x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Intel Atom powered Lenovo IdeaPhone K900 benchmarks are astronomical

Intel Atom powered Lenovo IdeaPhone K900 benchmarks are astronomical

Posted: , by Nick T.

Tags :

Intel Atom powered Lenovo IdeaPhone K900 benchmarks are astronomical
Whoa! That Lenovo IdeaPhone K900 smartphone might be a lot more capable that we originally thought. Announced and displayed during CES 2013, it comes with a 2GHz dual-core Atom chip by Intel, which, according to benchmark results, packs some serious processing punch. People who had the chance to run AnTuTu on the device got results of 25,000 points and above, with a best score (so far) in the lower 27,000's. 

In comparison, the quad-core Snapdragon S4 Pro inside the HTC DROID DNA gets 14,000 points on average when benchmarked using AnTuTu, which is about as much as we get with the 1.6GHz Exynos 4412 inside the Samsung Galaxy Note II. Keep in mind that both of these use quad-core CPUs. Furthermore, while the average Lenovo IdeaPhone K900 benchmark score is already impressive, it could potentially go up even higher when a finalized version of the smartphone gets tested.

2GHz dual-core Intel Atom benchmark (left) and the XiaoMi Phone 2 vs the Lenovo IdeaPhone K900 (right)
2GHz dual-core Intel Atom benchmark (left) and the XiaoMi Phone 2 vs the Lenovo IdeaPhone K900 (right)

2GHz dual-core Intel Atom benchmark (left) and the XiaoMi Phone 2 vs the Lenovo IdeaPhone K900 (right)

Of course, there's always the chance of these benchmark results being a forgery. But if they're not, then all chip makers using ARM-based CPUs in their designs might be in for some serious competition. It would be also interesting to see how Intel's new dual-core Atom processor compares to Samsung's Exynos 5 Octa, but until the latter ends up inside a smartphone or a tablet, there's no way of knowing what it's capable of in real life. 

Thanks for sending this in!

66 Comments
  • Options
    Close






posted on 11 Jan 2013, 02:39 6

1. XPERIA-KNIGHT (unregistered)


NOOO WAY!! LOL that is crazy.....but also, does this mean the everyday usage will be smooth as butter in everything you throw at it? or is it "just" benchmark scores?

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 02:59 10

12. Retro-touch (Posts: 273; Member since: 24 Oct 2011)


Its just benchmark scores, it will just be as smooth as Nexus 4 (virtually no lag), beyond that Android itself will have to optimized further to eliminate lag completely and apps will then have to follow, Facebook still sucks till now even though its faster, for example

Benchmarks at this point are worthless, most of the high end phones even the octo core when it comes outs will perform similarly, with slight differences, seconds faster aren't really significant

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 04:20 9

25. hung2900 (Posts: 956; Member since: 02 Mar 2012)


About the score, the writer had a mistake "Snapdragon S4 Pro inside the HTC DROID DNA gets 14,000 points on average when benchmarked using AnTuTu, which is about as much as we get with the 1.6GHz Exynos 4412 inside the Samsung Galaxy Note II."

Actually these scores are Antutu 2.x.x, with Antutu 3.x.x, S4 Pro's score is about 19,500 - 21,000 and Note 2's score is about 17,500 - 19,000

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 05:45 2

37. k1ng617 (Posts: 264; Member since: 13 Oct 2009)


Yea my Note 2 stock ran 18000's all day

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 05:56

39. XPERIA-KNIGHT (unregistered)


can you provide proof of that?

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 16:10

61. Phullofphil (Posts: 801; Member since: 10 Feb 2009)


I just ran my Verizon note 2 once and got about 17500 wich is on par with other note 2's I took screen shots but I dont know how to post thise in my coments.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 07:01 4

43. SuperAndroidEvo (Posts: 4857; Member since: 15 Apr 2011)


Yeah I al totally with you on that one. I have no idea who has a HTC Droid DNA that gets below 19,500 on Antutu.

I hit 20,000 to 21,000 everytime on my HTC Droid DNA & that is at the STOCK clock of 1.5GHz.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 08:19 2

47. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


And this is where I call shenanigans.... not on you, on manufacturers and their fluffing of things for higher benchmarks. My Nexus4 which has a near identical hardware setup (krait quad pro @1500mhz, 2gig ram) and a lower resolution screen (720p vs 1080p) only gets about 16800 on Antutu.. I just ran it 3 times. All things being equal, I should have a higher score not a lower one since it takes a lot less power to push a 720p screen than it does a 1080p screen.

What do you get on Velamo? I'm running it right now.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 11:24

51. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


Well, the Adreno 320 in Nexus 4 is proved to perform lower than the one in Optimus G due to some thermal throttling going on.

Maybe the whole SoC has the same issue.
It would explain the difference in Antutu compared to the Optimus.

My stock S3 hits over 16000, btw

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 15:50 1

59. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


you have to break it down by category to see the differences. Normally the integer or I/O is fluffed by the manufacturer to boost the score. This being a nexus means its unaltered by manufacturer fluffing and should be as true a score as you can get.

Are you using a US SGS3 with a dual core krait?

here's the breakdown for my Nexus4
CPU integer - 3791
Ram - 2127
cpu float 1822
2d 1618
3d 6484
database IO 395
SD write 111
SD read 200
CPU frequency - 1296 x 4 cores

The fun thing is that I set the cpu to run at 1500mhz for high and low, so its still being overridden by something. i keep getting results saying that the test was performed at everything from 1100 to 1296... but no higher.

Looking at the score ranks, the highest nexus at stock frequency's score is 20500. dont know if its a stock kernel though.

Anyways, compare your scores.

posted on 12 Jan 2013, 03:47

62. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


Here, from a test I did today.
It's the Exynos version

http://i46.tinypic.com/1zob1wh.png

A fluffed integer?
I'm running the latest firmware with the multi window and stuff

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 03:25

15. 4.hour.uptime (Posts: 3; Member since: 11 Jan 2013)


Maybe...
but with 1 hour talk time
and 4 hour stand by time

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 04:38 3

30. abate (Posts: 43; Member since: 19 Dec 2012)


Look at this link.. Razr M (28nm S4 dual) vs Razr i (32nm Atom)
(Note all the hardware are same except the SoC(CPU).

engadget.com/2012/10/04/motorola-razr-i-review/

Wrap-up
01) Intel Atom entry offered a marginally faster response to most actions.

02) RAZR i booted in to Home Screen around 12 seconds ahead of the Snapdragon sibling.

03) On our battery rundown -- video playback, 50 percent brightness, WiFi and 3G on, social networks and email on sync -- Intel's iteration lasted nine hours, compared with eight hours for the RAZR M.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 05:11

35. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


That's pretty much what I would expect, as the single thread performance of an Atom Z2460 should be a lot higher than the Dual krait, more taking into account the high CPU clock.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 02:39 4

2. alterecho (Posts: 1098; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


Whoa! Performance per core is astronomical indeed! Even if the Exynos Octa is more powerful, it will have a tough fight in single core tests.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 03:27

16. 4.hour.uptime (Posts: 3; Member since: 11 Jan 2013)


there's a reason why there hasn't been any intel smartphone although intel already crying for 3 years.... performance over power requirement.

it's useless to have that fast CPU, if your phone only have 1 hour talk time and 4 hour stand by time.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 04:16 4

23. linneti15 (Posts: 49; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)


intel has pretty much fixed the power consumption problem with the newest atoms... they are more power efficient than tegra 3 and exynos 5250 and just slightly better than snapdragon s4 but they are quicker!!! source --> anandtech.com/show/6536/arm-vs-x86-the-real-showdo​wn. Sorry cant put the link in, i have done less than 30 comments :/ so just put: h ttp://ww w. without the spacs in from of it

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 04:54

34. linneti15 (Posts: 49; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)


in front of it*

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 05:20 2

36. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


A15 cores are more powerful (single cored) than the (current) Atom, so actually it won't be really any competition between the dual core Atom and and quad cores A15 like the Exynos Octa or Tegra 4.
The competitor for those will be "Bay Trail" (Atom quad core) and not "Clover Trail" (Atom Dual core), but it won't be out till the second half of this year.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 02:40 14

3. noim1 (Posts: 297; Member since: 15 May 2012)


I always Knew Intel had the Raw Power ...they just have to utilize it for mobile devices !!!! Go Intel !! Bring in some Competition in the Processor Game...

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 02:56 2

8. MeoCao (unregistered)


if Intel somehow could use i7 for phones the benchmark would be through the roof.

The question for Intel is how about battery life?

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 03:01 3

13. eisenbricher (Posts: 973; Member since: 09 Aug 2012)


Agree. I am also waiting for AMD's specialization in low power graphics. I heard that they are working on graphics solution for smartphones!!

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 06:09

40. desijatt (Posts: 58; Member since: 28 Aug 2012)


I think Intel will get even more success in mobiles and tablets market than PC market....I'll wait for Bay Trail Processor in a android or windows tablet but still don't know how good will be the GPU with it....

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 02:46 4

4. mariosraptor (Posts: 130; Member since: 15 Mar 2012)


that is why it does not matter how many cores you have if they are not utilized prperly.
i didn't expect less from Intel, i expect more.
after so many years in PC CPU game they definitely know how to make chipsets.
now i want to see it's power efficiency and real life smoothness.
Good job Intel.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 02:47

5. BadAssAbe (Posts: 456; Member since: 22 Apr 2011)


This sound too good to be true, If it was even remotely close to 25,000 Intel would have officially confirmed it while saying it could get better

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 02:48

6. Izzy_V (Posts: 216; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)


Kudos for giving the finger to all the skeptics that didn't think Intel would be serious competition from the Razr i's scores.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 02:48

7. gabe92 (Posts: 27; Member since: 25 Oct 2012)


WOW! O.o

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 02:57 1

9. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


No doubt that this is a powerful chip:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5592/intel-atom-z2580-z2000

..but I still think there could be something fishy about these results.
So far Atoms have been nowhere near those numbers in Antutu.
And Antutu itself has been proved as prone to faking results by manufacturers.
The GPU on this thing for example is only half the power of iPad 4' GPU.
Anandtech also compared the older dual core 2GHz Atom with Exynos dual, and the latter was way superior. Something just doesn't look right here.

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 04:09 2

20. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


Same as below... Old Z2460 is single core, that's how the Exynos dual was superior to it (actually depends for what task).

posted on 11 Jan 2013, 04:25

27. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


No, it was dual core, but clocked at 1.6, not 2ghz(my bad again)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6422/samsung-chromebook-xe303-review-testing-arms-cortex-a15/6

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories