Notebookcheck Logo

Honor 300 Pro tipped to debut with extra-custom version of Snapdragon 8 Gen 3

The "300 Pro". (Image source: Digital Chat Station via Weibo)
The "300 Pro". (Image source: Digital Chat Station via Weibo)
The 300 Pro is thought to debut as one of Honor's latest mid-range "Portrait Master" Android smartphones soon. Now, it has allegedly been spotted on Geekbench with a highly unusual processor - even though it apparently goes by a familiar name.

The 300 Pro has yet to be made official, yet has been described in some detail by typically reliable leaker Digital Chat Station. However, the latest Honor smartphone to hit Geekbench has a processor that seems anything but its alleged Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 SoC.

The AMP-AN00 has a convincingly Honor 5G smartphone model number in its new benchmarking leak, which also specifies the "ARM SM8650" (a moniker that normally conforms to the 8 Gen 3) as the CPU. 

However, 5 of its 8 cores are clocked at the same 2.96GHz speed: a highly unusual feature, especially compared to the 8 Gen 3's 3+2+2+1 configuration with a top speed of 3.3GHz. Another 2 cores from this new processor are 2.04GHz with the fastest remaining one is apparently set at 3.05GHz.

The alleged new Snapdragon 8-series mutant has achieved respectable scores of just over 2,100 and just under 7,000 in single- and multi-core scores respectively. It will be interesting to see if it really will be introduced as the source of the 300 Pro's processing power soon.

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra: now available for as little as $941.43 as an Amazon Black Friday 2024 Deal.

The "Honor 300 Pro" on Geekbench. (Source: Geekbench)
The "Honor 300 Pro" on Geekbench. (Source: Geekbench)

Source(s)

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > News > News Archive > Newsarchive 2024 11 > Honor 300 Pro tipped to debut with extra-custom version of Snapdragon 8 Gen 3
Deirdre O'Donnell, 2024-11-29 (Update: 2024-11-29)