There really is no definitive results out there until we see some benchmark numbers of the chipsets themselves. There's a Benchmark app, but 1) Benchmarks need to be done with optimized drivers (as we've seen Snap's improvements in OpenGL benchmarks with optimized drivers) and 2) They were running 2D graphics push, which is obviously tailored to the strong points of the Scorpion CPU.
As for the app-loading speeds, browser tests, stuff that you're seeing out there can be attributable to a number of things:
1) I don't think there is no doubt that Snap is certainly faster, the question by how much? On paper, the Scorpion CPU can be clocked UP TO 1GHz, which it is in the N1 and the HD2. The GPU can perform UP TO 22Mpoly/s, if fully clocked. While we know the CPU is running at full clock, since Android OS doesn't make full use of the GPU, we don't know what settings the GPU is shipped with. Even though the Snap is newer, both are manufactured using the older 65nm technology (current is 45nm).
2) Qualcomm CEO mentioned himself that the Snapdragon will represent about a 5% increase in performance over existing competitors. Remember, the QSD8250 was developed in response to the popular utilization of OMAP3 (2006) in devices, during which time Qualcomm was distributing and utilizing the MSM72xx chipset. In the Smartphone arena, you're either using the TI OMAP3 chip (iPhone uses a Samsung chip that's virtually the same) or the Qualcomm MSM. Snapdragon was the next iteration and evolution, made available in Q4, 2008.
3) The variables are too different at the moment: a) We have to wait until both get OPTIMIZED OS2.1 for their hardware. The N1 already has optimized OS2.1; when the DROID gets 2.1 released, it too shall be optimized for its hardware. b) At the end of the day, the N1 is going to have 512mb of RAM. While this typically may not be an advantage since the OS and other applications are rather light on RAM use, it may, under load, multi-tasking be a benefit to speed for the N1. Again, this may or may not be a factor. But certainly, having more RAM helps speed.
But even at the end of the day, are you comparing the TI core to Scorpion? Are you comparing the SGX GPU to the ATI Imageon GPU? What's valid? All this to say, that you may notice some marginal speed differences and some processes are going to take advantage of Scorpion's superior integer performance. But neither chip is a slouch. What you're looking at is the LAST of a breed: single core SOC. The next phase of SOC will feature dual- or quad-cores, 45 nm technology. 1GHz+ clock speeds, but maybe the same GPUs! So... right now, it's a numbers game.
I liken it to flat-screen TVs. 60Hz LCD vs. 120Hz LCD vs. 240Hz LCD vs. 600Hz plasmas... can you really tell the difference if there's no artificial smoothing going on? Absolutely not. So why did plasma manufacturers tout 600Hz subdrives? Because they know consumers are dumb. They're just looking for the highest value. Right now, the catch number is 1GHz. But I guarantee you this:
The next evolution of the OMAP3430 chip -- the OMAP4430/4440 -- @ 1GHz will put the Q8250 Snap to shame. Same clock speed. That's why the DROID isn't THAT MUCH slower. I said it before and I'll say it again: It's about INTEGRATION -- how well all the units work together: the CPU, GPU, DSP, ISP... all of it.
Tegra 650 is a bum chip even though it has arguably THE BEST GPU on the market right now because the main CPU is based on an ARM11 architecture and is super whack! Bad CPU mated to an AWESOME GPU. The Snap has a brilliant CPU and a decent GPU. The OMAP3 has a very good CPU mated to a very good GPU and by far the best DSP. So many factors... and we're not even talking about software yet!