Vivo Xshot review: Shot in the dark

Shot in the dark

GSMArena team, 8 April, 2015.

Performance

The vivo Xshot is available in two versions - a high-end "flagship" version and a bit less powerful "elite" one. The Flagship has a Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 SoC, with a quad-core Krait CPU clocked at 2.3 GHz, 3GB of RAM and 32GB of onboard memory, while the elit" version packs a Snapdragon 800, 2GB of RAM and 16GB of memory. Both are extendible through a microSD card. Other than that, the two handsets are identical.

For this review, we are using the beefier "flagship" version, so the cited results are pretty much the best you can expect from the Xshot. The GPU in the unit is the quite capable Adreno 330.

Vivo Xshot

Judging by the specs sheet alone, the vivo Xshot should mostly breeze through our benchmarks. There is, however the small issue of the custom Android build it is running. It is sure to affect performance, but results could go either way.

On one hand, there are quite a few optimizations in Funtouch OS, but is debatable if any of them actually have to do with hardware optimization for the particular platform. On the other hand, there is the fact that in its core Funtouch is Android 4.3 Jelly Bean, which is quite outdated at this point and could prove a major handicap against opponents running 4.4 KitKat, at minimum.

But the only way to really find out how the vivo Xshot faired in testing is to dive into the results.

The specs sheet of the "flagship" model vivo that we have are also quite common, so finding rivals in the performance department was also quite an easy task. Now a few things need to be noted for the tests. The Galaxy A7 is on the list, because of its similar price tag to the higher-end Xshot, while the Galaxy S5 and Note 3 are close in terms of specs and price. The Galaxy Note 4 is priced slightly higher, but is included a current-gen device.

First up, we have the raw CPU performance test with GeekBench 3, so things should be pretty straightforward in this department.

The Xshot scored pretty high in terms of CPU performance, but there are still a few contenders, with pretty much the same hardware, that did slightly better, like the Oppo Find 7 and Galaxy S5, for example. There are, however slight variations in the chipset models of these phones, so the rather small lead can be attributed to that. Either way, it is not something that would be easily noticeable under normal everyday use.

GeekBench 3

Higher is better

  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    3394
  • Oppo Find 7
    3178
  • Xiaomi Mi 4
    3175
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    3120
  • Oppo Find 7a
    3093
  • vivo Xshot
    3048
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    3011
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    2984
  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    2970
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 3 S800
    2937
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    2925
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    2923
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    2880
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    2860
  • Oppo N3
    2704
  • OnePlus One
    2663
  • LG G3
    2370
  • HTC One (M8)
    2367

In Antutu 5, the vivo maintained a steady middle ground position, which is pretty consistent with GeekBench scores. There is a lot of rearrangement in the score board around it, which is mostly due to Android Lollipop, which Antutu definitely favors. Once again the Galaxy Note 4 is on the top and the Galaxy A7 at the bottom, which is to be expected from a mid-range specked device.

AnTuTu 5

Higher is better

  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    49273
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    46824
  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    45660
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    45530
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    45348
  • HTC One (M8)
    44020
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    43676
  • vivo Xshot
    43318
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    43164
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 3 S800
    42211
  • LG G3
    42038
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    40393
  • Oppo N3
    39245
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    31436

Advancing further to the slightly broader Basemark OS II test, we see a totally different story. The vivo Xshot has plummeted to the very bottom of the list and the single and dual-core performance breakdowns give us a pretty good idea why.

This is where the custom Android build comes into play. As we mentioned, it could swing results either way, but in the case of Funtouch OS, benchmark performance is really suffering. Now, this does not necessarily translate into bad real-world performance, but is a clear indication that the Android 4.3 core is showing its age and not much software optimization has been done by vivo to remedy the situation.

This could potentially lead to performance drops in certain applications, not to mention that there are quite a few recent Google APIs that the OS is missing on, which translates to the Xshot missing some more recent apps.

Basemark OS II

Higher is better

  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    1332
  • LG G3
    1327
  • Xiaomi Mi 4
    1324
  • Oppo N3
    1280
  • Oppo Find 7
    1212
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    1202
  • OnePlus One
    1196
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    1181
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    1176
  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    1173
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    1147
  • HTC One (M8)
    1126
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    1109
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    1082
  • Oppo Find 7a
    1057
  • vivo Xshot
    1022
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 3 S800
    1003
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    786

Basemark OS II (single-core)

Higher is better

  • Oppo Find 7
    2606
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    2588
  • Oppo Find 7a
    2580
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    2574
  • Xiaomi Mi 4
    2573
  • vivo Xshot
    2531
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    2510
  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    2499
  • HTC One (M8)
    2428
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    2426
  • Oppo N3
    2417
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    2415
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    2409
  • LG G3
    2267
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 3 S800
    2236
  • OnePlus One
    2213
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    2114
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    1572

Basemark OS II (multi-core)

Higher is better

  • Oppo Find 7
    10391
  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    10320
  • Oppo Find 7a
    10256
  • OnePlus One
    10234
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    10063
  • LG G3
    9975
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    9948
  • HTC One (M8)
    9860
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    9827
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    9646
  • Xiaomi Mi 4
    9508
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    9446
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 3 S800
    9364
  • Oppo N3
    9320
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    9284
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    9198
  • vivo Xshot
    8871
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    8792

We already mentioned, that the vivo Xshot is powered by the quite capable Adreno 330 GPU. Most of the other contenders on the list use the very same chip, but, as it turns out, a lot more efficiently. Screen resolution is also not the culprit, as again, most phones on the list have Full HD displays.

The fact is that offscreen rendering is particularly poor on the Xshot, which either means the GFX benchmark application is not playing well with Funtouch or something is messed up in the way the hardware is utilized. Either way, vivo still has a lot of software work to do and we would really suggest an Android version upgrade more than anything else.

GFX 2.7 T-Rex (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    41.7
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    40
  • Oppo Find 7a
    28.4
  • HTC One (M8)
    28.4
  • OnePlus One
    28.3
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    28
  • Oppo Find 7
    28
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    27.8
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    27.7
  • Xiaomi Mi 4
    27.6
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    27
  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    27
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    26.6
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 3 S800
    26.3
  • LG G3
    26
  • vivo Xshot
    23
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    15

GFX 2.7 T-Rex (onscreen)

Higher is better

  • HTC One (M8)
    30.1
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    30
  • OnePlus One
    30
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    29.3
  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    29
  • Oppo Find 7a
    28.8
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    28.3
  • Xiaomi Mi 4
    28.2
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    28.1
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    28
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 3 S800
    26.7
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    26.4
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    26
  • vivo Xshot
    23
  • LG G3
    20
  • Oppo Find 7
    19.9
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    15

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    18.5
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    18
  • OnePlus One
    12.1
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    12
  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    12
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    12
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    12
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    11.8
  • Xiaomi Mi 4
    11.6
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    11.4
  • Oppo Find 7a
    11.4
  • HTC One (M8)
    11.1
  • Oppo Find 7
    11.1
  • LG G3
    11
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 3 S800
    9.9
  • vivo Xshot
    9.5
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    5.8

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    13
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    13
  • OnePlus One
    12.9
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    12.7
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    12
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    11.9
  • HTC One (M8)
    11.9
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    11.7
  • Oppo Find 7a
    11.4
  • Xiaomi Mi 4
    11.3
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    11.2
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    11
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 3 S800
    10
  • vivo Xshot
    9.4
  • LG G3
    7.7
  • Oppo Find 7
    6.7
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    5.8

The vivo Xshot uses a custom browser solution as well. It didn't fair particularly well in our browser performance tests, scoring surprisingly low.

Kraken 1.1

Lower is better

  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    5181
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    5351
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    5968
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    6043
  • Xiaomi Mi 4
    6137
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    6209
  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    6260
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    6355
  • Oppo Find 7
    6363
  • Oppo N3
    6460
  • Oppo Find 7a
    6660
  • OnePlus One
    7008
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    7023
  • LG G3
    7632
  • vivo Xshot
    9114
  • HTC One (M8)
    10296
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    12266

BrowserMark 2.1

Higher is better

  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Lollipop
    2232
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    2208
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 Lollipop
    2066
  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (S615)
    1655
  • Motorola Moto X (2014)
    1600
  • Motorola Moto X (2014) Lollipop
    1562
  • Sony Xperia Z3
    1533
  • HTC One (M8) Lollipop
    1460
  • LG G3
    1453
  • Oppo Find 7
    1452
  • Samsung Galaxy S5 (S801)
    1398
  • OnePlus One
    1339
  • Oppo Find 7a
    1327
  • vivo Xshot
    1075
  • HTC One (M8)
    1069
  • Xiaomi Mi 4
    744
  • Oppo N3
    730

All things considered, the vivo Xshot offers performance lower than its chipset suggests. We feel most of that can be attributed to the custom OS, based on aging Android and the only way vivo is going to stay relevant in the high-end market is via an update sooner rather than later.

Reader comments

  • paresh mmaheshwari

Phone is best but software problems is new version massmello is upgrad plzz my problems to fast and solutions is vivo all mobile update to plz slave this problems to better than better vivo mobile's 1 problem is not velu

  • AnonD-614878

How to root my Vivo Y51L.....

  • sidb

Lots of software issues. U cannot retrieve contacts through search. I hate samsung but am missing it now.