56 | 4.78 fps/W |
| ROG Phone III (Snapdragon 865+) | N7P | 22.34 | 5.35 | 4.17 fps/W |
| Mate 30 Pro (Kirin 990 4G) | N7 | 16.50 | 3.96 | 4.16 fps/W |
| Galaxy S20+ (Exynos 990) | 7LPP | 20.20 | 5.02 | 3.59 fps/W |
| Galaxy S10+ (Snapdragon 855) | N7 | 16.17 | 4.69 | 3.44 fps/W |
| Galaxy S10+ (Exynos 9820) | 8LPP | 15.59 | 4.80 | 3.24 fps/W |
GFXBench Aztec High showcases a similar performance raking, with the default mode ROG3 performing very conservatively, requiring the AeroCooler to be able to keep up with other phones in the market.
It was very odd to see the ROG3 perform quite this poorly, and most importantly getting that much hotter than the competition. I re-measured the power consumption of the device and the Snapdragon 865+ only to note that the new SoC is seemingly using quite a lot more power than the standard Snapdragon 865, reaching up to 5.35W versus 3.91W on the Galaxy S20 Ultra.
| GFXBench Aztec Normal Offscreen Power Efficiency (System Active Power) |
||||
| Mfc. Process | FPS | Avg. Power (W) |
Perf/W Efficiency |
|
| iPhone 11 Pro (A13) Warm | N7P | 73.27 | 4.07 | 18.00 fps/W |
| iPhone 11 Pro (A13) Cold / Peak | N7P | 91.62 | 6.08 | 15.06 fps/W |
| iPhone XS (A12) Warm | N7 | 55.70 | 3.88 | 14.35 fps/W |
| Galaxy S20 Ultra (Snapdragon 865) | N7P | 54.09 | 3.91 | 13.75 fps/W |
| iPhone XS (A12) Cold / Peak | N7 | 76.00 | 5.59 | 13.59 fps/W |
| Reno3 5G (Dimensity 1000L) | N7 | 27.84 | 2.12 | 13.13 fps/W |
| ROG Phone III (Snapdragon 865+) | N7P | 58.77 | 5.34 | 11.00 fps/W |
| Mate 30 Pro (Kirin 990 4G) | N7 | 41.68 | 4.01 | 10.39 fps/W |
| Galaxy S20+ (Exynos 990) | 7LPP | 49.41 | 4.87 | 10.14 fps/W |
| Galaxy S10+ (Snapdragon 855) | N7 | 40.63 | 4.14 | 9.81 fps/W |
| Galaxy S10+ (Exynos 9820) | 8LPP | 40.18 | 4.62 | 8.69 fps/W |
Aztec normal showcases the same results and power draw characteristics.
| GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 Offscreen Power Efficiency (System Active Power) |
||||
| Mfc. Process | FPS | Avg. Power (W) |
Perf/W Efficiency |
|
| iPhone 11 Pro (A13) Warm | N7P | 100.58 | 4.21 | 23.89 fps/W |
| Galaxy S20 Ultra (Snapdragon 865) | N7P | 88.93 | 4.20 | 21.15 fps/W |
| iPhone 11 Pro (A13) Cold / Peak | N7P | 123.54 | 6.04 | 20.45 fps/W |
| iPhone XS (A12) Warm | N7 | 76.51 | 3.79 | 20.18 fps/W |
| Reno3 5G (Dimensity 1000L) | N7 | 55.48 | 2.98 | 18.61 fps/W |
| iPhone XS (A12) Cold / Peak | N7 | 103.83 | 5.98 | 17.36 fps/W |
| ROG Phone III (Snapdragon 865+) | N7P | 93.58 | 5.56 | 16.82 fps/W |
| Mate 30 Pro (Kirin 990 4G) | N7 | 75.69 | 5.04 | 15.01 fps/W |
| Galaxy S20+ (Exynos 990) | 7LPP | 85.66 | 5.90 | 14.51 fps/W |
| Galaxy S10+ (Snapdragon 855) | N7 | 70.67 | 4.88 | 14.46 fps/W |
| Galaxy S10+ (Exynos 9820) | 8LPP | 68.87 | 5.10 | 13.48 fps/W |
| Galaxy S9+ (Snapdragon 845) | 10LPP | 61.16 | 5.01 | 11.99 fps/W |
| Mate 20 Pro (Kirin 980) | N7 | 54.54 | 4.57 | 11.93 fps/W |
| Galaxy S9 (Exynos 9810) | 10LPP | 46.04 | 4.08 | 11.28 fps/W |
| Galaxy S8 (Snapdragon 835) | 10LPE | 38.90 | 3.79 | 10.26 fps/W |
| Galaxy S8 (Exynos 8895) | 10LPE | 42.49 | 7.35 | 5.78 fps/W |
Manhattan 3.1 is the same as well; here the power consumption grows to up to 5.56W which is extremely high and well beyond that a smartphone can normally dissipate.
| GFXBench T-Rex Offscreen Power Efficiency (System Active Power) |
||||
| Mfc. Process | FPS | Avg. Power (W) |
Perf/W Efficiency |
|
| iPhone 11 Pro (A13) Warm | N7P | 289.03 | 4.78 | 60.46 fps/W |
| iPhone 11 Pro (A13) Cold / Peak | N7P | 328.90 | 5.93 | 55.46 fps/W |
| Galaxy S20 Ultra (Snapdragon 865) | N7P | 205.37 | 3.83 | 53.30 fps/W |
| iPhone XS (A12) Warm | N7 | 197.80 | 3.95 | 50.07 fps/W |
| ROG Phone III (Snapdragon 865+) | N7P | 224.48 | 4.92 | 45.60 fps/W |
| iPhone XS (A12) Cold / Peak | N7 | 271.86 | 6.10 | 44.56 fps/W |
| Galaxy 10+ (Snapdragon 855) | N7 | 167.16 | 4.10 | 40.70 fps/W |
| Reno3 5G (Dimensity 1000L) | N7 | 139.30 | 3.57 | 39.01 fps/W |
| Galaxy S20+ (Exynos 990) | 7LPP | 199.61 | 5.63 | 35.45 fps/W |
| Mate 30 Pro (Kirin 990 4G) | N7 | 152.27 | 4.34 | 35.08 fps/W |
| Galaxy S9+ (Snapdragon 845) | 10LPP | 150.40 | 4.42 | 34.00 fps/W |
| Galaxy 10+ (Exynos 9820) | 8LPP | 166.00 | 4.96 | 33.40fps/W |
| Galaxy S9 (Exynos 9810) | 10LPP | 141.91 | 4.34 | 32.67 fps/W |
| Galaxy S8 (Snapdragon 835) | 10LPE | 108.20 | 3.45 | 31.31 fps/W |
| Mate 20 Pro (Kirin 980) | N7 | 135.75 | 4.64 | 29.25 fps/W |
| Galaxy S8 (Exynos 8895) | 10LPE | 121.00 | 5.86 | 20.65 fps/W |
T-Rex also shows a big increase in power consumption, over 1W worse than the Snapdragon 865.
Power-hungry Snapdragon 865+?
Overall, the ROG Phone III’s disappointing thermals and rather odd and worse sustained performance figures seem to be explained by the new SoC’s vastly increased power consumption characteristics. I made sure that this wasn’t just a measurement fluke, both in regards to power and the sustained performance figures and went ahead and retested a past phone such as the Mi 10 Pro, and I got the very same results. The regular non-gaming Snapdragon 865 phone was just cooler than the ROG Phone III, and was able to maintain higher performance over prolonged periods of time than the ASUS device.
Yes, the AeroCooler does help with the dissipation of heat, but in absolute terms, that’s a quite high price to pay in order to get a tiny advantage over other devices which don’t require any extra cooling.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
71 Comments
View All Comments
ArcadeEngineer - Friday, August 28, 2020 - link
I don't get this idea that bluetooth headphones are somehow more convenient than wired ones. Having another charger to juggle outlets on is the opposite of convenient.Tchamber - Friday, August 28, 2020 - link
I use my headphones all day work. For fun, I can listen to music, whatever. But I'm standing, walking, bending over and leaning in my CnC mill all day long, and having a cord was a hassle for me. That's pretty much the only place I listen to my phone. For me, it's no hassle having one more plug, especially when my LG Tones last two days at work.ads295 - Saturday, August 29, 2020 - link
High five from someone who owns two Swiss-types :-)flyingpants265 - Sunday, August 30, 2020 - link
Of course it's not a f****** hassle.The reason for deleting headphone jack is to sell wireless headphones, it is a multi-billion dollar market on its own. This is a tech website, everyone should know this by now.
Comments about removing the 3.5 jack, have been bought and paid for. Haha. What I mean is, Corporations have successfully used money for advertising and other various influences to ultimately engineer legions of smooth-brained human beings to tell me that plugging in my headphones is bad. Yeah, ok. I'll do anything you want. Why don't you just sodomize me too while you're at it?
Great_Scott - Monday, August 31, 2020 - link
The good news here is that there's a cottage industry of USB-C sound cards with 3.5 jack support for phones like this. And the huge battery means that you wouldn't need to charge it at the same time...s.yu - Wednesday, September 2, 2020 - link
You don't. Because there are two C ports. As long as there exists flagships with headphone jacks or two C ports, I will not buy one with one C port no jack.Quantumz0d - Friday, August 28, 2020 - link
Tell me does any of those BT sets have a good driver to boot, and then tell me whether any of them support AptX technology to be able to play my FLAC files / 24 Bit files or Can they work without an app always to function.Dude I have a V30 with me, the ESS DAC in that is not possible to be beaten by any company, I even have a Modi stack with me for monitors, and I can plug in my IEMs, Monitors, HD600s and I don't have to fiddle with some stupid charging box and worry about them, my IEMs are Triple Drivers with Hybrid technology. And you say you want Audio fidelity ? nice joke esp with Power Beats ? Muddy Bass technology is what they have.
I'm sorry there's none of the BT technology which makes any aspect from Sound quality, Fidelity, Convenience & Price to Performance, there are NO BT sets in mainstream that we can buy which have stunning audio performance you need to shell out for MMCX, like Shures.
Let me tell you one more thing, my phone has BT as well, and I can buy any BT set I want and a 3.5mm enabled any of the ChiFi or Japanese or European IEMs/Cans. Also instead of that overpriced Powerbeats Apple set go and buy an RHA T20 wireless, it has AptX, great battery, superior sound, superior build quality and have 3.5mm wire also.
vol.2 - Friday, August 28, 2020 - link
you're just walking into a dumb argument here. people are allowed to like their specific wired headphones and they should be able to use them if they want to. i have both; i use the bluetooth for calls and watching youtube, i use one of my many pairs of wired headphones for music.Tchamber - Friday, August 28, 2020 - link
Sure, I didn't think I was arguing though. I get it, wired headphones sound better.Lolimaster - Sunday, August 30, 2020 - link
Thing is, the two technologies can coexist till the end of time. Point is, there's no excuse to remove the jack from a phone or worse, from a tablet (S7 line). Then ironically, gigantic camera bumps are protruding from phones in futile attempt to keep the rest of the phone "slim". 0.9 or 1cm thicc phones are perfectly fine, that's around my S9 + cover included and that phone feels way more secure in the hand than the stock 0.85cm.