Is this the Motorola Moto X (2016) revealing its specs on GFXBench?

posted by Alan F. / Jun 17, 2016, 10:30 AM

Did the Motorola Moto X (2016) go through the GFXBench benchmark test?

Last week, when Motorola unveiled the new Motorola Moto Z series, a statement attributed to the manufacturer hinted that the Motorola Moto X range is still alive and was not killed off by the new high-end Moto Z models. However, if a handset with the Motorola model number XT1662 proves to be the Moto X (2016), the latest version of the phone will be completely different than its predecessors.

According to a GFXBench test, the Motorola XT1662 will feature a 4.6-inch screen with a 1080 x 1920 FHD resolution. We have to consider the possibility that this is a mistakeThe MediaTek MT6755 chipset is under the hood carrying an octa-core 2.1GHZ CPU, and the Mali-T860 GPU. 3GB of RAM is inside, along with 32GB of native storage. A 16MP snapper is found on the back, with a front-facing 8MP camera for selfies and video chats. Android 6.0 is pre-installed.

Now obviously these specs are far removed from last year's Moto X series which included screens in the range of 5.5-inches to 5.7-inches. Outside of one model, the displays on those handsets had a 1440 x 2560 QHD resolution, and all of them were powered by a Snapdragon chipset.

If the Moto X is not dead, as Motorola claims, it has apparently been transitioned into a smaller device with less imposing specs. Hopefully, we will hear more about the Motorola XT1662 soon. As soon as we do, we will pass the information on to you.

source: GFXBench via TimesNews.co.uk

FEATURED VIDEO

Options

33 Comments

1. sebstin

Posts: 174; Member since: Dec 03, 2015

May be its Moto E?.. 4.6" will be nice for one handed use.. Hope price will be right too..

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 10:34 AM 2

9. DeDex

Posts: 121; Member since: Sep 01, 2014

Moto E with a FHD screen would be an unreasonably high jump on the spec sheet. However, the presence of a Mediatek SoC is a bit surprising.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 10:53 AM 1

21. libra89

Posts: 2265; Member since: Apr 15, 2016

Whatever it is, ok specs at 4.6" sounds great and right up my alley.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 1:26 PM 3

2. lamseunyau

Posts: 38; Member since: Apr 27, 2015

I hope they'll keep the front facing speakers

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 10:35 AM 3

30. Mxyzptlk unregistered

I hope it's as good as the current Moto X Pure but I seriously doubt it with their current track record.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 6:02 PM 0

3. deanylev

Posts: 234; Member since: Mar 11, 2014

I think Moto will kick ass if they bring back the X series. Z series for amazing innovation, cool design, basically a taste of the future X series for good old Moto. Comfortable, gorgeous designs, AMAZING front facing stereo speakers, and top notch customizability. G series for amazing features/specs at an amazing price. Can't beat that balance, something for everyone :)

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 10:37 AM 3

4. Scott93274

Posts: 6030; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

I'm not exactly familiar with MediaTek chip-set performance, but the 8 cores and 2.1GHZ clock speed seem rather impressive on paper. Also the scaled down screen size and resolution really makes this more akin to a true followup to the original 2013 Moto X. With 3 GB of RAM, 32 GB of storage, this looks like it could be one hell of a secondary device. Right now I'm just curious to see what capacity battery they're able to fit in that size of a device, and of course, the price, lets see a price for this baby.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 10:38 AM 0

24. matistight

Posts: 956; Member since: May 13, 2009

on paper an 8 core 2.1 seems awesome, but lets think about it. sd 810 is ~2.0ghz octacore, but sd 820 is ~2.1 quad core, and sd 820 is supposed to be better. So who really knows.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 1:59 PM 0

27. Scott93274

Posts: 6030; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

I've ready that the additional cores actually have little payoff for Mobile devices... for reasons I'm unsure of. But that being the case, it would make sense that a processor with fewer cores at a higher clock speed would have better performance. Taking all that into account, this thing does have a 1080 resolution so that has to contribute to having a speedy performance.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 3:37 PM 0

25. zunaidahmed

Posts: 1183; Member since: Dec 24, 2011

Let's not forget is still cortex A53 @2.1GHz, which in terms of perfomance looking at wikipedia for reference, a53 has a dmips/mhz of 2.3 while a57 has about 4.6, which normally means double the performance at the same clock speed. So this 8 core SoC should have same performance as a 4 core a57 SoC @2.1 on fully parallel task (just benchmark) if not, it will just perform like 8 a57 @1.05-1.1GHz

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 3:24 PM 1

5. sikandar201

Posts: 10; Member since: Sep 17, 2015

the only thing i'm worried about : will note 6/7 support google's daydream vr?

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 10:41 AM 1

6. Scott93274

Posts: 6030; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

.... are you in the right article bro? This has nothing to do with Daydream VR or the Note 6/7. lol

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 10:43 AM 3

8. sikandar201

Posts: 10; Member since: Sep 17, 2015

Yup... that's why i mentioned 'the only thing i'm worried about'

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 10:49 AM 1

10. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

OK...that's kind of like going to an article about the new Star Trek movie and saying, "the only thing I'm worried about is if the new Corvette will have wireless charging."

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 11:10 AM 3

13. sikandar201

Posts: 10; Member since: Sep 17, 2015

if you don't want to give answer to my question.. then gtfo of here..

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 11:35 AM 0

17. Scott93274

Posts: 6030; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

Seeing as there's no official confirmation of any device that is compatible with Daydream VR then maybe we should all GTFO of here.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 1:07 PM 1

22. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Or you could pose that same question in an article that at least deals with either Samsung or Daydream VR, since the commentors in those articles would be more likely to be of help to you than those in an article about something completely different.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 1:38 PM 1

19. UglyFrank

Posts: 2191; Member since: Jan 23, 2014

A note 6/7 is closer to a Moto X than a Corvette is to a Star Trek film.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 1:12 PM 0

23. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Point is, an article related to what he's asking about would be a better place to look for information, either one dealing with Samsung or with Daydream VR.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 1:41 PM 1

16. rishav20193

Posts: 240; Member since: Jul 18, 2015

noo.......daydream was announced when samsung might have been really close to finalise the next note !! but, i read samsung & some other companies are working on a new device for google daydream VR

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 12:41 PM 1

20. Scott93274

Posts: 6030; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

I'm willing to bet that OEMs are made aware of future projects and their hardware requirements long before Daydream is publicly announced. There's a chance it might work, but buyer beware, first adapters usually go into new devices not fully aware of their future prospects.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 1:13 PM 1

26. zunaidahmed

Posts: 1183; Member since: Dec 24, 2011

I doubt they would support it, Google did say all the device this year are not powerful enough to support it, and I am pretty sure note 6/7 will use the same SoC as the S7 just with boosted clock speed and more RAM. Samsung recently started the trend of using bleeding edge tech on the galaxy S series each year while using a more matured version of it on the note series

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 3:28 PM 0

7. sikandar201

Posts: 10; Member since: Sep 17, 2015

Yup... that's why i mentioned 'the only thing i'm worried about'

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 10:48 AM 0

11. Furbal unregistered

4.6 would be a welcome addition. Mediatek should run fine at 1080p

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 11:16 AM 1

12. havoc

Posts: 95; Member since: Jan 08, 2015

as long as it doesnt have that hideous boxy front fingerprint scanner in cool with it.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 11:25 AM 1

14. WPX00

Posts: 511; Member since: Aug 15, 2015

would you rather have none at all? because if they put one, it sure as hell is gonne be there and same shape, because consistency.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 11:37 AM 0

15. middlehead

Posts: 449; Member since: May 12, 2014

I would definitely prefer it not have a scanner, at least until the legal issues with the things are cleaned up.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 12:08 PM 0

18. Scott93274

Posts: 6030; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

Legal issues? Sorry, I'm apparently in the dark about these things. I would still like it if it had the scanner, just have it in place of the Moto dimple on the back of the device, but WPX00 is probably correct, if it has one it'll be on the front for consistency across all their devices. Too bad.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 1:10 PM 0

28. irossdrummer

Posts: 366; Member since: Jan 17, 2015

Maybe this is a moto z play? Very doubtful this is an X

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 4:31 PM 0

29. Scott93274

Posts: 6030; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

I'm going to disagree with you. The defining characteristic of the 2 Moto Z phones is that they're both compatible with Moto Mods, therefor they would need to be uniform in size. The phone in the benchmarks has a 4.6" phone and therefor not a Moto Z.

posted on Jun 17, 2016, 4:56 PM 0

view all comments