Nokia X synthetic benchmarks
Here is another teaser for our upcoming Nokia X review – benchmark scores! We were able to make some tests
shortly after the Nokia X was announced on the MWC in Barcelona, but
this time around we can finally run all benchmarks on a retail-ready
unit.
The Nokia X is powered by a dual-core 1GHz Cortex-A5 processor coupled with half a gig RAM, which should be barely enough to run a standard Android Jelly Bean version. Luckily Nokia has done some great work optimizing the Android OS and its proprietary launcher, so the final OS is relatively smooth and snappy, with almost no visible lag. The apps from the Nokia Store run great too.
The GPU in charge of graphics is Adreno 203. It is probably the slowest GPU currently in mass production, but it should be enough to handle less demanding games running on WVGA resolution. Unfortunately GFXBenchmark, 3DMark and Epic Citadel are still incompatible with Nokia X, so you’ll have to rely on the all-in-one test scores.
There aren’t many benchmarks available in the Nokia Store, but we managed to sideload a few, so we are able to provide you with comparable scores.
The single-core performance, as usual, we measure with the BenchmarkPi test. The 1.0 GHz Cortex-A5 processor quite expectedly hit the bottom of our charts, twice slower than its Cortex-A9 siblings and 50% behind the Cortex-A7 cores.
GeekBench 3 tests the multi-core performance and Nokia X occupied the
last spot in our all-time chart. However its performance wasn’t too bad
considering that all other tested devices are way more expensive than
it.
The all-in-one tests AnTuTu and Quadrant gauge the overall hardware
performance, including graphics and RAM bandwidth. Nokia X, being the
only Cortex-A5 device we’ve put through the newest versions of the apps
once again finished last on both tests, but again the gap was a bit
lower than we expected.
Finally, we ran SunSpider and BrowserMark web benchmarks on the
default Nokia X browser. The Nokia X punched way above its weight here,
beating some quite expensive devices in both SunSpider and BrowserMark.
The Nokia X did come out last on most of the tests we ran, but given its
modest price that was to be expected. If anything the smartphone does
better than expected given its standing in the pecking order. And as we
told you the phone handles its platform very well and that’s what
matters in the end. Yes, some hiccups or bottlenecks may occur if you
put huge pressure on the Nokia X but overall – the UI experience and
performance is solid.
The Nokia X is powered by a dual-core 1GHz Cortex-A5 processor coupled with half a gig RAM, which should be barely enough to run a standard Android Jelly Bean version. Luckily Nokia has done some great work optimizing the Android OS and its proprietary launcher, so the final OS is relatively smooth and snappy, with almost no visible lag. The apps from the Nokia Store run great too.
The GPU in charge of graphics is Adreno 203. It is probably the slowest GPU currently in mass production, but it should be enough to handle less demanding games running on WVGA resolution. Unfortunately GFXBenchmark, 3DMark and Epic Citadel are still incompatible with Nokia X, so you’ll have to rely on the all-in-one test scores.
There aren’t many benchmarks available in the Nokia Store, but we managed to sideload a few, so we are able to provide you with comparable scores.
The single-core performance, as usual, we measure with the BenchmarkPi test. The 1.0 GHz Cortex-A5 processor quite expectedly hit the bottom of our charts, twice slower than its Cortex-A9 siblings and 50% behind the Cortex-A7 cores.
Benchmark Pi
Lower is better
- Samsung Galaxy Note II 305
- Alcatel One Touch Hero 308
- Huawei Ascend Mate 347
- Huawei Ascend P6 348
- LG Optimus G 353
- Sony Xperia C 374
- Motorola Moto G 392
- Sony Xperia M 400
- LG Nexus 4 431
- Samsung Galaxy Core LTE 466
- Nokia X 676
GeekBench 3
Lower is better
- LG Optimus G 1465
- Alcatel One Touch Hero 1321
- Huawei Ascend P6 1315
- LG Nexus 4 1288
- Motorola Moto G 1120
- Sony Xperia C 1079
- Oppo R819 1047
- HTC One mini 887
- Samsung Galaxy Core LTE 647
- Samsung Galaxy Ace 3 564
- Nokia X 421
AnTuTu 4
Higher is better
- Motorola Moto G 17214
- LG Optimus G 16943
- Huawei Ascend Mate 15714
- Alcatel One Touch Hero 15667
- Oppo Find 5 15167
- Sony Xperia C 13948
- Samsung Galaxy Core LTE 13109
- Sony Xperia M 9902
- Nokia X 7514
SunSpider
Lower is better
- Samsung Galaxy Note II 972
- LG Optimus G Pro 1011
- Samsung Galaxy Grand 2 1063
- HTC One 1124
- Alcatel One Touch Hero 1181
- Motorola Moto G 1308
- LG Optimus G 1251
- Sony Xperia Z 1336
- Oppo R819 1423
- HTC Butterfly 1433
- Alcatel One Touch Hero 1646
- Huawei Ascend Mate 1741
- Samsung Galaxy Core LTE 1680
- Sony Xperia M 1867
- Nokia X 2363
- Huawei Ascend P6 3858
BrowserMark 2
Lower is better
- Motorola Moto G 2562
- Samsung Galaxy Grand 2 2432
- Samsung Galaxy S4 mini 2314
- Alcatel One Touch Hero 2096
- LG Optimus G 2048
- Sony Xperia Z 2093
- Sony Xperia C 1984
- Sony Xperia L 1809
- Nokia X 1729
- Sony Xperia M 1642
- Samsung Galaxy S III 1247
- Samsung Galaxy Core LTE 1100
- Huawei Ascend P6 974
- Samsung Galaxy S III mini 714
0 comments:
Post a Comment