AnTuTu Benchmarks for NVIDIA Project Shield Showcase Ridiculous Power; 32,000+ Score


Editor in Chief
Staff member
Jan 5, 2011

It's easy to be impressed with the new mobile chips currently available. Between the Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 and the Exynos 5 Octa-core from Samsung, we have seen some truly awesome scores ranging all the way to 28,000+. Luckily, that's just a start for the massive performance improvements we will see in 2013. It looks like NVIDIA's Tegra 4 architecture will take things to a new level of ridiculous. Some AnTuTu benchmarks of NVIDIA's Project Shield using the Tegra 4 chipset just showed up online, and if they are not faked, they are set to blow away the current crop of processors.

As you can see in the pic above, the score achieved was 32,150, which is 4,000 points faster than any current retail device we have seen before. The only time we have seen a faster benchmark was a Tegra 4 equipped reference tablet from NVIDIA when they first announced the new chipset. It hit a top score of over 36,000. If real, this new benchmark shows a real-world performance that is unparalleled in the industry right now. The benchmark was supposedly taken from a 1.9GHz quad-core Tegra 4-based Project Shield console with Android 4.2.1 Jelly Bean.

Right now, the only unknown quantity in this chipset war is the Qualcomm Snapdragon 800. Until we see some real benchmarks from the Snapdragon 800, it looks like NVIDIA will hold the performance crown. Of course, both chipsets are planned to launch later this summer, so it's possible they will fight for the "king of the hill" title at the same time.

As far as pure gaming devices are concerned, the Tegra 4 based NVIDIA Project Shield is likely in a league of its own. Here's a recap of Project Shield specs,
  • 5-inch display with 720p resolution (294 PPI)
  • Tegra 4 quad-core ARM Cortex A15 processor
  • 72-core NVIDIA GeForce GPU
  • Built-in gaming controls
  • Android 4.1.2 Jelly Bean
  • Support for Steam games
Source: NVIDIA Tegra 4-based Project Shield spotted in AnTuTu benchmark, score tops 32,000


Senior Member
Aug 20, 2011
Now all we need is some battery tech. to keep up with the power demands. A tablet with four hours of runtime wouldn't be very interesting, no matter how fast it is or how dazzling the graphics performance.



Super Moderator
Staff member
Jan 6, 2011
Impressive indeed. Could it possibly be considered fast enough in the constant race for more just for the sake of more? I agree with Jim that NVIDA runs the risk of getting into Intel issues where performance is often unusable when it comes at a high cost to battery life. Tegra 4 is is currently clocking in about 3x faster than Tegra 3 (36,000 vs 12,000 respectively). What if they chose to go with 2x the performance of Tegra 3 (24,000) but also doubled the battery life? Either way the future performance is looking very good.


Senior Member
Aug 20, 2011
Tegra 4 is is currently clocking in about 3x faster than Tegra 3 (36,000 vs 12,000 respectively). What if they chose to go with 2x the performance of Tegra 3 (24,000) but also doubled the battery life?
Or even just half-again the battery life? To me, for tablets (and "smart"phones), the goal ought to be "How fast can we make this thing run for 12 hours?" rather than "How long can we get this thing to run, without it weighing as much as a small child, running full out?"

I guess the question I would ask is: How fast is fast enough? The Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 I had for a short while, which was judged to be a mid-level entry, I thought was plenty fast enough for anything for which I'd be inclined to use a tablet.

Maybe I'm just easily-satisfied, vis-a-vis performance.



Feb 25, 2012
I'm really looking forward to the new intel atom processors. Quad-core at the battery life of the dual will rock!