Google Tensor G5 vs Xring O1
Across 12 measured categories, the Xring O1 comes out ahead.
I put the Google Tensor G5 and the Xring O1 side by side to see how they really compare. On graphics, the Google Tensor G5 runs the PowerVR DXT-48-1536 while the Xring O1 runs the Arm Immortalis-G925 MP16. Below I go through the CPU, GPU, memory and connectivity, then the benchmark scores, so you can work out which one is the better fit for you.
Where each chip wins
Google Tensor G5
1 advantage
-
533 MHz higher RAM speed
5333 MHz vs 4800 MHz
Xring O1
7 advantages
-
123% higher AnTuTu score
29.63 Lakhs vs 13.27 Lakhs
-
45% faster Geekbench multi-core score
9,111 vs 6,301
-
16% faster Geekbench single-core score
2,660 vs 2,298
-
120 MHz higher CPU clock
3900 MHz vs 3780 MHz
-
Larger L3 cache
16 MB vs 8 MB
-
Higher GPU FLOPS
5701.6 GFLOPS vs 1689.6 GFLOPS
-
Newer storage standard
UFS 4.1 vs UFS 4.0
Benchmark charts
AnTuTu v11 Total
Geekbench Single-Core
Geekbench Multi-Core
Specifications Comparison
Here is how the Google Tensor G5 and the Xring O1 compare across every spec. In each row, the stronger value is highlighted so the differences are easy to spot.
| Launch Date | August 2025 | May 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Chipset Class | Flagship | Flagship |
| Manufacturer | Xiaomi | |
| Model Number | GS501 | - |
| Total Cores | 8 | 10 |
|---|---|---|
| Core Configuration | 1x Cortex X4 - 3.78GHz 5x Cortex A725 - 3.05GHz 2x Cortex A520 - 2.25GHz |
2x 3.90 GHz - Cortex-X925 4x 3.40 GHz - Cortex-A725 2x 1.90 GHz - Cortex-A725 2x 1.80 GHz - Cortex-A520 |
| Max Frequency | 3780 MHz | 3900 MHz |
| Instruction Set | ARMv9.2-A | ARMv9.2-A |
| Process Node | 3 nm | 3 nm |
| Manufacturing | TSMC | TSMC |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB |
| L3 Cache | 8 MB | 16 MB |
| TDP | 6 W | - |
| GPU Name | PowerVR DXT-48-1536 | Arm Immortalis-G925 MP16 |
|---|---|---|
| GPU Frequency | 1100 MHz | 1392 MHz |
| Shading Units | 128 | 128 |
| FLOPS | 1689.6 GFLOPS | 5701.6 GFLOPS |
| Ray Tracing Support | No | Yes |
| NPU | - | 44 TOPS |
| API Support | Vulkan 1.4, OpenCL 3.0, OpenGL ES 3.2 | Vulkan 1.4, OpenCL 3.0, OpenGL ES 3.2 |
| RAM Type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |
|---|---|---|
| RAM Frequency | 5333 MHz | 4800 MHz |
| Memory Bus | 4x 16-bit | 4x 16-bit |
| Max Bandwidth | 68.2 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |
| Max RAM Size | 16 GB | 24 GB |
| Storage Type | UFS 4.0 | UFS 4.1 |
| Camera Support | 200MP | 320 MP |
|---|---|---|
| Video Capture | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS |
| Max Display Resolution | WQHD+ | 4K |
| Video Playback | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS | 8K at 30FPS, 4K at 120FPS |
| Video Codecs | H.264, H.265, HEVC, AV1, VP9 | H.264, H.265, AV1, VP9 |
| Audio Codecs | AAC, AIFF, CAF, MP3, MP4, WAV | AAC LC, FLAC, HE-AACv1, HE-AACv2, MP3 |
| Modem | Samsung Exynos 5400 5G | MediaTek T800 5G |
|---|---|---|
| Network Support | 5G | 5G |
| Download Speed | 14.79 Gbps | 7.90 Gbps |
| Upload Speed | 3.5 Gbps | 4.20 Gbps |
| Wi-Fi | 7 | 7 |
| Bluetooth | 6.0 | 5.4 |
| Navigation | GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou, Galileo, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou, Galileo, QZSS |
Benchmark results
| Total | 13,26,623 | 29,63,052 |
|---|---|---|
| CPU | 4,63,275 | 9,37,172 |
| GPU | 4,11,537 | 9,96,086 |
| Memory | 2,33,612 | 4,09,648 |
| UX | 2,12,199 | 6,20,146 |
| Single-Core | 2,298 | 2,660 |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-Core | 6,301 | 9,111 |
Overall Score
Each category scored out of 100.
| Category | Google Tensor G5 | Xring O1 |
|---|---|---|
| CPU Score |
|
|
| GPU Score |
|
|
| Memory Score |
|
|
| Total Score |
|
|
Related comparisons
- 1 Exynos 2600 vs Google Tensor G5
- 2 Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs Google Tensor G5
- 3 Google Tensor G5 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8500
- 4 Apple A16 Bionic vs Google Tensor G5
- 5 Google Tensor G5 vs Samsung Exynos 2400
- 6 Xring O1 vs Apple A17 Pro
- 7 Xring O1 vs Snapdragon 8 Gen 1
- 8 Xiaomi Xring O1 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000
- 9 Xring O1 vs Google Tensor G4
- 10 Samsung Exynos 2500 vs Xring O1
Discussion