CPU and General Use Performance

Snapdragon is what Qualcomm calls its SoC, but the CPU itself is called Scorpion. Scorpion is very similar to ARM’s Cortex A8, but with potentially twice the Neon (SIMD FP) throughput. In day to day use however, I don’t expect to see a huge difference between the Scorpion and A8 CPU cores used by Qualcomm and TI respectively.

We’ll start with the targeted browser tests, first SunSpider. A javascript performance test, this benchmark is completely network independent but it measures the performance of the browser as well as the underlying hardware.

SunSpider shows the Droid X roughly on par with the Nexus One running Android 2.1, and a bit slower than the HTC offerings. This benchmark is as much of a software test as it is a hardware one since the move to Froyo (Android 2.2) cuts benchmark times in more than half.

The performance delta from the original Droid to the Droid X is extremely pronounced here. The Droid is just plain slow, and to think it wasn’t that long ago that we were begging manufacturers to use the Cortex A8. The X is a major step forward compared to last year’s high end smartphones.

Next up is the Rightware BrowserMark. This test combines JavaScript and HTML rendering performance:

BrowserMark puts the Droid X in the same league as other Android 2.1 phones. In terms of real world web browsing it doesn’t look like there’s any real difference between the OMAP 3630 and Qualcomm’s Snapdragon.

Turning an eye towards the real world we have a WiFi web page loading test. Here we’ve got a local copy of the AnandTech front page and we’re loading it over WiFi. Note that these results can’t be compared to previous tests as they are running in a slightly different environment than in previous reviews.

The lower level synthetic CPU tests mostly echo our findings thus far - there's very little difference in CPU performance between the OMAP 3630 and Qualcomm's Snapdragon.

The Linpack and Pi tests are very much compiler benchmarks as well as platform tests. We’ve actually had to remove the Froyo Nexus One results from the Linpack graph simply because they make the graph unreadable - Froyo is nearly 3x the speed of the fastest Android 2.1 phone here.

On a relatively level playing field, with all phones running Android 2.1, the Droid X is around twice the speed of the original Droid. The OMAP 3630 even holds a performance advantage over Snapdragon in this test. While Linpack as a workload isn’t very representative of what most people will do with their phones, it is a great FP and cache benchmark.

From a CPU and platform perspective, TI’s OMAP 3630 appears to be just as fast as Qualcomm’s Snapdragon SoC. The two perform very similarly across the board regardless of benchmark. The OMAP most visible advantage is in its GPU. The PowerVR SGX 530, especially running at 200MHz in the OMAP 3630, is at least 50% faster than the present day competition in other Android phones. It should be similar to performance offered by Apple’s A4.

The GPU Performance Showdown: Snapdragon vs. OMAP 3630 The OMAP e-Fuse & Motorola's Bootloader
Comments Locked

89 Comments

View All Comments

  • czesiu - Tuesday, July 20, 2010 - link

    great review!

    higher res version for this please:)
    http://images.anandtech.com/doci/3826/DROIDX-Anand...
  • Brian Klug - Tuesday, July 20, 2010 - link

    I'm actually going to dump all the screen comparison photos I've got (there are quite a few) into a gallery, then you can peruse at native resolution. Should be up in a little bit ;)

    -Brian
  • hatter_india - Tuesday, July 20, 2010 - link

    Fantastic review but I expect no less from AnandTech. But there are a couple of bloopers:

    1- OMAP 3630 is third mobile chip to use 45nm process. First is of course A4. But second is Samsung's Hummingbird, a chip that the korean company designed with help of Intrinsity. This chip is found in Galaxy S or its variants. Samsung is the same company that also tweaked A4, which incidentally is fabbed by Samsung. Too many coincidences ;-)

    2- A comparison to PowerVR SGX 540 found on Galaxy S would have been interesting as according to Samsung SGX 540 is almost three times more powerful than SGX535.

    3- Droid X should have also been compared with Galaxy S or any of its variants like Captivate, Vibrant etc
  • hatter_india - Tuesday, July 20, 2010 - link

    This line: Samsung is the same company that also tweaked A4, which incidentally is fabbed by Samsung

    Should read: Intrinsity is the same company that also tweaked A4, which incidentally is fabbed by Samsung
  • Goty - Tuesday, July 20, 2010 - link

    Does AT have any plans to review any of the Galaxy S phones? I just picked up a Captivate on Sunday and I'd love to see how it stacks up. I just ran the Neocore benchmark and got around 55 FPS, which speaks well of the GPU, but I'd like to see results from the other tests you guys do.
  • Brian Klug - Tuesday, July 20, 2010 - link

    Hey Goty,

    We definitely have plans to do reviews of all of the Galaxy S phones we can get our hands on. I'm working on getting them as soon as possible ;)

    I'm also pretty excited to explore that SoC and compare.

    -Brian
  • Ram21 - Tuesday, July 20, 2010 - link

    Really enjoyed this review. Keep up the great work! Being as thorough as you guys are really helps to make good decisions on purchases.
  • SonicIce - Tuesday, July 20, 2010 - link

    lol how long before we can attach an external mouse and keyboard to a phone to use it as a pc and play 3d games online with it
  • strikeback03 - Tuesday, July 27, 2010 - link

    How about this?

    http://www.androidcentral.com/dell-streak-logitech...
  • ltfields - Tuesday, July 20, 2010 - link

    Guys, another gold standard review. I may not be able to pick up an X because I'm still under contract with another carrier, but the reviews are riveting. Keep up the excellent work!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now