Sony Xperia C3 and C3 Dual review: Let me take a selfie

Synthetic benchmarks

Sony Xperia T3 makes use of the Snapdragon 400 mid-range chipset. It has four Cortex-A7 CPU cores ticking at 1.2 GHz, Adreno 305 graphics and 1GB of RAM.

We've already seen the Snapdragon 400 powering a plenty of devices in the last year or so and it is indeed good enough for hiccup free use, though it's time is running out already. Many manufacturers are already replacing the Snapdragon 400 with its newer iteration - Snapdragon 410, which offers a 64-bit processor, which is more in line with where the industry is heading.

Starting off with the CPU benchmarks, the Xperia C3 posted a rather poor result on the multi-core GeekBench 3 cross-platform benchmark. It managed to do the same as the Moto G (2014), but other Snapdragon 400-powered devices such as the Xiaomi Redmi 1S and Sony Xperia T3 are doing even better. Their processor clock is higher though.

GeekBench 3

Higher is better

• Lenovo Vibe X2
  3647
• HTC Desire 820
  2586
• Xiaomi Redmi Note
  2435
• HTC Desire 816
  1510
• Xiaomi Redmi 1S
  1492
• Sony Xperia T3
  1373
• Sony Xperia C3 Dual
  1181
• Motorola Moto G (2014)
  1171

AnTuTu is a compound benchmark, which also takes into account RAM and GPU performance. The Xperia C3 numbers are average, close to what's expected from an S400-running device. Naturally, the octa-core Redmi Note and Desire 820 are notably better.

AnTuTu 5

Higher is better

• Lenovo Vibe X2
  46666
• Xiaomi Redmi Note
  32487
• HTC Desire 820
  27070
• Xiaomi Redmi 1S
  19912
• Sony Xperia C3 Dual
  18466
• Motorola Moto G (2014)
  18245

Basemark OS II is another all-round benchmark. It gives an overall score along with single, multi-core performance, math performance and more. We focus on the overall score and the dedicated CPU scores. The Sony Xperia C3 overall rating is on par with other Snapdragon 400 phones such as the Xiaomi Redmi 1S and Redmi Note.

Basemark OS II

Higher is better

• Lenovo Vibe X2
  930
• HTC Desire 820
  725
• Sony Xperia T3
  535
• Motorola Moto G (2014)
  526
• HTC Desire 816
  520
• Sony Xperia C3 Dual
  466
• Xiaomi Redmi Note
  452
• Xiaomi Redmi 1S
  394

The single and multi-core scores are average, mostly because the processors in the other Snapdragon 400 phones run on a higher clock.

Basemark OS II (single-core)

Higher is better

• Lenovo Vibe X2
  2571
• HTC Desire 820
  1812
• HTC Desire 816
  1739
• Xiaomi Redmi Note
  1701
• Sony Xperia T3
  1465
• Xiaomi Redmi 1S
  1435
• Sony Xperia C3 Dual
  1203
• Motorola Moto G (2014)
  1123

Basemark OS II (multi-core)

Higher is better

• Lenovo Vibe X2
  13999
• Xiaomi Redmi Note
  12771
• HTC Desire 820
  8453
• HTC Desire 816
  7071
• Sony Xperia T3
  5759
• Sony Xperia C3 Dual
  5234
• Motorola Moto G (2014)
  5001
• Xiaomi Redmi 1S
  4875

The graphics benchmark results came out average. The GFXBench tests - both off-screen and on-screen variants - reflected some OK performance on par with the competition. Note that the Open GL ES 3.0 Manhattan 1080p offscreen test failed to run because of insufficient video memory.

The Adreno 305 is a capable GPU, but the quad-core Mali-450MP4 within the Xiaomi Redmi Note is obviously better and doubles the performance.

GFX 2.7 T-Rex (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

• Lenovo Vibe X2
  17.8
• HTC Desire 820
  15
• Xiaomi Redmi Note
  9.8
• HTC Desire 816
  5.9
• Sony Xperia T3
  5.9
• Sony Xperia C3 Dual
  5.8
• Motorola Moto G (2014)
  5.8
• Xiaomi Redmi 1S
  5.7

GFX 2.7 T-Rex (onscreen)

Higher is better

• HTC Desire 820
  26
• Lenovo Vibe X2
  17
• Xiaomi Redmi Note
  13.3
• Sony Xperia T3
  11.2
• Sony Xperia C3 Dual
  11
• HTC Desire 816
  11
• Motorola Moto G (2014)
  10.8
• Xiaomi Redmi 1S
  10.3

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

• HTC Desire 820
  12
• Lenovo Vibe X2
  6.1
• Sony Xperia T3
  4.2
• Motorola Moto G (2014)
  4.1
• Sony Xperia C3 Dual
  4
• HTC Desire 816
  3.9

The Mozilla's Kraken 1.1 is JavaScript-centric browser benchmark. The Sony Xperia C3 did poorly on this test yet better than the new Moto G (2014). Unfortunately, the HTML5 BrowserMark 2.1 test crashed each time we tried to run it.

Kraken 1.1

Lower is better

• Lenovo Vibe X2
  4747
• Xiaomi Redmi Note
  12416
• Xiaomi Redmi 1S
  12470
• HTC Desire 816
  13564
• HTC Desire 820
  13568
• Sony Xperia T3
  13738
• Sony Xperia C3 Dual
  15737
• Motorola Moto G (2014)
  15988

One thing is clear, the Sony Xperia C3 isn't acing any benchmarks. On the contrary - its raw performance is average at best, barely touching some of its competitors. On a positive note - the synthetic benchmark performance may not be a complete measure for the device performance as in real-life use we found it to operate quite well. It provides solid and smooth Android experience and will do OK for the occasional game.

Unfortunately, heavier 3D games may not run well or at all because of insufficient RAM or will results in performance bottlenecks.

The Xperia C3 is OK for the moment and if you don't intend to use it for more than web browsing, watching the occasional video, listening to music, or playing some Angry Birds, and, of course, messaging and calls, then you'd be good for quite a while.