Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

High-Level Test Results: T-Rex

GFXBench 3.0: A Fresh Look At Mobile Benchmarking
By

T-Rex remains a demanding OpenGL ES 2.0 test that utilizes many modern effects, including materials, high-res textures, motion blur, parallax mapping, and complex particle systems. It also uses complex geometry, planar reflections, specular highlights, and soft shadows as part of the render pipeline.

On-Screen

All of our devices are able to run this OpenGL ES 2.0-based benchmark so let’s see how they handle it at their respective native resolutions.

Not surprisingly, Apple's iPhone 5s leads yet again, and its sub-720p resolution even helps it beat out the Tegra Note 7 (an 800p device) by over 20%. The Nexus 5 does well in third place, given its FHD native resolution. It's only 20% slower than the EVGA Tegra Note 7 and 36% slower than the iPhone 5s. That’s pretty impressive considering it's pushing at least twice as many pixels as the other two devices.

Google's Nexus 7 beats out the Oppo N1, which is interesting for two reasons. First, the Oppo N1 is powered by a Snapdragon 600 SoC, while the Nexus 7 uses the older Snapdragon S4 Pro. Yes, they both have the same Adreno 320 GPU core. But the Nexus 7 has a higher native resolution. Also, it operates at a lower clock rate. It seems Oppo is suffering for its Android 4.2-based ColorOS, while native Android 4.4.2 works in the Nexus 7’s favor.

The two Exynos 5 Octa-based devices trade blows in last place. The Note’s Exynos 5 Mali-T628MP6 GPU core suffers for its massive native resolution. Nevertheless, the Samsung tablet still manages to beat out the Meizu MX3. Its PowerVR SGX544MP3 is really beginning to show its age; it was originally used in the iPhone 5, and now in the poorly-selling budget-oriented 5c.

Off-Screen

We have a bit of a reshuffle, but Apple's iPhone 5s is still in the lead, its PowerVR Series 6 GPU a leader in this benchmark.

The Galaxy Note 10.1” 2014 jumps from second-to-last up to second place. Google's Nexus 5 continues its hold on third place. The EVGA falls from second place to fourth, hampered by the increased demand of 1920x1080 (perhaps a result of its 1 GB DDR3-L memory subsystem) . The 2013 Nexus 7 and Oppo N1 battle for second-to-last place with their similar Adreno 320 GPUs at 400 MHz.

Meizu's MX3 stays in last position, since nothing changed. Its PowerVR SGX544MP3 still has has to push the same number of pixels as in the native resolution on-screen test, though again we see evidence of a little overhead in the off-screen benchmark.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 21 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 0 Hide
    Cryio , February 21, 2014 1:30 AM
    I was just about to write "why not WP", but then I remember WP games run on DirectX.
  • -2 Hide
    panzerknacker , February 21, 2014 3:18 AM
    Its cool u guys put so much effort into this but tbh most of the benchmark results seem to be completely random. Phones with faster SoC's performing slower and vice versa. I think there is no point at all benching a phone because 1. The benchmarking software is a POS and unreliable and 2. The phone OS's and apps are all complete POSs and act completely random in all kinda situations. I'd say just buy the phone with a fast SoC that looks the best to u and when it starts acting like a POS (which they all start doing in the end) buy a new one.
  • -1 Hide
    Marcus Wandle , February 21, 2014 4:24 AM
    You show those dumb nay sayers, Apple.
  • -6 Hide
    umadbro , February 21, 2014 6:15 AM
    What kind of bs is this? Force 720p on all devices and you'll see what happens to your precious 5s. Even my Zl murdered it.
  • -2 Hide
    andreluizbarbieri , February 21, 2014 6:17 AM
    Why No mention about MX3 and Note beat iphone 5s?
  • 0 Hide
    jamsbong , February 21, 2014 8:58 AM
    The only relevant benchmarks are the first two because they are full-fletch 3D graphics, which is won by the most portable device; The iPhone. The rest of the benchies are just primitive 2D graphics which is irrelevant. Android devices won all those in flying colours.
  • -1 Hide
    rolli59 , February 21, 2014 9:23 AM
    Well I have a smart phone but that is so I can receive business emails on the go, I have a tablet because it is great for watching movies on the go. Do I want to find out if there are any faster devices to do those things, not really while what I got is sufficient. I leave all the heavy tasks to the computers.
  • 2 Hide
    Durandul , February 21, 2014 10:38 AM
    Quote:
    The only relevant benchmarks are the first two because they are full-fletch 3D graphics, which is won by the most portable device; The iPhone. The rest of the benchies are just primitive 2D graphics which is irrelevant. Android devices won all those in flying colours.
    If those are the only two benchmarks relevant to you, then I wonder why you are using a phone and not a 3DS or something. But seriously, most of the other devices have more than a million more pixels then the iPhone, so this benchmark is not so telling. It was mentioned before, but it would be nice to test at a given resolution, although as suppose applications don't give you an option on the phone.
  • 2 Hide
    umadbro , February 21, 2014 11:34 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    The only relevant benchmarks are the first two because they are full-fletch 3D graphics, which is won by the most portable device; The iPhone. The rest of the benchies are just primitive 2D graphics which is irrelevant. Android devices won all those in flying colours.
    If those are the only two benchmarks relevant to you, then I wonder why you are using a phone and not a 3DS or something. But seriously, most of the other devices have more than a million more pixels then the iPhone, so this benchmark is not so telling. It was mentioned before, but it would be nice to test at a given resolution, although as suppose applications don't give you an option on the phone.
    It does give the option to force some specific resolution. Don't know why this "review" didn't do it. That's what I've been trying to say from the start.
  • 0 Hide
    umadbro , February 21, 2014 11:41 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    The only relevant benchmarks are the first two because they are full-fletch 3D graphics, which is won by the most portable device; The iPhone. The rest of the benchies are just primitive 2D graphics which is irrelevant. Android devices won all those in flying colours.
    If those are the only two benchmarks relevant to you, then I wonder why you are using a phone and not a 3DS or something. But seriously, most of the other devices have more than a million more pixels then the iPhone, so this benchmark is not so telling. It was mentioned before, but it would be nice to test at a given resolution, although as suppose applications don't give you an option on the phone.
    It does give the option to force some specific resolution. Don't know why this "review" didn't do it. That's what I've been trying to say from the start.
  • 3 Hide
    dragonsqrrl , February 21, 2014 2:52 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Quote:
    The only relevant benchmarks are the first two because they are full-fletch 3D graphics, which is won by the most portable device; The iPhone. The rest of the benchies are just primitive 2D graphics which is irrelevant. Android devices won all those in flying colours.
    If those are the only two benchmarks relevant to you, then I wonder why you are using a phone and not a 3DS or something. But seriously, most of the other devices have more than a million more pixels then the iPhone, so this benchmark is not so telling. It was mentioned before, but it would be nice to test at a given resolution, although as suppose applications don't give you an option on the phone.
    It does give the option to force some specific resolution. Don't know why this "review" didn't do it. That's what I've been trying to say from the start.

    ... you guys realize that the off-screen tests render at 1080p, right? That's the whole point, to make direct performance comparisons regardless of a devices display resolution. It's also explained in the performance results.

    On a different note, I find it amazing how consistently and predictably the community on this site tries to discredit an objective review when the performance results favor an Apple device in any way. This isn't exactly breaking news for anyone who's familiar with SOC performance. Please try to set aside your childish biases and just accept the results for what they are. The A7 is a powerful SOC, get over it.
  • 0 Hide
    h2323 , February 21, 2014 10:25 PM
    Looks like imagination techs powervr and the radeon..I mean adreno own.
  • -1 Hide
    umadbro , February 22, 2014 12:29 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Quote:
    The only relevant benchmarks are the first two because they are full-fletch 3D graphics, which is won by the most portable device; The iPhone. The rest of the benchies are just primitive 2D graphics which is irrelevant. Android devices won all those in flying colours.
    If those are the only two benchmarks relevant to you, then I wonder why you are using a phone and not a 3DS or something. But seriously, most of the other devices have more than a million more pixels then the iPhone, so this benchmark is not so telling. It was mentioned before, but it would be nice to test at a given resolution, although as suppose applications don't give you an option on the phone.
    It does give the option to force some specific resolution. Don't know why this "review" didn't do it. That's what I've been trying to say from the start.
    ... you guys realize that the off-screen tests render at 1080p, right? That's the whole point, to make direct performance comparisons regardless of a devices display resolution. It's also explained in the performance results.On a different note, I find it amazing how consistently and predictably the community on this site tries to discredit an objective review when the performance results favor an Apple device in any way. This isn't exactly breaking news for anyone who's familiar with SOC performance. Please try to set aside your childish biases and just accept the results for what they are. The A7 is a powerful SOC, get over it.
    I love people like you who claim to be some proffesinal "SoC experts" online while we the rest of us don't know nothing.A7 is a powerful SoC but the GPU is the same powervr as many other devices have. Apple tweaked the cpu cores only (at least going by the news).You talk about the off-screen tests which show exactly that the Android powered devices clearly pull back into the game with the A7, only one's the iPhone gets are the on screen tests which the iPhone runs at 720 and the androids run at 1080 - million(s) of more pixels to process then of course the load on the gpu is bigger therefor slower results. That's exactly why this review needs to force 720 on everything which you can easily do in the app itself on android.The two cores in an A7 are tweaked so much it keeps up with quad-core SD's etc, I got to give them that. But don't come rushing in telling that you know it all and everyone else are just dumb.
  • 0 Hide
    nebun , February 22, 2014 8:01 PM
    apple has a good phone with the iPhone5s....not bad, considering how small it is....powerful indeed
  • -1 Hide
    MANOFKRYPTONAK , February 22, 2014 9:33 PM
    Why don't they do a chart that includes scores changed to the same resolution? I understand why they have these original charts that show performance on the devices screen, but why don't they have a chart with that shows real hardware performance?
  • -1 Hide
    lockhrt999 , February 23, 2014 3:57 AM
    Nexus 5 is slowest example of snapdragon 800. Why didn't you use Note 3?
  • 0 Hide
    daglesj , February 23, 2014 6:26 AM
    ART or Dalvik on the KitKat Androids?
  • 0 Hide
    daglesj , February 23, 2014 6:42 AM
    Hmm well just did tests of the first two benches with my stock Nexus 4 running ART runtime and the scores were - 525 for Colossus1388 for TRex.Virtually the same as the Nexus 5 with a slower phone.Right okayyyy..
  • 0 Hide
    daglesj , February 23, 2014 6:56 AM
    The low levels were - ALU at 1800 / Alpha at 4534 / Driver at 406 / Fill at 2672.So looks like running ART can be a boost for older Android kit maybe.This was a straight install of the benchmark. No rebooting or shutting down of other apps and services.
  • -1 Hide
    Ninjawithagun , February 24, 2014 7:53 AM
    Fundamentally flawed benchmarking because the resolutions were not taken into consideration. Of course the Apple A7 processor is able to beat all the other processors because it has the least amount of graphics processing overhead. In comparison, the Nexus 7 @ 1920 x 1080 has to process 2.85 times (or 285%) more pixels per clock cycle versus the Apple A7 (1136 x 640). The benchmark scores would be nearly even (or even worse) if Apple A7 processor had to output a simliar resolution.
Display more comments