The latest AnTuTu benchmark results are in for March 2024, with the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 outperforming the Dimensity 9300 to claim the top spot. However, there are some important details to note.
It’s crucial to understand that these rankings are based on devices with at least 1,000 AnTuTu benchmark runs in a month. If a higher-end model didn’t make the list, it’s likely due to not meeting the minimum run threshold. Additionally, the results only reflect benchmark runs conducted in China. Now, let’s dive into the numbers.
The Asus ROG Phone 8 Pro powered by the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3, 16GB RAM, and 512GB storage, claimed the top spot in March with an average score of 2,141,448. Following closely behind is the Oppo Find X7 with the Dimensity 9300, 16GB RAM, and 1TB storage, scoring an average of 2,138,119. In third place is the iQOO 12 with the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3, 16GB RAM, and 512GB storage, achieving an average score of 2,110,595.
The fourth spot goes to the Red Magic 9 Pro+ with the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3, 16GB RAM, and 512GB storage, followed by the vivo X100 Pro with the Dimensity 9300, 16GB RAM, and 1TB storage. Rounding up the top 10 are the iQOO Neo9 Pro, iQOO 12 Pro, vivo X100, nubia Z60 Ultra, and Oppo Find X7 Ultra, mostly featuring the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 except for a few models.
It’s notable that Xiaomi devices are absent from the rankings, indicating a potential focus shift from optimizing smartphones for AnTuTu. One could interpret this as Xiaomi struggling to match the performance and thermal efficiency of its competitors.
Additionally, AnTuTu’s mid-range chipset chart reveals the Snapdragon 7+ Gen 3 leading the pack with the OnePlus Ace 3V scoring an average of 1,466,728 points. Following closely behind are the Redmi K70E with Dimensity 8300-Ultra and the Realme GT Neo5 SE with Snapdragon 7+ Gen 2.
The list continues with the Redmi Note 12 Turbo, the Oppo Reno11, and other notable models showcasing the Snapdragon and Dimensity chipsets. The disparity in performance between different Snapdragon versions highlights the misleading nature of Qualcomm’s naming conventions.
Source (in Chinese)
