The New Motorola Moto X (2nd Gen) Review
by Joshua Ho on September 17, 2014 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Motorola
- Android
- Mobile
CPU and General Performance
By now, the choice of SoC has become a major focus in every smartphone. While it may not be clear how to use more compute with every generation, it’s generally accepted that stronger CPU and GPU performance is better, especially if it means that there is a power advantage in race to sleep tasks. In the case of the new Moto X we see a Snapdragon 801 SoC with CPU clocked at 2.5 GHz and a GPU clocked at 578 MHz. At this point, there's really not too much to talk about in this SoC as we've reviewed multiple devices with the same exact part.
Currently, our test suite relies upon a combination of browser and gaming benchmarks to get a good idea of total performance. However, it’s important to note that the Android results are only comparable to other Android phones as the stock browser will have specific optimizations that aren’t found in Chrome. We’ll start with the browser benchmarks first.
In the browser benchmarks, we see that the new Moto X falls right where we expect it to for the Snapdragon 801. It's plenty fast, and I don't expect any differences in CPU performance between Snapdragon 801 and 805 devices. This is unlikely to be a point of differentiation until Snapdragon 810 and beyond come into play. We'll take a look at Basemark OS II next, which is a general system performance benchmark.
Here, we once again see that there's not much different in terms of performance. We'll turn to the gaming benchmarks next to get a good idea of what to expect from the GPU.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
179 Comments
View All Comments
Jon Tseng - Wednesday, September 17, 2014 - link
Nice write-up on the semi content.One thing worth mentioning though might be the Moto Maker customisation options (which we're even getting in the UK!). Some of the premium leather/wood options definitely make the phone stand-out from competition (in a classy way, I might add).
semo - Thursday, September 18, 2014 - link
And once you get over oh la la nonsense you will wonder why you can't buy a more powerful aftermarket battery and why 1080p video recording is a chocolate teapot of a feature without an SD slot.It will be too late by then as you would have parted with your cash and voted for this trend to continue with your wallet. These nice things are only there to distract you from the planned obsolescence.
T1beriu - Wednesday, September 17, 2014 - link
I think the contrast graph is missing.JoshHo - Wednesday, September 17, 2014 - link
Infinite contrast would break the graph. :)s44 - Wednesday, September 17, 2014 - link
A small point... is it correct that only the *Sprint* version will have all the bands for full T-Mo operation when their version of 700mhz (Band 12) finally rolls out? I see Band 17 (due to be rolled into 12 at some point) listed on the GSM/Pure, and though perhaps a baseband update could enable 12, I know better than to expect that without an official announcement.Should full-price T-Mo buyers really be getting Sprint's X instead?
gg555 - Wednesday, September 24, 2014 - link
There's a lot of confusion out there about this. Also, given that Motorola tweeted a few days ago that there would be no Moto X for Sprint, it's not clear if model XT1092 actually exists or will ever be released.As far as I can see, only in this AnandTech review and a post at Android Central is there any mention of an XT1092 model. Also, on the Motorola site the XT1095 and XT1097 are not listed has supporting identical bands, as shown here at AnandTech. The XT1095 (Pure Edition) is show dropping a few of the LTE bands--which makes no sense to make a separate model that all it does is disable a couple bands.
Anyway, if the XT1092 does ever come to exist, as you note, it would be the best for T-Mobile because it supports LTE band 12 (700 Mhz)--which is just bizarre, given that the Pure Edition is being currently sold as the model for T-Mobile.
There's a thread in the Motorola forums where a company representative says they are aware of the confusion and looking into what is the deal with the bands on these phones, but no clarification has come yet.
https://forums.motorola.com/posts/d766a5d90a?page=...
djw39 - Wednesday, September 17, 2014 - link
Is there any thought that if the battery testing methodology ignores differences in devices due to the job scheduling setup and cell signal/wifi reception, that it is not giving the full picture? I'm sure the people at Motorola who worked on the antenna tuning are disappointed that you specifically exclude this from your tests.It seems like the LG G2 is a near-identical device with advantages over Moto in battery & camera. LG should just push their new UI skin out to that phone and keep selling it.
Impulses - Wednesday, September 17, 2014 - link
They made a G3 Mini or whatever that's basically a G2 rehash... Probably has a smaller battery tho, I forget.Problem with taking into account a job scheduler, varying signal conditions, etc is that it makes it near impossible to create a repeatable test with consistent results.
They could add ADDITIONAL tests like: battery life with borderline signal strength or battery life with a consistent sync job... But that would add to their already long battery of tests.
Plus where do you draw the parameters for tests like that (same signal strength for all phones or same scenario with varying low signal strength), and how do you keep it consistent (cell towers have varying loads, get upgraded, etc).
I suppose they could use that signal analyzer with the Faraday box Brian had for a while but I dunno if that could simulate a data traffic load.
leoblaze9 - Wednesday, September 17, 2014 - link
No love for the xperia z/z1/z2/z3 cameras at all??I was under the impression that they were among the best of the best cameras to be had in smartphones especially for android phones
adityarjun - Wednesday, September 17, 2014 - link
@Joshua Ho - A request: if possible please do the battery tests again once Android L is out for this phone.