Share this Story

Samsung Galaxy S II vs. DROIDX2 – Benchmarks

As many of you know by now, we picked up a Samsung Galaxy S II to try to understand the massive amounts of hype that this device has seen even though it has yet to land in the U.S.  We walked through a quick hands-on yesterday, but wanted to come back today and fulfill some reader requests which called for a string of benchmarks to be done.  And since we happen to have a DROIDX2 handy, we thought it would be a great dual-core competitor to match it up against.

Here are the results we came up with after running SmartBench, CF-Bench, Linpack, Quadrant Standard, Neocore, and Nenmark1 a number of times on both devices.  

(All images can be clicked to see larger versions.)

(Galaxy S II will be on the left in each set.)

SmartBench:  Samsung Galaxy S II vs. Motorola DROIDX2

CF-Bench:  Samsung Galaxy S II vs. Motorola DROIDX2

Quadrant:  Samsung Galaxy S II vs. Motorola DROIDX2

Linpack:  Samsung Galaxy S II vs. Motorola DROIDX2

(Single Thread:  SGS2 vs. DROIDX2)

(Multi-Thread:  SGS2 vs. DX2)

Neocore:  Samsung Galaxy S II vs. Motorola DROIDX2

Nenamark1:  Samsung Galaxy S II (top) vs. Motorola DROIDX2 (bottom)

We’re not about to claim to be benchmark gurus by any means, but there is something pretty evident here, and that’s the fact that the Galaxy S II is wiping the floor with the DROIDX2.  (The SGS2 that I’m in possession of has a 1.2GHz dual-core Exynos processor and the DX2 as you all know is running NVIDIA’s dual-core Tegra 2.)  One thing I will note though, is that the DX2 is still running Froyo (Android 2.2) and a ridiculously buggy version of MotoBlur, so I wouldn’t be surprised if these numbers jumped up quite a bit after it receives Gingerbread (Android 2.3).  That’s all speculation of course.

And now we await the arrival of the DROID3 and it’s dual-core OMAP to see if it can stand up to this beast that Samsung has produced.

  • also keep in mind that you have only a 1ghz dual core in the droid x, a qHD screen with 35% more pixels that need to be processed & only 512mb of ram. i’d say that the scores the droid x got was more than the exynos if you were to have the droid with lower resolution & up the speed to 1.2ghz instead of just 1ghz & up’d the ram to 1gig instead of 512mb’s i’d say the droid would be mopping the floor with the galaxy 2. but all in all the droid does give a great score considering the lower clock speed & lower ram along with the higher res aka 35% more pixels. i’d say its more even than just a win. more games & apps will be made for the qHD screens & for tegra chips so in reality games will play better on the droid x & if they arent tegra games then being only 3 frames a second slower is not a bad trade off for the higher res & longer battery life due to the lower clock speed & lower ram, which brings up the fact that it seems to be more efficient also. i would wait on the galaxy s but its been too long & i just saw the benchmarks, im sure the photon with the same chipset as the droid x but with 1gig of ram would produce better scores on par with the sgs2. so i might get the photon if there is no sgs2 in sight.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t consider this an apples to apples test. One phone is clocked slightly higher than the other, they are running different versions of android, and they don’t run on the same carrier. No doubt the samsung is quicker…won’t argue that…but I don’t consider this a direct comparison by any means.

  • The SGSII does have a lower resolution screen 

  • Anonymous

    The Samsung Galaxy S II: The phone after the phone after my dream phone.

  • I’ve been heavily into the recent Samsung devices. Even my younger sister’s Continuum is pretty fantastic. 

    The Galaxy Tab is sure to wipe the floor with the iPad, especially with 4G LTE capabilities. 

  • Anonymous


  • Anonymous