Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra review: Geared up

Synthetic benchmarks

The Xperia XA1 Ultra has the Helio P20 chipset as its heart - a midrange offering from Mediatek based on two quad-core Cortex-A53 clusters in a big.LITTLE configuration - 4x2.3Ghz + 4x1.6GHz.

Midrange Mediatek chipsets have been getting a bad rep in the past couple of years for not being quite energy efficient. The best bit about the new Helio P20 is that unlike any of the company's other chipsets, this one is built on a 16nm fabrication process. Compare that to the 28nm used for the Helio P10 for instance and you'll know that the new chipset should really offer better power efficiency, less heat and why not better performance than the previous gen.

Indeed, that was our experience with the 5-inch Xperia XA1, and we expected a similar showing from the Ultra. The caveat with the big one is that it's got a FullHD display, as opposed to the XA1's 720p unit - a drop in graphics frame rates was to be expected.

But first things first - we start off with GeekBench to get a feel for CPU performance. Unsurprisingly, the XA1 Ultra posts similar numbers to its smaller bro in this benchmark, particularly in the multi-core test. The Ultra has a slight advantage over the non-Ultra in single-core, but it's not a night-and-day difference.

The Snapdragon 625 matches the Helio P20 near perfectly in single-core performance - look at the results posted by the Huawei nova plus, vivo V5 Plus, or the Redmi Note 4.

In multi-core applications, however, the Helio P20 has an advantage, hence the XA1 Ultra outperforms the competition. A Snapdragon 652, on the other hand, is a much more powerful affair in both single-core and multi-core benchmarks. It's represented here by the Galaxy C9 Pro. But that chipset comes from a higher performance tier than the Snapdragon 625 as its name suggests.

GeekBench 4 (single-core)

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  1890
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  1815
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  1546
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  1440
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  862
• vivo V5 Plus
  846
• Huawei nova plus
  843
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  832
• Sony Xperia XA1
  800
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  795
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  776
• Lenovo Moto M
  771
• Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
  638

GeekBench 4 (multi-core)

Higher is better

• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  4456
• OnePlus 3T
  4364
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  4333
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  4102
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  3976
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  3610
• Sony Xperia XA1
  3554
• vivo V5 Plus
  3136
• Huawei nova plus
  3100
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  3011
• Lenovo Moto M
  2921
• Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
  2719
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  2621

For an assessment of the overall performance, not just the CPU, we turn to Basemark OS II 2.0. The XA1 Ultra underdelivers here, posting lower numbers than the XA1, and we gather it's the higher resolution to blame. The Snapdragon 625s of this world are scattered pretty wide with the Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 ranked lower than the XA1 Ultra, but the Huawei nova plus comes out ahead of the Sony phablet.

Basemark OS 2.0

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  2678
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  2434
• Oppo F3 Plus
  1890
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  1770
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  1728
• Sony Xperia XA1
  1351
• Huawei nova plus
  1215
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  1163
• vivo V5 Plus
  1107
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  1050
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  1031
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  987
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  497

According to Antutu 6, the Snapdragon 625s and the Helio P20s are quite on par with each other in terms of overall performance. That's also true for the 14nm Exynos 7880 (represented here by the Galaxy A7 2017), which scores closely to the other energy-efficient chipsets.

AnTuTu 6

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  165097
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  155185
• Oppo F3 Plus
  91458
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  85181
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  85162
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  64983
• Huawei nova plus
  64680
• vivo V5 Plus
  63812
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  62217
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  61616
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  60767
• Sony Xperia XA1
  60707
• Lenovo Moto M
  51831
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  50109
• Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
  44062

Let's move on to graphics benchmarks. Looking at the frame rates in GFX Bench offscreen tests (rendered at 1080p regardless of actual display resolution) - there's hardly anything to split the S625s and the Helio P20s, but the Exynos 7880 has more oomph and this gives the Galaxy A7 (2017) an edge.

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  49
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  44
• Oppo F3 Plus
  17
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  17
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  15
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  14
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  9.9
• Huawei nova plus
  9.9
• vivo V5 Plus
  9.9
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  9.8
• Sony Xperia XA1
  9.6
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  9.6
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  7.2
• Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
  7.2
• Lenovo Moto M
  7.1

GFX 3.1 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  33
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  30
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  11
• Oppo F3 Plus
  10
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  9.5
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  9.1
• Sony Xperia XA1
  6.2
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  6.2
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  6.2
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  6.2
• Huawei nova plus
  6.2
• vivo V5 Plus
  6.2
• Lenovo Moto M
  4.7
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  4.7
• Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
  4.6

GFX 3.1 Car scene (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  20
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  18
• Oppo F3 Plus
  6
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  5.8
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  5.4
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  5.2
• Sony Xperia XA1
  3.7
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  3.7
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  3.4
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  3.4
• Huawei nova plus
  3.4
• vivo V5 Plus
  3.4
• Lenovo Moto M
  2.5
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  2.5
• Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
  2.5

Since most of these phones feature 1080p displays, there's not much of a difference between offscreen and onscreen results. However, the 720p XA1 manages practically double the frame rates of the Ultra in all three tests. That said, the Ultra's scores are perfectly in line with what other phones in its class are capable of, save for the Galaxy A7 (2017), which has a notable advantage.

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  48
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  47
• Sony Xperia XA1
  19
• Oppo F3 Plus
  17
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  17
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  15
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  15
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  10
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  10
• Huawei nova plus
  10
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  9.7
• vivo V5 Plus
  9.7
• Lenovo Moto M
  7.6
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  7.5
• Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
  7

GFX 3.1 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  33
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  32
• Sony Xperia XA1
  15
• Oppo F3 Plus
  11
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  11
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  9.4
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  9
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  6.7
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  6.7
• Huawei nova plus
  6.6
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  6.2
• vivo V5 Plus
  6.1
• Lenovo Moto M
  5.2
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  5.1
• Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
  4.6

GFX 3.1 Car scene (onscreen)

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  20
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  19
• Sony Xperia XA1
  7.9
• Oppo F3 Plus
  6
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  5.8
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  5.4
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  5.2
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  4
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  3.7
• Huawei nova plus
  3.7
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  3.4
• vivo V5 Plus
  3.4
• Lenovo Moto M
  2.7
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  2.7
• Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
  2.5

Basemark X puts a tiny bit more separation between the S625 and the P20 - the XA1 and XA1 Ultra are trailing the Qualcomm bunch. The Exynos 7880 is again out of reach, using the Galaxy A7 (2017) in our comparison.

Basemark X

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  36958
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  36062
• Oppo F3 Plus
  16695
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  15814
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  14619
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  13666
• vivo V5 Plus
  10542
• Huawei nova plus
  10524
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
  10446
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  10401
• Sony Xperia XA1
  9714
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  9598
• Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
  7522
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  6754
• Lenovo Moto M
  6732

It's the exact opposite in Basemark ES 3.1, at least as far as the S625-P20 feud is concerned. The Mediatek chip posts substantially higher scores than the Snapdragon, even if the two seemed more evenly matched in the OpenGL 3.1 parts of GFX Bench. Once again, the Exynos-powered Galaxy A7 (2017) is a notch closer to the devices packing upper-tier chips.

Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal

Higher is better

• OnePlus 3T
  641
• Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus
  538
• Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
  287
• Samsung Galaxy C9 Pro
  261
• Oppo F3 Plus
  261
• Samsung Galaxy A7 (2017)
  229
• Sony Xperia XA1 Ultra
  192
• Sony Xperia XA1
  191
• Huawei nova plus
  138
• vivo V5 Plus
  138
• Motorola Moto Z Play
  138
• Sony Xperia XA Ultra
  131

In a single sentence - the Xperia XA1 Ultra is a dependable performer, putting out benchmark results in the ballpark of competitors' numbers. The GPU of the Helio P20 chips is better suited to the 720p Xperia XA1, but in fairness none of the FullHD rivals in the Ultra's class have a lot going for them in this respect either. Well, except maybe the Galaxy A7 (2017).