Droid Bionic browser bench  Nexus One browser bench

     Droid Bionic                                Stock Android 2.3.4

In his pre-release hands-on and review of the Motorola Droid Bionic, Joe the Insider also gave us a peek at some web browser benchmarks.  These numbers aren't the end-all be-all of real world performance, but they do show how the hardware and the software handle things like sprites and math functions while rendering what you see in the web browser window.  And the Bionic looks like it does a fine job handling it's business.  Compared to a fully stock Android 2.3.4 build on the Nexus One (it's not even rooted!), the Bionic beats the score hands down, even while running out of the box stock with all the Blur bells and whistles.

We should expect this based on the new hardware, but it sure is nice to see it in handy picture form.  Be sure to read Joe's thread and get the full details. 

The full scoop: Thoughts after using Bionic, plus pictures

 
There are 83 comments

Reader comments

Droid Bionic browser benchmarked, numbers look impressive

83 Comments
Sort by Rating

Don't understand why it's being compared to a Nexus One, it's pretty obvious the Bionic is going to beat it (just by looking at the specs). Motorola would have had to absolutely murder the device for it to perform merely on the Nexus One's level.

I agree I would assume comparing it to the current crop of phones coming out would make more sense, but show it in a poor light.

I ran the test on the iphone, charge n my tablet. Here are the devices I tested
Samsung Charge:28K
Iphone stock: 31k
Samsung 10.1 tab: 87k

I also used my old fascinate but it wasnt stock and it got 33k

Hmm...how did the Tab score so much higher than dual core Android phones when they all use the same Tegra 2 chip?

Does the hardware acceleration in Honeycomb really speed things up that much? I hope we can see the same scores in phones when ICS comes out...

The Nexus One's proc is a 1Ghz QSD8250 Qualcomm 1st gen (S1) Snapdragon (Scorpion) from 2009 (Adreno 200 GPU).

The Nexus S's proc is a 1Ghz S5PC110 Samsung Hummingbird (ARM A8) from 2010 (PowerVR SGX540).

The only thing similar is '1Ghz'. Performance-wise, the N1 is nowhere near the speed of the NS.

I would think that a device over a year Newer than my Evo would beat that score. Yes, I am running MikG 2.45 ,which is a Sense rom and not OC'd, with the Stock Browser. My average score of 53417 either shows the weakness of the Bionic and the Motorola developers as far as this benchmark goes or the strength of the Open Source developers and the roms they put out. Either way I am very disappointed in the Bionic. It seems to have been way over hyped or about 1 year late to the party.

so wow i would say you just proved a pure android enthusiast point. blurr or m.a.p.(motorola app platform) is laggy. the 1st gen single core against a now gen dual core should be destroyed but aint that ar behind. oh and the nexus 1 is 2 yrs old wow.

I may be missing the point of this benchmark. I just ran the same one on my Droid X running Dolphin HD and got 54614. Does this mean my X is faster than the Bionic? I certainly hope not.

60298 rooted Incredible running CM7. I know this isn't comparing oranges to oranges, but thought it was pretty sweet anyway.

I don't much care for stock rom benchmarks, I mean my Motorola Atrix scored 95k with CM7 pre-beta. So I just want to see the bionic's score when it has some CM7 love<3

Heres some food for thought,
im running a rooted nexus s with netarchy kernel, i just overclocked it to 1400 and ran this test.

i just got 41982 on the first test after the phone has been on for over a day.

and 49k on the second run.

so something is really bottlenecking this bionic down...

this should be fast, but even thou the nexus doesnt sound like much, its really a great phone,.
im running 2.3.5, and the phone itself is bloatware free and fast as can be, for a phone thats now free at best buy, its well worth it.

Funny thing about this comment is that the 4430 and 4460 are......wait for it........ the same chip. lol its a crazy concept called binning. Google it LOL

I get 34 on my DX running stock GB. I can't wait for this phone to get released so we can move on to better things. It missed the boat now let it die!

This isn't very impressive

GSII, 2.3.4 = 57000-59000 (non root)
iPhone 4, iOS 5 Beta 7 = 52000-53000 (last year's model)

Evo 4g Rooted running fresh's latest - 53K

Bionics numbers are a joke. I really LOVE the galaxy lineupe but i have a feeling all this dual core is over rated. I use my dads evo 3D (yeah i know, it "sucks") but yes its a bit snappier but nothing amazing or worth the change to me. Id rather change for the SAMOLED+ screens

that's on your 4g speeds. The bionic clearly shows it's running on
3g speeds so your sprint 4g is only faster than verizons 3g

Never ran this benchmark before, my rooted Tbolt with BAMF Sense ROM, stock kernel and NOT OC'd ran a 34k. My unlocked stock Xoom ran a 73k, both with Dolphin HD.

I got 55835 the first time when on wifi and while playing music. I got 64759 on my second time on wifi without having music playing. And finally, I got 62457 on 3G without music playing. I dunno if 3G and wifi make any difference, but I tested my device on both, nonetheless. I have a Samsung Fascinate running Android 2.3.5 on Cyanogenmod 7 btw.

The pic shows the bionic was running on 3G...so I would assume that if on 4G it would have scored a lot higher.

I don't know if it would have made a difference if the Bionic was on WiFi like the Nexus one in the screenshots. I got a 47K with my DINC w/ CM7.

Totally agree - even if these so-called benchmarks are useless then don't waste your time or ours posting this rubbish

Totally agree - even if these so-called benchmarks are useless then don't waste your time or ours posting this rubbish

Sounds like These numbers were getting are a max of 3G at a given point or a round about. Would like to see this on 4G, bet those numbers would do the same at a higher rate per phone. I think this is just the server limitations.

There's no news to post about so they post this rubbish.

The Bionic should be beating the new phone of 2011 not 2010, 3G or LTE - whichever.

Not impressed. Benchmarks only mean so much. But for what its worth... Using my over 1 year old Evo 4G running CM7 (Nightly Build 178) I got 59k first run. Got nearly same score on WiFi and 3G so connection speed apparently doesn't seem to matter. That Bionic must be saddled down with some serious bloatware to get beat by a older and much slower device. As for the benchmarked NS getting 36k. Wtf? I don't get that.

Edit - Forgot to mention. My Evo is stock clock speeds. Not that the Evo overclocks much anyway....

I love how people buy into the Verizon hype when they sell (for always more than the other carriers) inferior hardware.

$300 at upgrade? Check.
Slower than an Evo 3D or a Galaxy S2? Check.
Plans that cost substantially more? Check.

3 strikes and you are out, Verizon.

Just ran the benchmark on my completely stock SGS II running stock Android 2.3.3 on stock browser.

Got 49680

Cm7 really is amazing then. Just ran the test on my Nexus One. Got 64k and 60k on 3g and 68k on 2g. So forget the bionic, it's beating sgs2, just because of cm7? What a load of rubbish.

Funny thing is how AC posts these results like it's a revelation and the best thing since sliced bread. All AC just did was make the Bionic look like a POS. AC == Bionic == EPIC FAIL

My Nook Color w/ CM 7.1, dolphin HD @ 1.2gHz is getting 66,500 with this test. That's a pathetic number for "state of the art". Reaffirms my decision to sit this generation out, my plane old Evo 4g still feels about as fast as any phone I have tried in stores, minus 3-D games of course.

My Photon 4G just got 47730 points, better than the bionic.... well is the same phone.. different branding but same phone...

I too, will consider a device worthless if it has a bad benchmark from a test whose methods I don't fully understand. It's the best way to be correct at things while on the internet.

Keep in mind its just browser speed. This could be affected by poor signal, antivirus, security settings, data hungry app in background, and so on. This test is far from being accurate enough to decide if a phone sucks or not. Y'all need to get a grip. It tests browser speed not overall phone performance! Bet you're the same people who always use quadrant scores that are completley worthless.