Moto X Review
by Brian Klug on August 26, 2013 1:30 PM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Qualcomm
- MSM8960
- Motorola
- Android
- Mobile
- Android 4.2
- Moto X
GPU Performance
By Anand Shimpi
Although there’s a CPU core count difference between the MSM8960Pro and the APQ8064 Snapdragon 600 platforms we’ve tested, on the GPU front both use the same IP block: Adreno 320.
The max GPU frequency on the Moto X is 400MHz, compared to 450MHz for the APQ8064 Snapdragon 600 based Galaxy S 4. The difference in GPU frequency is small, and Android games typically have a large CPU bound component so it isn’t totally unfeasible for the Moto X to be among the fastest Adreno 320 phones on the market.
Looking at 3DMark we see just that. The Moto X is the fastest Android phone we’ve tested here. The advantage has nothing to do with GPU frequency however, if we look at CPU frequency over time it’s clear what’s going on.
3DMark
The graphs below show a full 3DMark Ice Storm run, including demo, graphics and physics tests (in that order):
The Moto X’s CPU cores are running at 1.7GHz for all of the 3D tests, and only drop down to lower frequencies during the physics test. The SGS4 by comparison has more cores, running at ~1GHz for most of the benchmark. Given the more CPU bound nature of 3DMark, the Moto X manages to pull ahead.
GFXBench 2.7
BaseMark X and GFXBench 2.7 on the other hand shift the workload to a more GPU bound workload, and we see the Moto X take a couple of steps back.
Basemark X
Epic Citadel
Epic Citadel and other native resolution benchmarks benefit from the 720p panel, in addition to the CPU frequency advantages.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
105 Comments
View All Comments
PC Perv - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
Same for the screen. It's not as if everyone is in publishing industry. Human eyes are not limited to sRGB. Colors can be accurate or inaccurate, but there is no right or wrong ones. The author talks as if having larger gamut than sRGB in and of itself is always a negative. Ever looked into the ocean and be marveled at the nature's wonder?Friendly0Fire - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
It is a negative if the software is not aware that the gamut is larger (hint: it isn't), causing incorrect colors.I doubt anyone at AnandTech would spit on an AdobeRGB screen if the OS and all software handled it properly, but that's just not happened and probably won't for the foreseeable future. In the meantime, accurate colors are better than higher gamut.
MartinT - Tuesday, August 27, 2013 - link
I'd argue that a large portion of what remains as a debate on optimal screen size is down to one particular supplier with considerable market share in the US not providing a model anywhere even close to what Brian (and the market) have zeroed in on as optimal.This is where Samsung's policy of trying absolutely everything comes real handy to anyone interested in cellphone trends.
quickbunnie - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
Brian Klug didn't think he'd like the Moto X. After using it, Brian Klug liked the Moto X.Translation: This phone is frickin awesome!
Brian Klug - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
I like it a whole lot more than I thought I would, still using it! :)-Brian
Fiebre - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
I wish you guys could do a battery test on the Droid maxx. I would really appreciate it.icrf - Tuesday, August 27, 2013 - link
I second this point. I'm thus far assuming that, industrial design aside, all Moto X points apply to Droid Maxx, except battery life. The Verge posted their review and said the new Droid Maxx falls short of last year's Droid Razr Maxx despite having an inflated battery life number in the marketing. That said, everyone else's battery tests seem to do silly things like not calibrating the display to a standard, which means the tests are neigh useless. We need Anandtech's superior consistency.Honest Accounting - Sunday, September 15, 2013 - link
The battery test here isn't as "objective" as the reviewer claims. It uses a fixed "200 nits" screen brightness, which will favour current LCD technology (and Apple in particular) over OLED . To be credible the screen brightness on the battery test should be a percentage of maximum screen brightness.geniekid - Wednesday, August 28, 2013 - link
But would you prefer using the Moto X or the HTC One?Solandri - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
I was a bit confused by the flash read/write performance charts. The standard in reviews seems to be to order them sequential r/w, then random r/w. I did a double take, then realized you'd ordered them write random/sequential, then read random/sequential. Different, but no big deal.Then I did a triple take and realized you'd ordered them write random/sequential, then read sequential/random. Coincidentally, this ordering is best-to-worst for the Moto X.
I trust your site's reviews enough to believe this was purely a coincidence, and that you switched the ordering because you led off by talking about the F2FS filesystem's write speed improvement (with the read speeds maintaining the traditional sequential/random order). But if you're going to switch around the order for the write speeds, you should switch the order of the read speeds to be consistent. The current ordering is not logical, and it gives the appearance of bias in favor of the Moto X.