Motorola Moto G Review
by Brian Klug on December 18, 2013 2:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Motorola
- Mobile
- *VA
- Cortex A7
- snapdragon 400
- Moto G
Battery onboard mobile devices remains one of the biggest concerns for shoppers, and even in a mass market device like the Moto G it’s an important axis. Although Moto G has a removable back door, the battery isn’t designed to be user accessible and is sealed inside, there’s a sticker which pretty much explains the situation.
Inside, the Moto G has a 2070 mAh, 3.8V battery for a capacity of 7.9 watt hours. It loses the stacked 3D structure that was a highlight feature of the Moto X, but still is a relatively large battery for a device with a 4.5 inch LCD display.
To evaluate battery life we turn to our battery life testing suite, which we run over WiFi and all the cellular interfaces appropriate for the device. Here we see a good combination of regular spikes in CPU usage with idle time, hopefully simulating constant, reasonably paced usage. As always the display is set to exactly 200 nits and configured the same way we always configure devices for maximum consistency.
The Moto G starts out with an impressive result on 3G. There’s no LTE on the Moto G so we’re only looking at the subset of devices that I’ve tested on 3G with the new battery life test. Still it’s impressive that the Moto G can crank out just over 7.5 hours on here, considerably more than Moto X forced onto 3G.
The WiFi test opens up considerable more comparison points, and here I’m really impressed by what the Moto G is able to crank out.
Cellular talk time is self explanatory, and again the Moto G winds up with an impressive result. I remember when Motorola seemed to somehow always be able to dominate the call test, Moto G definitely reminds me of those days.
Compared to the Moto X, the WiFi and 3G battery life tests really wind up being a story of the power consumption tradeoffs between LCD and AMOLED that remain to this day. The display size to battery capacity ratio is pretty big with the Moto G, and of course there are further improvements to overall efficiency with the latest Qualcomm silicon and modem block inside.
I mentioned that the Moto G doesn’t come with a charger in the box, a choice which cuts down on cost and is starting to make a lot of sense give the ubiquity of cheap USB chargers.
Thankfully Moto G seems to be good about its charge signaling, as it can pull up to 2 amps on appropriate chargers. The Moto G seems to be compliant with BC 1.2, and seems well behaved with drawing whatever is appropriate from other chargers as well.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
120 Comments
View All Comments
uhuznaa - Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - link
Even my 8 GB Nexus 7 has a two GB left. Lots of storage is convenient for the lazy and the horders, but in now way something that makes or breaks a device for "normal" use. "3-4 GB of music" is about 1000 songs. Yeah, more is better, always, but don't make this into more of a limitation than it actually is. Most people don't care very much anyway.apertotes - Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - link
a tablet is not at all like a phone. a tablet sits at home mostly, with WiFi and instant access to hundreds of online services. A phone goes with you everywhere, even places without -gasp- internet. And most people care, indeed, and that is why they buy galaxies instead of ones.Bob Todd - Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - link
Do you have any proof that the majority of Galaxy S* buyers do so because of micro-SD or removable batteries? Survey data from a reasonable cross section of buyers? I like both of those features, but the idea that it is the main driver of Samsung's success with that line doesn't seem to be grounded with any facts. I'd assume marketing plays the biggest role, along with actually building a solid brand behind it (one high end line available on most major carriers updated once per year). Yes some % of users care a great deal about removable storage and removable batteries, but if you think that's the secret to their success I think you are deluding yourself. And I'm almost sorry I responded at all to the inevitable whining about removable storage. There are other cheap devices that offer those features, be happy that a quality option is available at this price point.apertotes - Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - link
Well, HTC thought the same last year, after their beautiful HTC ONE X beat the Galaxy S3 in every review, but lost badly on sales. "It's the marketing!". They lost another good year blaming marketing, and now are even in worse situation than a year ago. Or do you want to convince me that HTC is not a strong brand? Or Blackberry, for what it is worth.Yes, Samsung sells lots of Aces very cheap, but S3 and S4 and Notes are not cheap. And they outsell almost the rest of high end android devices combined. I really do not think that Samsung is that good at marketing.
Impulses - Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - link
Nope, HTC isn't a very strong brand outside of tech enthusiasts. Samsung/Galaxy is a lot more easily recognized... I had three HTC phones in a row (all the EVOs), very early random people would ask me if they were "the new iPhone" (never mind the massive size difference). Later on most friends would ask "did you get a Galaxy?" when they'd see I have a new phone, never mind it says HTC front and center...Samsung is ABSOLUTELY that good at marketing, have you watched network TV or looked at print magazines lately? Geeks may not do that much anymore but the general public does and Samsung's ad campaign is all over that media, it's impossible to ignore.
sajara - Saturday, December 21, 2013 - link
Indeed you're absolutely right. Samsung is a very powerful brand just about everywhere due to marketing. That, produces free publicity through brand awareness and then word of mouth. Even in the Dominican Republic a (developing country) where i go regularly, a sacred Blackberry land, is buying in bulk Galaxy(s) and why? Huge billboards everywhere and all 4 carriers selling just about every model.sajara - Saturday, December 21, 2013 - link
I was referring to Impulse's post btw...Bob Todd - Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - link
Again, what proof do you have to the contrary? Like I said, I'm sure some % of their user population does buy the Galaxy line _specifically_ for micro-SD and a removable battery. But I'd put a decent chunk of change on the size of that % being 1 in every 5 buyers or less. You think all those buyers of a mainstream device (who have no idea what SOC is in their phone or even what a SOC is) are walking into their carrier's stores with a 64GB micro-SDXC card full of stuff? There is a lot more to the success of the Galaxy line than removable batteries and expandable storage.apertotes - Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - link
I do not need to give any proof at all. I am not in the industry, and I could not care less. But it is funny watching people that should really know about this stuff (like HTC spokesperson) blame it all on marketing time after time, and get worse results every year.Also, HTC is a very strong band. A few years ago it was almost a synonym of smartphone, and they also spend a lot of money on advertising and sponsorships.
Anyway, do you have any proof that micro-sd cards are not a strong reason behind massive galaxy sales?
martajd - Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - link
"I don't need to give any proof." Yeah, you do