Performance preview: The Moto X sports a great GPU, respectable CPU

We kick the tires of the Snapdragon at the heart of Motorola's new phone.

Read the whole story

 

[Deleted member 174040]

A subjective judgement, perhaps, but that's not a good look.

 

[OrangeCream]

Yes it is, a good look. The only thing better would be tortoiseshell.

 

[Black_Obsidian]

That look would go great with my station wagon...

 

[Stone]

Do they offer a rich Corinthian leather option?

 

[flunk]

I think this phone is marketed at the mass market, not techies. What does the mass market want? Good real-world performance, good battery life, reasonable price, pretty colors and lots and lots of features. Moto X seems to satisfy all those requirements.

This is why the Samsung Galaxy S line sells so well, they include the kitchen sink and a lot of the people who buy them don't even know (or care) what sort of SOC they have inside. It will be interesting to see if these sell well or not.

 

[killerhurtalot]

I'm not personally a fan of the styling on the Moto X but I can see where they are trying to head to. I have a lot of friends who are "hip" and likes to clad their phones in a wooden case.

But why on earth would google put a 1080x720 screen on there with a dual core processor! I know it'll probably improve battery life... but every other phone in the same price range out class it in both screen quality and hardware... Even with the improvements in chrome tailored to the Moto X, The phone will still seem sluggish to other phones with more powerful processors on some of the more CPU intensive tasks... I really don't think this phone would measure up to Galaxy S4 and HTC One in the long run...



On the side note.

"Most rumors point to the phone having a 4.7-inch screen. Many publications have reported its resolution as 1184×720 based on leaked screenshots of Android system reporting apps, but these apps commonly mis-report true display resolution because they exclude the pixels consumed by Android's software navigation buttons. I'll eat my hat if this isn't a run-of-the-mill 1280×720 display, which at 4.7 inches would have 312 pixels per inch."

Can we get a official response?

 

[CrookedKnight]

killerhurtalot[/url]":3p4cfp94]But why on earth would google put a 1080x720 screen on there with a dual core processor!

Because it's "good enough" for real-world performance -- the benchmarks sure aren't bad and a 720p screen is about all you need to make the pixels invisible at 4.7" -- and you get markedly better battery life by not pumping the phone full of pixels and gigahertz and cores just for the sake of higher numbers on the spec sheet.

 

[Grimmjowww]

Motorola plans to sell plastic tokens that can clip onto clothing—if the tab is within a few feet if the Moto X, no password necessary. (The tokens use NFC technology, built into the phones.) The Moto X will also let you set up password-free “safe zones” like your car.

 

[Deleted member 174040]

killerhurtalot[/url]":3pdajrbs]every other phone in the same price range out class it in both screen quality and hardware...

But when people walk into the store they're going to see colored phones, not specs.

That will appeal to a certain sizable audience.

 

[eallan]

AT&T says that the full off-contract retail price for the 16GB and 32GB Moto X will be $575 and $630, respectively.

That's fucking hilarious.

 

[ranald]

You also have to remember that that lowly 'dual core' processor has the same exact cores (or better) and GPU as the competing flagship phones you seem to think are so superior.

The speed you see will really depend on your workload.

CrookedKnight[/url]":155cojf7]

killerhurtalot[/url]":155cojf7]But why on earth would google put a 1080x720 screen on there with a dual core processor!

Because it's "good enough" for real-world performance -- the benchmarks sure aren't bad and a 720p screen is about all you need to make the pixels invisible at 4.7" -- and you get markedly better battery life by not pumping the phone full of pixels and gigahertz and cores just for the sake of higher numbers on the spec sheet.

 

[mnisdo]

Not a bad phone.. and not an exceptionally good phone. I guess its Ok, but not worth the hype around it.

 

[Danrarbc]

And keep in mind this 720p AMOLED panel supposedly isn't Pentile. So it'll look better than most 720p displays.

 

[thomsirveaux]

killerhurtalot[/url]":167bjxn8]I'm not personally a fan of the styling on the Moto X but I can see where they are trying to head to. I have a lot of friends who are "hip" and likes to clad their phones in a wooden case.

But why on earth would google put a 1080x720 screen on there with a dual core processor! I know it'll probably improve battery life... but every other phone in the same price range out class it in both screen quality and hardware... Even with the improvements in chrome tailored to the Moto X, The phone will still seem sluggish to other phones with more powerful processors on some of the more CPU intensive tasks... I really don't think this phone would measure up to Galaxy S4 and HTC One in the long run...



On the side note.

"Most rumors point to the phone having a 4.7-inch screen. Many publications have reported its resolution as 1184×720 based on leaked screenshots of Android system reporting apps, but these apps commonly mis-report true display resolution because they exclude the pixels consumed by Android's software navigation buttons. I'll eat my hat if this isn't a run-of-the-mill 1280×720 display, which at 4.7 inches would have 312 pixels per inch."

Can we get a official response?

It is 1280x720. I'll tweak the article, and my hat shall remain uneaten!

 

[ranald]

If that price only applies when you buy it *through* AT&T, I wouldn't be surprised. What the carriers label as full retail for a device is often exaggerated.

What the price is buying it 'direct' from Motorola/Google is a different story. If they're selling it for ~$600, they're nuts. That's about double the price I suspect it would take for this phone to be what Moto needs it to be, which is a high-volume smartphone for the masses.

eallan[/url]":37i9ctof]AT&T says that the full off-contract retail price for the 16GB and 32GB Moto X will be $575 and $630, respectively.

That's fucking hilarious.

 

[bomana]

Note that the "on-screen" benchmark comparisons are worthless as the Moto X is rendering a screen with less pixels (720p vs 1080p of the S4).

The "off-screen" benches suggest the gpu is essentially identical. Of course that means Moto X users will probably see smooth frame rates as the gpu is less likely to be a bottleneck on those phones.

 

[thomsirveaux]

bomana[/url]":cndgn2va]Note that the "on-screen" benchmark comparisons are worthless as the Moto X is rendering a screen with less pixels (720p vs 1080p of the S4).

The "off-screen" benches suggest the gpu is essentially identical. Of course that means Moto X users will probably see smooth frame rates as the gpu is less likely to be a bottleneck on those phones.

If by "worthless" you mean "representative of how actual games will run" I guess you're right. The onscreen/offscreen tests measure different things, which is why we include both.

 

[Deleted member 330960]

CrookedKnight[/url]":2jljf9ya]

killerhurtalot[/url]":2jljf9ya]But why on earth would google put a 1080x720 screen on there with a dual core processor!

Because it's "good enough" for real-world performance -- the benchmarks sure aren't bad and a 720p screen is about all you need to make the pixels invisible at 4.7" -- and you get markedly better battery life by not pumping the phone full of pixels and gigahertz and cores just for the sake of higher numbers on the spec sheet.

From the Verge review of the screen it is pretty poor. Pink-ish and some weird RGB layout like the Note 2.
EDIT: Not PenTile.

 

[jimCA]

Stone[/url]":33laselt]Do they offer a rich Corinthian leather option?

And a Shatner Ringtone: KHAAAAANNNN!!!!!

------
ok, maybe a little esoteric: Ricardo Montalban had a famous role in a chrysler commerical extolling the virtues of corinthian leather

 

[hmaarrfk]

RockDaMan[/url]":q6atyg55]

killerhurtalot[/url]":q6atyg55]every other phone in the same price range out class it in both screen quality and hardware...

But when people walk into the store they're going to see colored phones, not specs.

That will appeal to a certain sizable audience.

Unfortunately, in most carrier stores, all you get to see is a crummy plastic model of the phone. If you actually get to have a real phone, it will be in a HUGE metalic anti-theft protector so you don't actually get to feel the phone in your bear hands.

I wish other companies had the pull Apple does. That way they could force mobile operators not to ruin their phones with fake plastic look-alikes

 

[vudaful]

Major disappointment... I hoped that this phone would get me to upgrade from my Galaxy Nexus, but after seeing the cost, what a joke.

 

[mstark90]

I wanted Antarctic Blue.

 

[Chuckstar]

jimCA[/url]":8mv4i14s]
ok, maybe a little esoteric: Ricardo Montalban had athe famous role in athe chrysler commerical extolling the virtues of corinthian leather

[/pedantry]

 

[ranald]

Da plane boss! Da plane!

Chuckstar[/url]":31089a8a]

jimCA[/url]":31089a8a]
ok, maybe a little esoteric: Ricardo Montalban had athe famous role in athe chrysler commerical extolling the virtues of corinthian leather

[/pedantry]

 

[aaronwe]

I guess this means it all comes down to battery life.

If Moto can give me equal performance to the S4 and Nexus 4 with twice the battery life, and the always-listening feature, I'm sold.

 

[AreWeThereYeti]

"married to what are apparently separate 'contextual computing processor' and 'natural language processor' units. What those two extra units do is still a bit mysterious..."

Well, if it is true that you can invoke Google Now with voice commands at any time, even when the phone is "asleep", then one thing we can be sure of is that those two chips are busy consuming power all the time. I'm interested in how they can be doing voice recognition all the time without any noticeable power draw; that's kind of mind-boggling. But I'm prepared to believe it after seeing my phone use no noticeable CPU while Google Now is sitting there listening for me to say "Google". But how in the hell....

 

[ltonars]

vudaful[/url]":2aulboqm]Major disappointment... I hoped that this phone would get me to upgrade from my Galaxy Nexus, but after seeing the cost, what a joke.

There is suppose to be a Google Play version coming. I suspect just like the Nexus 4 the off-contract and unlocked price for that will be lower that what the carriers are/will charge. Probably at least $100 cheaper.

The other question is how long Motorola and carriers will keep these are $199. In 6 months could be down to $149 or $99. Priced at $199 for the initial wave and then dropping after that. Frankly, I think I saw an ad for buy-one-get-one-free for G4 the other day. The shelf life of these top end prices seems to be short.

 

[ltonars]

AreWeThereYeti[/url]":2j60yc67]"married to what are apparently separate 'contextual computing processor' and 'natural language processor' units. What those two extra units do is still a bit mysterious..."

Well, if it is true that you can invoke Google Now with voice commands at any time, even when the phone is "asleep", then one thing we can be sure of is that those two chips are busy consuming power all the time. I'm interested in how they can be doing voice recognition all the time without any noticeable power draw; that's kind of mind-boggling.

The same way the specialized function units in the GPU can render a movie for hours at low battery consumption . What they probably have is something that is closer to a DSP that has may even have some fixed function units so that it really does Natural Language understanding well and that is it. It can't run general programs well. It basically takes input and only looks for the exact match of that specific phrase ( which might even be cached in the core if it is small enough. ) It is only trying to find 3 specific words. That's it. Everything else is a non match and immediately thrown away.

Cellphones are typically never off. The unit controlling the radio is always on also. But that too is very limited, narrow function.

 

[Deleted member 174040]

hmaarrfk[/url]":kj07itz7]

I wish other companies had the pull Apple does.

Apple didn't always have it, and how they got it is well known. Any one of them is welcome to do the same thing Apple did.

 

[Sifaka]

I am surprised to see that you would compare it to the Samsung phones after they were busted optimizing the phone to run benchmarks faster than it would thermal throttle most applications. I know they were only caught up to this point doing this on the Exynos powered model, but you would think trust would have to be earned back.

 

[goglen]

killerhurtalot[/url]":kuijpsre]The phone will still seem sluggish to other phones with more powerful processors on some of the more CPU intensive tasks... I really don't think this phone would measure up to Galaxy S4 and HTC One in the long run...

Not everybody runs CPU intensive tasks. I'm a geek, but have never really had a desire to game (a bit of Fruit Ninja) on my phone in the last 1.5 years. My wife never does more than web and texting with her Droid Charge (it got voted out of the Droid family, its a sucky phone).

Sure, our kids run games - but these are kid games, not CPU intensive. This would be a good replacement for my wife.

 

[carlisimo]

Google Maps seems to be the most CPU-intensive app I use. Lately its performance has been lamentable on my One S (dual core, 1.5GHz). I'm not sure if that's the bottleneck, but it's been sluggish enough to annoy me.

 

[sword_9mm]

thomsirveaux[/url]":3rcb5d40]

bomana[/url]":3rcb5d40]Note that the "on-screen" benchmark comparisons are worthless as the Moto X is rendering a screen with less pixels (720p vs 1080p of the S4).

The "off-screen" benches suggest the gpu is essentially identical. Of course that means Moto X users will probably see smooth frame rates as the gpu is less likely to be a bottleneck on those phones.

If by "worthless" you mean "representative of how actual games will run" I guess you're right. The onscreen/offscreen tests measure different things, which is why we include both.

well, it's android so "actual games" really aren't a thing.

 

[sporkme]

carlisimo[/url]":10mb55lq]Google Maps seems to be the most CPU-intensive app I use. Lately its performance has been lamentable on my One S (dual core, 1.5GHz). I'm not sure if that's the bottleneck, but it's been sluggish enough to annoy me.

My 3Gs is really ripe for replacement, but I was truly shocked by how well Google Maps runs on it. Totally usable as a car GPS unit, and way better than stock ios5 app. It also somehow knows which direction I'm going, which totally baffles me because the stock app can never seem to fix on a direction in-car.

That said, comments like yours make me wonder about android performance in general. I really want to try something non-apple next, but it's got to feel orders of magnitude faster than my current phone.

I really want to like this Moto-X though, and I'm hoping att's off contract price is inflated.

 

[Sajuuk]

killerhurtalot[/url]":3o8rpri4]

But why on earth would google put a 1080x720 screen on there with a dual core processor! I know it'll probably improve battery life... but every other phone in the same price range out class it in both screen quality and hardware... Even with the improvements in chrome tailored to the Moto X, The phone will still seem sluggish to other phones with more powerful processors on some of the more CPU intensive tasks... I really don't think this phone would measure up to Galaxy S4 and HTC One in the long run...

In raw specs, maybe, but the Moto X seems to be pulling ahead in all of these benchmark tests. What would make it seem sluggish to other phones? What actually surprises me is the One seeming to perform so behind in benchmarks, I actually saw the One X come out on top of it in a benchmark lineup shown at another site. I should specify the web benchmarks, I must have skimmed over the Geekbench; judging by that though, memory seems to be consistently great, which is the biggest reasons android devices seem to become sluggish

 

[bigdrew172]

Any word on how long the battery will last? Motorola's long lasting batteries are what keeps me coming back to them. I send a lot of emails and do a lot of web surfing on my phone so im willing to give up a little in performance if it means im not looking for an outlet by 1pm everyday.

 

[Electroniclog]

Don't get me wrong, because I love Google products, but is it me or does the Moto X smell like a repackaged Nexus 4?

 

[logic_88]

Danrarbc[/url]":3gmlpbab]And keep in mind this 720p AMOLED panel supposedly isn't Pentile. So it'll look better than most 720p displays.

It's a SAMOLED panel, not SAMOLED+, so it's pentile.

Or at least that's what Brian Klug is reporting over at AnandTech.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7197/a-qu ... w-flagship

"The display on Moto X is a 4.7-inch 720p SAMOLED panel with the RGB subpixel arrangement (not a straight RGB stripe) we saw on the Samsung Galaxy Note 2, with a stacked green and red subpixel, and vertical blue subpixel. Motorola has used n–1 process Samsung AMOLED panels for a long time now, so this isn’t a surprise. It looks good and not incredibly blue, but I’ll have to get it under my measurement equipment to tell you exactly where it sits with regards to color accuracy."

 

[carlisimo]

sporkme[/url]":10hnmgfe]That said, comments like yours make me wonder about android performance in general. I really want to try something non-apple next, but it's got to feel orders of magnitude faster than my current phone.

I don't know what to tell you. I came over from the iOS side too (no iPhones, just iPod touches and the iPad2 I still use), and it's been a mixed bag. As much as I hate iTunes (the computer program) and the way iOS handles photo albums... I'm tempted to get an iPhone next time.

Other Android fans (most of my friends) tell me the problems I've had are either unusual or specific to HTC's Sense. I'm not giving up Sense though; it's the only way I've found to get a decent Chinese handwriting input that you can easily switch in and out of (still not as good as iOS's though). The One S was also pretty good for a midsized phone, which is rare in the Android realm. But not good enough - I think it's the 1GB of RAM that's holding it back. Or might be the CPU, I don't know. It's definitely slowed down over the 9 months I've had it. (It came out last April; at the time most of its specs were high end, excluding the screen with its middling resolution - which should only help performance, right?)

You should still try something new, though. It isn't all bad!