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
Friendly0Fire - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
I looked for a good replacement for my Nexus S which also had good sound quality and damn that's a hard task especially in NA. I just couldn't find anything short of ordering an international SGS4 and that's just way too expensive.It always makes me sad that we strive for these huge and pretty screens but entirely botch the audio outputs in most smartphones.
kwrzesien - Tuesday, August 27, 2013 - link
Second this. A comparison to tablets would be a great contrast too...we find the iPad 3 headphone out to a Yamaha/Klipsch system superior to any phone (iphones and Androids), would be interested to see the results of the Nexus and Note tablets. Maybe including a comparison of Bluetooth (3/4) and Wi-Fi wireless sound too.tuxRoller - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
No comment about its superior dynamic range? To my eye, it looked better than even the pureview 1028.Of course, you can't get past the moire artifacts, and lower spatial resolution.
Dan123 - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
How about the standby efficiency and how it affects battery life. I've seen some reports that it's not so good. You mentioned in the conclusion that you compared battery life without and without the touchless controls, I'd be interested to see how this feature affects standby efficiency.PC Perv - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
I can't get over the whole irony around the mid-range phone and mid-range screen size. I thought the criteria used to determine "high-end," "mid-range" was the price. The reviewer says this phone is first high-end phone that doesn't sport a large screen, then turn around to say the price is a bit high. Can you get that? It is a high-end phone but the problem is that it's priced as one.Too funny.
Sm0kes - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
I think your missing the meaning of "high-end". A high-end phone is typically in reference to hardware specifications, design, construction quality, etc.. While this is typically directly related to price (bleeding edge tech and industrial processes cost more), a high price does not automatically mean quality.Also, the facts are pretty clear (for whatever reason) that in the last couple of generations the larger phones tend to have better specs than there smaller counterparts (e.g., HTC One vs. HTC One Mini).
Mondozai - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
I think you're missing the point.Your sentence:
"While this is typically directly related to price (bleeding edge tech and industrial processes cost more), a high price does not automatically mean quality."
Which is right, but why do you later not connect this statement with the original comment you were replying to? The Moto X is specced like a 2012 phone but is priced like a high-end 2013 phone, especially as the LG G2 is coming out in a matter of weeks and the Note 3 is announced within just 9 days. That doesn't make it a bad phone, but there's a disconnect on the pricing.
kwrzesien - Tuesday, August 27, 2013 - link
The new gold iPhone will be the *only* high-end phone when it comes out.Honest Accounting - Monday, September 16, 2013 - link
What makes the specs 2012? Number of CPU cores? screen resolution? ...mammaldood - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
Does the Moto X support aptX like other Motorolas?