Motorola XT1058 blows away the competition with two graphics tests on a benchmark site
posted by Alan F. / May 13, 2013, 3:07 PM
During the weekend, we told you that benchmark tests revealed that the Motorola X would not be a top of the line model, breaking no new ground and is actually the last phone that was in the Motorola pipeline when the company was acquired by Google. But a GFX benchmark test actually shows some outstanding graphics numbers for the phone.
The first test, GFXBench 2.7 T-Rex HD C24Z16, resulted in a score of 1485 frames (26.5fps) for the Motorola XT1058 that topped the 853 (15.2fps) scored by the HTC One and the 704 score (12.6fps) achieved by the international version of the Samsung Galaxy S4. A second test, GFXBench 2.5 Egypt HD C24Z16, produced a score of 6078 (53.8fps) for the Motorola XT1058. The HTC One produced a score of 4133 (36.6fps) while the Samsung Galaxy S4 (GT-i9500) tallied 4572 (40.5fps).
While these scores show outstanding graphics capabilities for the Motorola XT1058, benchmark scores can be faked. While our source tells us that a Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro will be under the hood of the Motorola X phone, there is some speculation that a Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 processor will lie inside the device. But that chip won't be ready until the end of the year while the Motorola X is expected to roll out as soon as July. Additionally, the benchmark tests show that the GPU on the phone is the Adreno 320 which matches up with the S4 Pro. Previous benchmark tests also show the phone carrying a 720p resolution screen and powered by Android 4.2.2.
source: GFXBench via AndroidAuthoirty
Posts: 261; Member since: Jul 09, 2012
It can be a prototype.. that's why it's 720p :)
posted on May 13, 2013, 3:12 PM 14
Reminds me of the fiasco with the Bionic.
posted on May 13, 2013, 4:15 PM 8
Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010
Your memory is kinda fuzzy then. This phone has yet to be officially or even half officially announced. The Bionic was announced right with or after the Atrix. Then it went thru a major over haul. Then again, you are right. It might remind you and others of what happened with the Bionic. Being reminded of and being exactly like are 2 different things.
posted on May 13, 2013, 6:07 PM 4
Posts: 4275; Member since: Jun 26, 2011
The X phone is NOTHING like the Bionic at this point. The Bionic was announced in January of 2011, with full specs listed, official pictures from Motorola, official name, and even hands on footage with the press at the event. Then, within the course of 8 months; the Etna was scrapped due to its terrible battery life, completely rebuilt into the Targa, and then in September of 2011 was released on Verizon as an entirely new device that looked and operated completely different from the Etna. Now, the X phone hasn't had any event for it, no official specs, no official pictures, no official name, no official ANYTHING. All Google and Motorola said is that they were working on it. It was never unveiled like the Bionic was, Google and Motorola made it VERY clear that the X phone had STARTED development in late December of 2012; and now, 6 months of development later, they are getting ready for an unveiling. Now, once the X phone has official pictures, an official name, and is officially unveiled by Motorola and Google with demo units to give out to the press, then you can start spouting off about how this is going to be like the Bionic. When the phone is delayed for 8 months after the official reveal, I will be happy to agree with you. Until then, hush.
posted on May 13, 2013, 8:50 PM 3
Posts: 5629; Member since: Mar 08, 2013
Mxyzptlk, you're not an analyst, you're not working with Motorola or Google, so don't act like an expert. And I guess you're not using an iPhone, you're using a Bionic right? Every time when there is an X Phone article, you always post BIONIC BIONIC BIONIC comments!
posted on May 13, 2013, 9:56 PM 2
Posts: 5713; Member since: Oct 23, 2011
i never loved the Bionic and i'm a Motorola fan boy that had a Bionic. it impressed the hell out of me to begin with though being that it was the first phone powerful enough to really be able to put that blazing fast 4G LTE to any good use.
posted on May 14, 2013, 12:50 AM 0
Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009
In your attempt to compare the Bionic to the X/Ghost/XFON, you're forgetting a tiny, little insignificant detail: THE GHOST HASN'T BEEN FU.CKING ANNOUNCED YET. If you make this claim one more time before it's ACTUALLY announced, I WILL report you for trolling, as you now have no excuse to be wrong again.
posted on May 14, 2013, 1:16 AM 1
Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010
Then every Apple phone is in the same situation as well. Rumors usually start within weeks of the new model's launch. Then we keep hearing rumors moving the date closer/later/closer again/etc until it comes out around a year later. The previous poster is right. The Bionic was announced with the Thunderbolt, Charge, & Revolution in January 2011. The release date was originally set for May/June, but problems with the Tegra chip & LTE arose, which pushed it backed and finally resulted in a rushed redesign. They couldn't simply drop the Bionic because Verizon had ordered it, along with the Razr. The first gen LTE phones (Bionic,TB, Charge, & Rev) were all supposed to launch the first half of 2011, & the 2nd gen (Razr, Rezound, GNex, & Revolution2) in the second half. Moto couldn't simply drop the Bionic, they owed them a phone. But the main difference between the Bionic & the X phone is that the Bionic was announced and given a launch date, the X phone has no concrete details, only rumor and speculation, just like any other phone before it's announced. If anything, anyone who went with the Bionic deserved what they got. When Moto announced early summer of 2011 that they were completely redesigning the phone, that should've been a red flag. No phone goes from concept to launch in 3 months and not have MAJOR issues. Why do you think most of the phones launched take about a year to get to that point? Honestly common sense is in such short supply these days it might as well be a super power. I
posted on May 14, 2013, 11:43 AM 0
Posts: 810; Member since: Jan 09, 2013
It will probably have a locked bootloader.
posted on May 13, 2013, 3:12 PM 3
This is a given since it's a Motorola phone.
posted on May 13, 2013, 4:14 PM 4
Posts: 1021; Member since: Jan 17, 2013
Snapdragon 800 or Tegra 4.
posted on May 13, 2013, 3:20 PM 7
Posts: 4767; Member since: Mar 07, 2012
It could even be Snapdragon 600...the yield must be because of the lower resolution. Cause the Snapdragon S4 pro on a 720p device with Adreno 320 almost comes close to the S4 and the One.
posted on May 13, 2013, 3:45 PM 4
Posts: 4767; Member since: Mar 07, 2012
Yes, it is. But what i'm saying is, the processor on this Moto phone can also be the 600 instead of the 800, if the readings given up there are true. If it was the 800, it will like double, if not triple the frame rate, provided the resolution be 720p.
posted on May 13, 2013, 4:42 PM 3
Send a warning to post author
Send a warning to Selected user.
The user has 0 warnings currently.
Next warning will result in ban!
Ban user and delete all posts
Message to PhoneArena moderator (optional):