Samsung Focus 2 review

Ready for Samsung's latest entrant to the Windows Phone game? Hopefully you answered "yes," because we're about to take you through an in-depth look at such a device: the Focus 2. Around the time that we United States-based Engadgeteers were lusting over Nokia's Lumia 800 and getting to know the HTC Titan, Samsung introduced its Focus S and lower-tiered Focus Flash WP7.5 handsets. Redmond's hardware restrictions haven't exactly changed much since then, begging the question as to how the Focus 2 fits in as a late follow-up to the original Focus from back in 2010. The bulk of the answer, of course, is LTE. This handset is the only other Windows Phone aside from the Lumia 900 and HTC Titan II to feature such connectivity on Ma Bell's network. That, and it's priced at just $50 dollars on a two-year commitment. Is it a veritable steal like the Focus Flash proved to be, though? Join us past the break where we'll lay it all out.

Hardware

Inside the box you'll find the Focus 2, a USB cable with a cube-shaped wall adapter, an in-ear headset and a pair of information pamphlets. Anyone familiar with T-Mobile's Galaxy Blaze 4Gmight feel a sense of déjà vu as they glance at the Focus 2 for the first time. The devices are similar in design, but the Focus 2 falls victim to our all-too-common complaint with Sammy-bred phones: it feels just a bit too plasticky. Samsung traded the Blaze's brushed-metal accents and textured battery cover in favor of a literally slick "Gloss Pure White" finish. The overall design ethos remains intact, though, so the device at least feels pleasing in hand. You'll find a 4-inch (WVGA) Super AMOLED display up front with Windows Phone's standard trio of backlit capacitive buttons above the bottom edge. Colors on the screen appear vibrant with gobs of contrast, the black levels are very deep and you'll get fairly good viewing angles. Tilt the device about 150 degrees, however, and you'll start noticing some color shifting.

Having the non-Plus variety of Super AMOLED means you're getting PenTile, and it's beyond easily noticeable.

Here's the thing: having the non-Plus variety of Super AMOLED means you're getting PenTile, and it's easily noticeable. Once you've seen a display like those belonging to the Focus Flash or even the 4.3-inch Lumia 900, it makes the 800 x 480 resolution look worse than it really is. It's especially obvious on curved borders and text, making what should be a smooth white look like grid paper. We found that it irritated our eyes and was harder to focus on than comparable displays without it. The interesting takeaway is that the Focus 2 has a slightly higher ppi than the Lumia 900 (233 pixels per inch vs. 217). It would be wise to grab a look at this phone in person to see if you can live with it.

With that detailed, it's time to move a bit below the display. The capacitive buttons are ultra-responsive like the ones we experienced on the older Focus models, and the device's vibration motor left us with unquestionably better haptic feedback than the Lumia 900. That said, that level of responsiveness becomes a pain in Landscape mode, where we repeatedly found ourselves accidentally exiting out of Netflix into Bing just like with those other Focuses. Another quirk that'll surely annoy some folks is how much the buttons light up -- they're jarring indoors, being brighter than the display on its highest setting. By the way, don't count on the vibration motor to be subtle during a quiet meeting; we noticed it makes a boop pitch that'll easily be amplified if set down on a table.

The back of the Focus 2 lays claim to a 5-megapixel sensor, LED flash and speakerphone. Peeling off the thin, snap-on battery cover reveals a micro-SIM slot and a 1,750mAh battery to keep the handset juiced. A chunky stripe of chrome plastic wraps around the edges of device breaking up its milky white complexion. On the right, it houses a power button and a two-stage shutter release, along with a volume rocker on the left. All of the buttons have a pleasing click without being too stiff, but they do feel just a little wobbly like we noted on the Lumia 800. The shutter button feels especially great, however, only requiring a light tap to grab a photo without inducing any shake. That leaves us with the top of the device, where there's a 3.5mm headset jack and secondary noise-cancelling microphone, and the bottom which houses the main microphone and micro-USB port.

If you caught our initial hands-on, one point that still resonates with us is how small it feels in hand. Despite having a 4-inch screen, it doesn't seem much bigger than the Galaxy S or even an iPhone 3GS. It's only if you put these devices back-to-back when it becomes apparent the Focus 2 is larger. We've got a nifty chart that goes over the key specs of the Focus 2 below, compared to the Titan II and Lumia 900 for perspective.

	HTC Titan II	Samsung Focus 2	Nokia Lumia 900
Dimensions	5.2 x 2.7 x 0.4 inches (132 x 69 x 10.2mm)	4.79 x 2.47 x 0.43 inches (121.7 x 62.7 x 10.9 mm)	5.03 x 2.7 x 0.45 inches (127.8 x 68.5 x 11.5mm)
Weight	6.1 oz (173g)	4.3 oz (122g)	5.64 oz (160g)
Screen size	4.7 inches	4 inches	4.3 inches
Screen resolution	800 x 480 (199ppi)	800 x 480 (233ppi)	800 x 480 (217ppi)
Screen type	S-LCD	Super AMOLED (PenTile)	ClearBlack sAMOLED+
Battery	1,730mAh	1,750mAh	1,830mAh
CPU	1.5GHz single-core Qualcomm MSM8255T (Snapdragon S2)	1.4GHz single-core Qualcomm (Snapdragon S2)	1.4GHz single-core Qualcomm APQ8055 (Snapdragon S2)
GPU	Adreno 205	Adreno 205	Adreno 205
RAM	512MB	512MB	512MB
Internal storage	16GB	8GB	16GB
External storage	None	None	None
Rear camera	16MP, f/2.6	5 MP	8MP, f/2.2
Front-facing camera	1.3MP	VGA	1.0MP
Video capture	720p HD	720p HD (30fps)	720p HD
NFC	No	No	No
Radios	Quadband GSM / EDGE; HSPA+ 850 / 1900 / 2100; LTE 700 / 1700	Quadband GSM / EDGE; HSPA+ 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100; LTE 700 / 1700	Quadband GSM / EDGE / ; HSPA+ 850 / 1900 / 2100; LTE 700 / 1700
Network speeds	LTE, HSPA+	LTE, HSPA+	LTE, HSPA+ 21.1Mbps
Bluetooth	2.1+EDR	2.1+EDR	2.1+EDR
MHL	No	--	Yes
Internet Sharing	Yes	Yes	Yes
FM Radio	Yes	Yes	Yes
SIM card	Standard	Micro	Micro

Performance and battery life

It's getting tiresome to note that a new Windows Phone performs about the same as the others on the software front, but that's exactly the case here. Given the hardware restrictions that will remain in place until Windows Phone 8 hits, you're left with a 1.4GHz single-core CPU, an Adreno 205 GPU and 512MB of RAM to run your phone. As such, there are no surprises here, with the device averaging a WP Bench score of 87.2 after ten runs -- predictably not far behind every other Windows Phone we've used.

Performance is usually smooth, but it's not ultra-zippy like the latest iPhone and top tier of Android flagships. It's not likely to be an issue as long as you're not an extreme power user -- heck, at least three Engadget editors manage to use Mango devices as their daily drivers, so we really mean it when we say "extreme." Apps generally load fairly quickly, but we occasionally experienced load-screen hangups while trying to access basics like Messages and Twitter. Aside from that and some mild stuttering when swiping around, we'd be hard-pressed to say any of the Windows Phone flagships perform materially better. The main concern we have with the Focus 2 rests with its 8GB (6.51GB user-accessible) of non-expandable storage. Despite having powerful connectivity, it leaves us to think that Samsung is forcibly positioning an otherwise solid device into the newbie smartphone owner territory -- that, or it's hoping you love SkyDrive.

Of course, running over HSPA+ and LTE can do a number on your battery life, so how does it fare here?

	Samsung Focus 2	Samsung Focus S	Nokia Lumia 900	HTC Titan II
WP Bench	87.2	91.54	92	94.5
Battery rundown	4:47	4:24	4:29	2:50
SunSpider (ms, lower numbers are better)	7,058	6,914	6,902	6,445

Using a Lumia 900 alongside the Focus 2, we really didn't find much of a difference between their running times. As long as you're not tethering over LTE and HSPA+ for about three hours a day like we do, you'll easily be able to eke out more than a day's worth of life -- so long as Mango's battery saver is turned on. Even adding in a light amount of Netflix streaming, a handful of calls, texting, a few camera shots and light browsing, we could probably make it through a normal workday without an outlet. That said, the Focus 2 managed to last 18 minutes longer than the Lumia 900's four hours and 29 minutes in WP Bench's CPU-intensive battery rundown. It's not a whopping achievement by any means, but if battery life is your main concern for a Windows Phone then look no further.

If battery life is your main concern for a Windows Phone then look no further.

Speaking of radio signals, let's talk about speeds. Using BandWidth, we were able to record LTE throughput as high as about 10Mbps down (with peaks up to 13) and 5Mbps up in San Francisco. Tethering to a laptop in Midtown Manhattan, the best we manged was around 5 Mbps down and 4 Mbps up according to SpeedTest.net. Considering we've seen upwards of 21 Mbps down on the Lumia 900 and Titan II, we're disappointed that, in our LTE trials, the phone couldn't make it out of the speed zone that's common for HSPA+. Web browsing in IE9 is usually just peppy enough, but as our most accurate SunSpider score shows (7,058ms +/- 0.3 percent), it's a bit slower than the rest of the pack. We experienced load times in excess of a minute to fully load pages over WiFi with the Lumia 900, and the results aren't any better here. You won't catch any checkerboarding, but scroll down a long webpage and you'll be greeted by a sea of white for a second or two.

Lackluster speeds aside, we came away quite impressed with the audio quality on the Focus 2. Compared to the Lumia 900, the device has much less hiss in the signal and a bit less grit to overall sound, with headphones plugged in. Although WP7.5 still can't seamlessly transition between two tracks without a quick pause, we didn't experience any popping like we do with the 900. Unluckily enough for Nokia's flagship, it doesn't stop there -- the Focus 2's earpiece produced clearer audio, without the slightest hints of metallic tones like the Lumia produces. Even the speakerphone sounds clearer, making the 900's sound a bit muddier and condensed in comparison (it's sound is noticeably thicker, however). Interestingly enough, the Focus 2 also has a hotter volume output (at least in the lower volume settings) through its headphone jack, needing only to hit 3 or 4 out of 30 when the Lumia needed to be near 15 to achieve the same output. With both devices, though, callers on the other end didn't have any complaints about hearing us. The Lumia 900 is certainly a good performer in the voice quality department, but there's no question that Samsung's lower-tiered device comes out a step ahead. And in case you're wondering, the included in-ear headphones are essentially (save for the inline remote and mic) what you'd get with a Galaxy Player: passable at best.

Camera

Let's start this section by stating that, no, this 5-megapixel shooter won't rival your Canon S95s. It does have some redeeming qualities, however, especially when pit it against the Lumia 900. Once you get into the Focus 2's live screen, the 900's look awful by comparison -- the framerate is smoother while panning, and the dreaded pink center that other WP7.5 devices suffer from is at least less obvious. The Lumia 900 does produce sharper images with more information and a wider angle thanks to its 8-megapixel sensor and 28mm lens, but the Focus 2 never slipped up with auto white balance like the 900 does on nearly every shot.

Its contrast levels are a bit over the top on auto and highlights tended to get blown out easily, but you can always adjust your settings thanks to Windows Phone's plethora of manual options. Low-light performance from the Focus is acceptable.The images produced are noticeably less noisy than the Lumia, but the shots do come out a bit darker. The lens also suffers from some extreme flare-ups when any bright lights from cars and the like are introduced, so don't bet on anything other than artsy results in those types of situations. We were able to achieve better bokeh from the macro mode on the Focus 2 than the 900, but it had had a tendency to focus on the background in challenging light situations. The time it'll take to catch focus with both devices is about the same: not particularly quick. You'd be better off just whipping out a standalone camera if you're hoping to catch moving subjects, as you're results will always have a bit of blur. You'll also find a 4x digital zoom, but we'd steer clear of it as the results are worse than the VGA front-facing camera. Speaking of that, it'll do okay for videocalls. Pictures? Spare yourself the grief and don't even go for it. Overall, the cameras onboard are just good enough and the Lumia's results are largely better -- even if it means some extra tweaking to make it happen.

Let's talk about moving images now. That rear shooter is also capable enough to capture VGA and 720p HD video (30fps). Video quality, like the photos, is just good enough to get the job done. Colors come through naturally, but you'll also be dealing with a fair amount of rolling shutter, lens-flaring, blown-out highs and wobbling from the slightest movements (there's no image stabilization to speak of). Far as we can tell you're also stuck with a fixed focus, but thankfully, exposure is continuously adjusted automatically. The audio results for video, unlike the rest of of the phone, comes out as compressed garbage to be blunt. As you can hear in our sample video, our blabbering easily clips the signal as it tries to compensate for the traffic whizzing by. You'll also notice that the birds chirping sound more like harsh squeals, and that the overall sound is tinny. The most annoying aspect we dealt with is that video defaults to VGA, meaning you'll likely miss many quickly-passing moving if you want to shoot in HD.

Software

Remember Windows Phone 7.5 Mango? Yeah, it's exactly the same Metro-styled UI with Live Tiles and sparse customizability options you either love, hate or have learned to live with. Samsung and AT&T have added their usual array of bloatware apps, but you can delete all of them to free up more of that spare storage space. On the AT&T front, there's U-Verse Mobile, Family Map, Navigator, YPmobile and surprisingly useful Code Scanner, while Samsung packs in its usual Now news and weather aggregator and Photo Studio editor. Unlike most crapware we actually found ourselves using these two Samsung additions a great deal -- the Now application easily trumps Redmond's baked-in weather app. You'll also find these and other exclusive bits in the AT&T Featured and Samsung Zone sections within the Marketplace, leaving us to again wonder why they have to come pre-loaded on the device in the first place. Notably, Samsung's free Photogram app gave us access to some nifty filters like HDR and Glow, which gives you more options in addition to the likes of Lomoshot and Dreamshot found in Photo Studio. We'd be remiss not to mention that Photo Studio also enables other goodies like a Panorama mode.

Wrap-up

Samsung Focus 2 for AT&T hands-on at CTIA 2012 (update: video)

Samsung's Focus 2 arrives at AT&T today, a slice of LTE-equipped Mango for $50

Nokia Lumia 900 review

We're really at a toss-up with the Samsung Focus 2. We find ourselves reluctant to fall in love with the current crop of devices as the next version of Windows Phone looms ever closer, but geez does the Focus 2 tug on our geeky heartstrings. When it comes down to it, we feel like Samsung is playing love games with us on this one. You've now got a $50 option for an LTE-capable Windows Phone that can outlive the batteries of the $100 Lumia 900 and $200 Titan II and outperform at least one on audio quality, marred by a PenTile display, a paltry 6.51GB of user-accesible and non-expandable storage, and slow LTE speeds. Furthermore, the overall package doesn't serve as a compelling upgrade from even the earlier Focus models unless your heart is set on LTE and tethering. Every day that we get closer to Apollo it gets harder to recommend the likes of the Lumia 900 and the HTC Titan II on AT&T's network, making the lower-tiered Focus 2 an even harder sell. There's no question that the Focus 2 is a solid little handset, but we also have no doubt that when faced with a two-year agreement the Lumia 900 is still the best bang for your buck if you can pony up the extra $50.

Read more »

HTC One XL coming to Germany, drags LTE with it

In the US, Asia and Australia they've already had their fill of the HTC One XL. But, in Europe, they've had to make do with the lame ol' HSPA+ One X. That is, until now. German carrier Vodafone has announced that it'll be the first to bring the XL home, complete with triband LTE in tow. Just like the American "One X," the new Euro XL ditches the quad-core Tegra 3 for a 1.5GHz dual-core S4, primarily because the NVIDIA solution doesn't support LTE. Though, as an added bonus, we're sure it helps extend the life of that 1,800 mAh cell inside. Vodafone will get the handset first in early June in a nice matte black, while Deutsche Telekom and O2 Germany will score the device later -- potentially in white. If you want yours contract free, it'll cost you €699 from Vodafone or €659 from HTC.

Read more »

HTC One X vs. One S: which phone is The One for you?

Jet Li starred in a 2001 movie called "The One." In it, his character traveled to parallel universes and grew stronger as he killed alternate versions of himself. This continued on until there was only one other copy left, with the movie culminating in an epic battle between the two. We won't spoil the ending, but we were reminded of this movie when thinking about the One X and the One S: both are incredibly powerful phones that we'd be proud to use as our daily drivers, but the vast majority of us are only able to choose one One. (The One V is also a possible option but for the purposes of this feature we're laser-focused on HTC's two higher-end models.)

How can we make a sound decision? The two phones are considered premium devices with top-notch components and relatively few flaws. The major difference, however, is going to be the price. Naturally, the cost will vary depending on where you live and which carrier you choose, but make no mistake: the S is going to be less expensive. Is it worth spending the extra money to go with the top-shelf model, or will the little guy be plenty? Now that the two devices are officially on sale in Europe, it's time to pick a side. We can't decide for you, but our goal is to present each phone's pros and cons, going round by round. Which one is right for you? Read on to find out.

Hardware

Particularly since they were released in tandem, it's obvious these two phones share more than a little DNA. The One X is not only high-end, it's swinging for the fences in its attempt to be the best smartphone money can buy. But the One S is by no means a weakling; in fact, HTC is positioning both handsets as premium devices, though it considers the X to be the more lavish of the two.

So let's get the basics out of the way, because these details alone may be enough to cement your decision. First, the X sports a 4.7-inch display, compared with a 4.3-inch one on the S. While such a gargantuan screen would have been met with skepticism a year ago, 4.7 inches is about par for the course in 2012 (if you need proof, look no further than the popular 5.3-inch Samsung Galaxy Note and 4.65-inch Galaxy Nexus). Then again, the success of competing devices means little when your hands are small.

Thanks to some wise design decisions, like that thin, concave form shape, the X actually feels perfectly at home in-hand, so much so that even a certain phone reviewer with medium-sized hands can hold it without any difficulty. That said, the S is noticeably more compact and easier to grip, so if 4.7 inches of real estate is just a little too much for you, you've already found your winner.

Another bit that could potentially make or break your decision is the matter of available storage space: the One X carries 32GB of internal memory (AT&T's version will only come with 16GB), while its sibling's storage is capped at 16GB. More importantly, neither device has expandable storage. Since the vast majority of Android phones let you add external memory via a microSD slot, this wasn't a commonplace issue with Android phones until just a few months ago. What we're seeing now, however, is a shift in phone design; manufacturers are much more concerned with keeping their devices thin and sleek, and the microSD card slot is on the chopping block. We believe the popularity of the cloud is also partly to blame for this change of heart. Indeed, knowing that its decision to kill the microSD would cheese off a few hardcore fans, HTC is trying to sweeten the pot with free 25GB of Dropbox storage. But if you're on a capped data plan, good luck trying this out without incurring some steep overage charges.

As for industrial design, HTC didn't skimp on build quality. The debate about which one is the most durable will likely rage on for a long time, but suffice to say they're worthy opponents: in one corner you have the One X's high impact-resisting polycarbonate, and in the other sits the One S's aircraft-grade aluminum shell, which has been treated through micro-arc oxidation, in which the metal is zapped with 10,000 volts of electricity to become five times stronger. And though we're not certain which material is ultimately more resilient, we'd be very surprised to learn there's much of a difference; both have a reassuring solidity about them. And in case it's the front of the phones you're worried about, fear not -- they're both coated in Gorilla Glass.

The X and S are both thin, coming in at 8.9mm and 7.8mm, respectively. They're also light: 4.59 ounces (130g) for the X and 4.22 ounces (120g) for the S. And though the X is technically thicker and heavier, it's a marginal difference that feels commensurate with its larger screen and sprawling dimensions.

If you're a fan of Near Field Communication, you'll have no choice but to go with the One X, as this feature is completely absent on the One S. Additionally, Sense 4 includes support for Android Beam and Google Wallet. Of course, though, whether you can actually use Wallet depends on several factors, such as whether or not your carrier actually allows its use on their network.

Another key difference is the type of processor used. The One X is the first phone with NVIDIA's quad-core Tegra 3 chip, offering four cores running at 1.5GHz and an additional "PLUS-1" core that functions at reduced clock speeds in an effort to preserve battery life. The S, meanwhile, is powered by a 1.5GHz dual-core 28nm Snapdragon S4 chip. It doesn't sound as good given that it has half the cores, but as you'll see in the performance section, it's not the number of cores that's important; it's how efficiently each one is used.

Now we'll turn to the radios. For the international versions, you can expect to find quadband GSM / EDGE (that's 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100), which means you'll have no problem getting at least some kind of signal as you travel the world. When the need for speed is pressing, you'll find one more UMTS / HSPA + band on the X. Specifically, you'll be able to enjoy 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100, while the S sports all but the 1900MHz radio. T-Mobile AWS (US only) isn't included on either device, so you're stuck with enjoying either blazing-fast 2G downloads or waiting a few weeks for T-Mo's One S to arrive with 900 / 1700 / 2100MHz bands. AT&T users, you should look over your coverage with a fine-tooth comb before you pull the trigger -- if most of your time is spent in a 1900MHz zone, it won't be wise to go with the One S.

Crave more nitty gritty details? We've compiled a handy spec sheet showing off what each phone's packing. As we see it, both devices can talk the talk and walk the walk, but the X just happens to have a tad more spring in its step than its smaller sibling.

	HTC One X	HTC One S
Dimensions	5.29 x 2.75 x 0.35 inches (134.4 x 69.9 x 8.9mm)	5.15 x 2.56 x 0.31 inches (130.9 x 65 x 7.8 mm)
Weight	4.59 oz (130g)	4.22 oz (120g)
Screen size	4.7 inches	4.3 inches
Screen resolution	1280 x 720 HD (312ppi)	960 x 540 qHD (256ppi)
Screen type	S-LCD 2	Super AMOLED
Battery	1,800mAh	1,650mAh
Internal storage	32GB	16GB
External storage	None	None
Rear camera	8MP, f/2.0	8 MP, f/2.0
Front-facing camera	1.3MP	VGA
Video capture	1080p HD	1080p
NFC	Yes	No
Radios	Quadband GSM / EDGE; HSPA+ 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100	Quadband GSM / EDGE; HSPA+ 850 / 900 / 2100
Network speeds	DC HSPA+ 42Mbps	DC HSPA+ 42Mbps
Bluetooth	4.0	4.0
RAM	1GB DDR2	1GB DDR2
MHL	Yes	Yes
WiFi	a/b/g/n (dual-band)	a/b/g/n (dual-band)

Winner: One X

Display

After viewing the gorgeous non-PenTile 720p HD display on the One X for a few days, we realized just how difficult it was to revert to the S's qHD Super AMOLED panel. Let's put it this way: it's nearly the same screen as on the Droid RAZR, which comes as a tremendous disappointment to us. While we admit that the colors on the AMOLED display are a bit more saturated, that's all it has going for it. The pixelation is still easily noticeable -- in fact, it was the very first thing that stood out when we turned the S on for the first time. In contrast, the X's S-LCD 2 is definitely one of the nicest screens you can get right now, and there's no doubt it trumps the One S.

That said, this might not play a critical role in your decision if you're stepping up from a phone with a lower-res display. If that's the case, the qHD resolution might well suit you fine, especially if it means spending less on the phone hardware. But we'll warn you not to spend much time playing around with the X. Once you go 720p, it's hard to go back.

Winner: One X

Performance

It's a debate techies have been having for months. Which is better: NVIDIA's Tegra 3 or Qualcomm's Snapdragon S4? The One series gives us the first real idea of how both processors work on high-end smartphones, and the good news is that both handsets are amazing. Absolutely incredible. With very few exceptions, you'll be completely giddy using either device as your daily driver, as both the One X and One S offer some of the most buttery smooth performance we've had the privilege to experience on a smartphone.

Okay, but which one is better? From what we could tell in real-life usage, the two are neck-and-neck; the quad-core Tegra 3 doesn't offer any substantially significant improvement over the dual-core Snapdragon S4. Sure, the more cores the merrier, but there's certainly more to the performance of the processor than a simple number. We meant serious business in searching for a definitive answer to this puzzling query -- well, as definitive as we can actually get with benchmark scores -- and performed 17 tests. The true comparison of the two chipsets will come when we get our hands on AT&T's version of the One X, because it features nearly the same specs as its global counterpart but uses an S4 instead of Tegra 3. For now, though, this is the closest we'll get.

Here's what we found:

	HTC One X	HTC One S
Quadrant	4,906	5,053
Linpack (multi-thread)	150.54	222.22
NenaMark2 (fps)	47.6	61.0
Neocore	58.2	60.1
Vellamo	1,617	2,452
SunSpider 9.1 (ms, lower is better)	1,772.5	1,742.5
Moonbat (ms, lower is better)	2,676	2,751
GLBenchmark 2.1 Egypt	51fps	60fps
GL Benchmark 2.1 Pro	54fps	61fps
GL Benchmark Egypt offscreen	63fps	57fps
GL Benchmark Pro offscreen	89fps	98fps
AndEBench (Native / Java)	9,223 / 279	5,866 / 189
AnTuTu	11,030	7,067
SmartBench 2012 (Productivity)	4,731	3,028
SmartBench 2012 (Gaming)	2,632	3,383
HTML5 test	364	343
CF-Bench (Overall)	13,233	9,547

Of the 17 tests shown here, 10 came out in favor of the S. But let's break down some of the benchmarks. Of the four that measure browser performance, the two phones split evenly. One of the tests the S won was Vellamo, a Qualcomm-made tool, so take that score with a grain of salt. Still, a swing of 840 is rather sizable, even if there's a possibility the S may have had a slight home-court advantage.

We were able to get a good glimpse of GPU performance by using GLBenchmark, a suite of 28 various tests that measure the phones' OpenGL ES 2.0 (and GLBenchmark 1.0, in the case of the Pro scores). Of the 28, the X nabbed one and tied with the S in another. With that said, the single test in which the S was bested was the Egypt offscreen benchmark, which renders both loads at the same resolution of 720p.

Quadrant, which seems to be the gold standard of benchmark tests, also gave the S a slight advantage. Take into consideration, though, the fact that this test is run at the device's native resolution, which typically lends to a better score for lower-res displays. How much of an effect this has on the overall score is hard to say.

There were a handful of tests that the X won by a country mile. AndEBench, AnTuTu and CF-Bench, for example, are all multi-threaded tests that played up Tegra 3's strengths. The X creamed the S in productivity in SmartBench 2012 but fell short in gaming, which could be explained by the difference in resolution. The S won decisively in Linpack and Nenamark 2, but some of its other victories were thanks to slim margins.

The S conquered more benchmarks, but the tests favoring the X were essentially no-contest affairs. Can we crown a champion yet? We want to, but it's not going to happen right now, not with so many outlying variables (e.g., screen size and resolution). Both are remarkably powerful and our experience using both was nothing short of mind-blowing. To put it another way, it's kind of like trying to compare Magic Johnson with Larry Bird: both were legendary players in their day, one not necessarily better than the other, considering their various strengths and weaknesses. (Lakers and Celtics fans, just go with this analogy, okay?). It's the same with Tegra 3 and Snapdragon S4; both are champions in the league, and until AT&T's version of the One X comes out to play ball, this game will just have to go into overtime.

Winner: Neither

Battery life

There's one design choice we didn't mention earlier, and it's enough of a doozy that it could potentially swing your decision: neither phone has a user-accessible battery. Sure, both handsets are thinner as a result, but we imagine there will be more than a handful of power users who would happily accept a little extra heft if it meant they could swap in a larger juicepack. And let's face it: with the amount of normal use we're getting out of our phones these days, who isn't turning into a power user?

When it comes to runtime, the advantage clearly goes to the One S. But before we get into specific results, there are few variables to consider: first, the X comes with a 1,800mAh pack compared to the S's 1,650, but it also needs to service a larger, higher-res LCD display -- a big potential drain on any phone's battery life.

	HTC One X	HTC One S
Video rundown time	6 hours	8.5 hours
Regular-use time	12.5 hours	13.5 hours

As you can see, the screen in this case does indeed has an impact on runtime. In our standard video rundown test, which consists of looping movies with the brightness fixed at 50 percent brightness, the S led the X by two and a half hours. Still, the S only lasted marginally longer with regular use, which included checking email, web browsing, Twitter, Facebook, downloading apps, some light photo / video recording and other miscellany. When we left both phones on standby, only occasionally checking email, taking a photo or placing a call, the One X actually outlasted the S.

This simply confirmed to us what we already knew: the continually backlit LCD display and larger screen size are going to be a significant drain on the battery, especially compared to the AMOLED display on the S. But another aspect that didn't get a lot of love in this department was graphics performance. In fact, after pushing the Tegra 3's GPU through the full gamut of GLBenchmark tests for 20 minutes, the X's battery slipped 17 percent. And how did the S do when faced with the same task? It only experienced a nine percent drop.

Naturally this is going to be a concern to hardcore gamers, but casual smartphone users won't feel the heat quite as much. Getting 12.5 hours in normal use, as our tests indicated, should get you through the better part of a full day, but you may need to plug in your new beauty just after dinnertime. The One S wins a slight advantage in overall battery life, but the chasm between the two sets of scores isn't as wide as you might think.

Winner: One S

Camera

HTC has been putting a lot of marketing muscle behind its ImageSense technology, and we put its performance through its paces in our review of the One X. Its quick start-up time, machine gun-like continuous shooting and ability to record stills and video simultaneously help make the experience a delightful one. But how different are the cameras on these two phones?

The One S is technically a lower-end device than the X, so it must have a cheaper camera, right? Well, not when it comes to the main, rear-facing camera or its video capture capabilities. Let's break it down: both phones use the same 8-megapixel sensor in back and offer all of the essential components to make ImageSense work as well as it does. Video capture is set at 1080p in both cases. The only difference is the front-facing camera. You'll notice the X delivers a 1.3-megapixel sensor with 720p HD video capture, but the designers in Taiwan weren't as charitable to the S, which makes do with a VGA cam and video capture fixed at 640 x 480 resolution.

But not all is roses and sunshine for the One S when looking at some of the images. Taking shots side-by-side, it's clear that the S produces images that are just a smidgeon overexposed when compared to the One X. Keep in mind that this doesn't mean the photos are worthless junk -- they still turn out great, but the bigger brother is just a tad better in this department. At least, for now. It's highly likely that this slight variation in the cameras' performance is software-related, since every other component is identical between the two devices. We're hoping this will be easily fixed in a future update, but it's important to note for the time being.

Winner: One X

Firmware

With so many factors to consider, there's at least one that won't have any bearing on your decision: the firmware. Both devices come loaded with Sense 4, the latest version of HTC's custom Android skin running atop Ice Cream Sandwich, and it's virtually identical on both devices, the only exceptions being hardware-related (no Android Beam on the S, for instance). As for the question of whether or not the new Sense is right for you, we'll steer you to our extensive review. Suffice to say, though, if you have your heart set on an HTC device, you won't have a choice when it comes to out-of-the-box firmware.

Winner: Neither

Carriers

If you live in the US, your experience with either phone might vary depending on which carrier you choose. For instance, as mentioned earlier, both phones will work on AT&T's HSPA+ / UMTS / EDGE networks, though the S will only get the latter in 850MHz coverage. T-Mobile users, on the other hand, are left with only EDGE speeds since neither One offers the requisite AWS radios.

That's for the unbranded global models. However, three of the four major carriers in the US will get a new HTC device to call its own, and each will be "optimized" to work on its respective network: AT&T will stock the LTE version of the One X, which adds in 700 / AWS LTE bands, reduces the storage to 16GB and uses a 1.5GHz dual-core Snapdragon S4 MSM8960 chipset. T-Mobile opted for the One S with AWS included, to ensure its customers can enjoy 42Mbps HSPA+. Sprint will feature the EVO 4G LTE, a device that's similar to the AT&T One X internally but brings a few radical design choices (read: a kickstand) and bows to a few other carrier whims. Verizon hasn't announced anything, though an Incredible 4G has been rumored for quite some time, and it's uncertain as to whether or not Big Red will decide to offer any additional selections from HTC this spring or summer.

Wrap-up

Have you chosen a team yet? These two offer a unique litany of temptations: the One X with the more convincing spec sheet and the One S with slightly better battery life. We know this might not be what you want to hear, but we think it's safe to say you can't go wrong either way. It really comes down to whether or not each phone fits comfortably in your hand and gives you the combination of features you want. (It wouldn't hurt if it fell inside your price range, too.) Heck, perhaps it even convinced you to wait for the mystical Samsung Galaxy S III. Regardless of what you choose, we hope our guide has soothed your troubled soul somewhat.

Read more »