Home / Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11 / Compare

Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11 vs Mali-G925-Immortalis MC12

On Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11 (POCO X8 Pro Max, REDMI Turbo 5 Max, Samsung Galaxy Tab S11 Ultra, Xiaomi 15T Pro). The first driver named is compared against the second, which is the baseline.

StockMali-G925-Immortalis MC12v1.r49p1-03bet0.f8a98b506b89b21c80a508d70abfcb3f

CustomMali-G925-Immortalis MC11v1.r49p1-03bet0.4505ac1771886c7c25f13653ad4cdff7

Graphics system version (Vulkan)1.3.278 to 1.3.278

Optional features (extensions)152 to 152+0 -0

Features that pass their check (validated)40 to 390 pass only on Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11 1 pass only on Mali-G925-Immortalis MC12

Speed test scenes (benchmark)0 faster 5 slower32% slower overall (geometric mean)

Games each driver could run (an estimate from its feature list): green likely, yellow maybe, orange limited, red no

StockDX92002+DX102006+DX112009+DX122015+Switch

CustomDX92002+DX102006+DX112009+DX122015+Switch

compute_nbody18% slower
hdr_2160p22% slower
oit_linked_lists35% slower
pipeline_barriers_2160p42% slower
subpasses_2160p38% slower

Custom driver against stock, per scene. Bars to the right are faster, to the left slower.

Small areas of the picture differ from the stock driver in 2 scenes (pipeline_barriers: 1758 of 2304 cells, pipeline_barriers_2160p: 1751 of 2304 cells). The picture matches overall, so this is a local rendering fault, not a different scene.

Mali-G925-Immortalis MC12 details Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11 details

Feature checks that differ (2)

Feature	Stock	Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11	Change
compat.nested_map core	pass	untested	lost
compat.helper_loop_terminator core	fail	untested	changed

Speed test scenes (benchmark)

The two drivers were not measured on the same set of device models. Frame times from different devices do not compare drivers, so read these numbers with that in mind.

Scene	Stock ms	Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11 ms	Difference	Starts	GPU clock, MHz	Picture vs stock
compute_nbody	10.80 typical 10.60	13.22 typical 12.95	18% slower	3 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs ? clock unknown	no large difference 0.0 no small difference worst 0.0 64x36
hdr_2160p	8.39 typical 8.27	10.81 typical 10.55	22% slower	3 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs ? clock unknown	no large difference 0.0 no small difference worst 0.0 64x36
oit_linked_lists	13.17 typical 13.39	20.12 typical 20.05	35% slower	3 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs ? clock unknown	no large difference 0.0 no small difference worst 0.0 64x36
pipeline_barriers	5.66 typical 5.61	6.05 typical 5.90	too light, see pipeline_barriers_2160p	3 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs ? clock unknown	no large difference 10.4 differs in 1758 small areas worst 80.3 64x36
pipeline_barriers_2160p	6.09 typical 6.22	10.54 typical 10.57	42% slower	3 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs ? clock unknown	no large difference 10.2 differs in 1751 small areas worst 79.7 64x36
subpasses	7.20 typical 7.39	4.70 typical 4.32	too light, see subpasses_2160p	3 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs ? clock unknown	not checked
subpasses_2160p	9.86 typical 9.84	15.98 typical 15.97	38% slower	3 of 3 vs 3 of 3	? vs ? clock unknown	not checked

Time to draw one frame, per scene: the average (mean) frame time of the scene's best round, which is how many frames the driver delivered; lower is faster. "Typical" beside it is the median frame, which can sit well under the average when a driver's frames come in two speeds. A pair of reports made before per-round averages were recorded is compared on the median. A scene whose rounds disagree by more than 15% is left out. A scene marked "paced" was held at that mean frame time by the driver or the display queue, together with at least one other scene of the same run; its time says how the frames were spaced, not how fast the driver rendered, so it is not compared. A scene marked "too light" took under 8 ms at the standard size (1920 by 1080) on both drivers, where the screen's frame queue spaces the frames more than the chip does; its heavier run is the one compared: the row ending in _2160p is the scene drawn at 3840 by 2160, and compute_nbody_2x is that scene with twice the particles. "Faster" and "slower" describe Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11 against Mali-G925-Immortalis MC12. "Picture vs stock" compares one fixed frame per scene as a coarse colour grid (0 is identical, above 40 is a different picture); it finds a scene that was not drawn. Where both reports carry the finer 64x36 grid, the second figure is how many of its 2,304 cells differ by more than 4 of 255, and "worst" is the largest single cell; this is what finds a small rendering error in a picture that otherwise matches. A row marked 16x9 comes from a report made before the finer grid existed. "Starts" is how many of a scene's process starts reached a measured round. A GPU clock marked "not comparable" differed by more than 5% of the device's maximum between the two timings.

Technical differences (Vulkan)

Extensions only in Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11 (0)

None

Extensions only in Mali-G925-Immortalis MC12 (0)

None

Core features that differ (0)

None

Limits that differ (0)

Limit	Stock	Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11

Formats supported by only one driver (0 gained, 0 lost)

Only in Mali-G925-Immortalis MC11:

None

Only in Mali-G925-Immortalis MC12:

None