Motorola ATRIX 4G vs. LG Optimus 2X: Not all dual-cores are created equal

final verdict: excellent specs but dont mean jack shit cus software is proly slow, buggy, and ugly, and without quality apps…..instead of focusing on specs, maybe google can set up hardware accelaration in its mobile os.

The benchmarks should be used as reference and be not taking seriously….why?

1) Android 2.1 and 3.0 Does not support dual core processors, Google mention that Dual-core support will come in Android “I” (ice cream if my assumption is correct).
2) The benchmarks are good tool to test scores, but each one of them does not support dual-core. Till devs optimize the software for dual-core then we can get real benchmarks.

I’ll take both with scores with a grain of salt till we get support for both hardware and software, till then we just wait.

Uh…I HOPE your tests took into account the difference in screen resolution. I imagine if the Atrix had a 800×480 screen resolution it would be the winner in all of the categories. Geesh, if you’re going create public postings about your “scientific” benchmark results, at least take relevant features into account when you’re performing those benchmarks. Thanks for trying though.

Specs & tests are nice, but so many other things go into how good a phone is…build quality, screen visibility outside, voice quality, support & upgrades, and reception.

The testers from android and me tested stock android devices with gingerbread against devices with non-stock froyo. What a fair comparison. Additionally the Atrix has a higher resolution. The LG Optimus got bad critics because of it is sluggish UI. But good that it won all the tests. These artificial test are absolutely useless and people that buy a phone because of these test are stupid.

Wait, I thought the competition was the iPhone! Why are they putting family to fight against family. Motorola doesn’t care if you buy an LG phone or an HTC. Right? They just don’t want you to buy an iPhone. I believe I read that Motorola’s shareholders JUST want to make sure people buy Android. Right?

just to clarify, i am actually not an iphone owner. in fact i dont own any apple products because i dont want to be tied down by itunes but i can’t help but realize how sad and pathetic it is that apple is the only company that seem to be able to produce beautifully-designed hardware that has amazing graphics and incredible touch responsiveness. it’s a shame because competition is good yet no one is competitive enough. seriously, y can’t manufacturers hire a designer for their hardware? why arent they able to produce the same fluidity of the apple touchscreens? y? consider the ipad 2. everyone is bitching about how the screen hasent changed but look at the graphics on that thing……heck with super amoled crap….look at the ipad 2 graphics……it’s gorgeous…..

It’s been stated many times in the comments, but I’ll ask again – why wasn’t the Motorola’s much higher resolution stated as a cause for the performance difference? Anything above 30 fps is not perceptible to the human eye anyways…I didn’t realize I surfed over to FAILblog.

Interesting results.

Are the memory channels different on 2X vs 4G?

On the 3D benchmarks the differences are pretty much explained by the 1.35 pixel quantity multiplier between the two.

Please don’t post if you are retarded. Think twice before posting and make sure it ” your post” makes sense.

All I know is that the screen on the atrix is really disappointing. I took one look and was like wow this screen sucks……well compared to samsung’s.

Yeah MotoBlur really slows down the phone

Hey Zach you should update your article to note atrix is the only phone using QHD screen

bgr fail

I’m seeing a lot of excuses for the Atrix here, but if it’s got a high-res display it should have the horsepower to run it. I’m more interested in the not-too-shabby scores for the single-core Nexus S. If stock Gingerbread runs lickety-split with just one core, imagine its performance with two.

There is just one issue with this test, look at the screen resolutions of the devices. If the Atrix had a lower resolution screen these benchmarks wouldn’t look the same. That’s the biggest issue, pushing out a higher pixel count will hurt the performance of the device. Now if we could test the performance over HDMI it would be an accurate test.

I tried an Atrix at the local AT&T store this weekend. I don’t get all the fuss? It had the same crap all the other Moto/Android phones have, and runs the same. Moving from screen/screen was fair, nothing to write home about. Went in and killed all the crap running, and started a few to be sure it would run stuff I’d normally have open, and it didn’t do any better. Checked the HTC Inspire as well; same deal minus the MotoBlur gunk. ZZZZZZZZZ

Funny store though! While I was there, a guy was returning his Inspire..reason? Overheard continual lockups and crappy battery life…nice…LOL

I’m surprised how bad the Atrix sucks…

You guys are dumb, I got an Atrix 4g and it is phenomenal. Best phone I ever had and I had all 4 Iphones. I’m a apple fanatic but the Atrix made me jump ship. It is a fantastic phone, and all you idiots complaining about blur, get launcher Pro and wipe that stuff out. you don’t even have to root jackasses. The battery life is great also.

Man, moto sucks, IMHO.

Atrix has much higher resolution display its a quarter HD the fact that it scored so close to the very top makes me wonder if it had the same resolution as the LG 400×800 if it would of won