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
apertotes - Thursday, December 19, 2013 - link
No, I do not. There are two sides here. Some say Samsung sells because of marketing, some say Samsung sells because they understand better what the consumer wants (micro-sd, removable batteries, etc.). Neither side is backing their arguments with any proof at all.uhuznaa - Thursday, December 19, 2013 - link
Well, the fact remains that you can hardly view any review of a competing product on Youtube without a Samsung ad being forced down your throat before it. They must be spending a hell of a pile of money on that.apertotes - Thursday, December 19, 2013 - link
So? Is it less of a fact that Samsung high end devices keep a micro-sd slot and removable battery?Bob Todd - Friday, December 20, 2013 - link
Yes it is, for the simple undeniable truth that enthusiasts make up a tiny sliver of this market (just like is true for most markets). We (enthusiasts) are closer to a rounding error on their financial statements than an overwhelming majority. For every user who clamors for removable batteries or the ability to flash a custom kernel to overclock their phone, there are 95 others who just walk into the store and buy whatever cool phone they saw on TV, or whatever their friends use, or whatever the guy at the counter steered them toward. Samsung could bring the Galaxy S5 to market with sealed batteries and no expandable storage and it would still be the single best selling Android phone by an enormous margin. I have no idea why you are so hell-bent on convincing others, or deluding yourself, that the % of people that really care about these things (or read blogs like Anandtech clamoring for in-depth SOC analysis) make up more than a puddle vs. the ocean of people who DGAF.metayoshi - Friday, December 20, 2013 - link
The guy behind the counter is definitely a major factor, and I believe Samsung dedicates some of their money into that. I remember my sister was due for an upgrade from her Verzion Galaxy Nexus, and I convinced her to buy a G2 and even linked her the mini review from this site. She told me battery life and a good camera were priority, and to me, it was a no brainer.In she walks into the Verizon store, and boy was the guy trying hard to sell the GS4. I told her, the LG has essentially the same features as the GS4 down to the gimmicky camera features, but the camera quality (OIS), and the 3000 mAh battery is much better than what the GS4 will deliver. If I wasn't there, there is no doubt in my mind that my sister would have a GS4.
So yeah... for the people that just don't know what all of their options are, and they go to the phone salesmen for the "expert" advice, which makes up the majority of people, what they're really getting is the phone that the employees are getting paid the most money to sell, which, in my case, was definitely the GS4. After that experience, there is no doubt in my mind that Samsung is giving extra commission to employees who sell these Samsung phones.
shaduck007 - Saturday, January 4, 2014 - link
At Best Buy, I always ask the Intel specialist his opinion.apertotes - Monday, December 23, 2013 - link
That is simply not a fact. That is your poorly reasoned opinion. Facts are:1. Samsung invests a lot of money in advertising and marketing.
2. Samsung's phones have micro-sd and removable battery.
Unless you work as a high level Samsung employee, there is no way to know which of those facts affect sales in a more powerful way.
bhima - Monday, December 23, 2013 - link
iPhones have literally ZERO of those features listed in number 2. They sell by the truckload. Bob Todd is spot on and said it best, Anandtech readers/tech enthusiasts make up a rounding error in the financial statements of these companies.apertotes - Tuesday, December 24, 2013 - link
and that is why HTC did not sell that much. They can't compete on features with Samsung, they are competing with iPhones. And nobody can beat Apple in their own turf. At least Motorola is pricing the G way below.Now, Apple says a truckload of iphones without removable storage or batteries. That is completely true. But Apple is on a league of its own. Neither better nor worse. Simple different. Apple users do not care that much about raw power or features. Also, Starbucks, trendy, hipster, instagram.
boeush - Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - link
"3-4 GB of music" is about 1000 songs."In crappy 64 kbps bit rate, maybe. Personally, I don't do crappy when it comes to my music: all my stuff is ripped to CD-quality at a minimum, and lossless (FLAC) when possible. For instance a single anthology collection for a single band that I have currently on my phone, takes up nearly 10 GiB.