Battery Life

One thing I distinctly remember about the Samsung Focus is much of an improvement the battery life was compared to the original Galaxy S. Windows Phone 7 was a very well tuned OS, and it managed battery life very well. When the first waves of Windows Phone 8 devices were launched, I heard complaints about battery life, and I was very surprised. The Lumia 930 review here at AnandTech confirmed that there were issues with battery life on at least some Windows Phone 8. However, the Lumia 735 achieved a very respectable battery life in our web browsing test. With both of those results in mind, I was very curious about how the Lumia 640 would fare when it comes to battery life.

As always, our first test is the WiFi web browsing battery life test. Since this Lumia 640 is locked to Cricket Wireless, I'm unable to also test it on LTE, which is unfortunate. However, Qualcomm's radios have evolved to the point where there's only a very small difference the between power usage with a good LTE signal and WiFi.

Web Browsing Battery Life (WiFi)

With a 9.5Wh battery and Snapdragon 400, I had expected the Lumia 640 to last much longer in this test. It shares many components with the Lumia 735, including the SoC, yet the Lumia 735 lasts significantly longer. I can only attribute this to display power usage, and even that seems strange as the Lumia 735 uses an OLED panel which will consume a lot of power when displaying the large white areas of web pages. To ensure there wasn't any sort of issue, I re-ran the battery test and achieved roughly the same result. 8 hours is not the lowest result we've seen, but it's ultimately disappointing when you consider how long other budget devices like the Moto E can last.

GFXBench 3.0 Battery Life

In GFXBench's battery test we see that the Lumia 640 sits between the Lumia 735 and the Moto E. However, it should be noted that although these three devices achieve a much longer battery life than other devices, this is a result of their relatively low performance during GFXBench T-Rex HD.

One observation that doesn't show up during out battery tests is idle battery life. During my time with the Lumia 640, I noticed that Windows Phone seems to have an abnormally high battery drain when devices are idle. Even though I was only able to use it on WiFi and had no cellular connection when I wasn't at home, I still found myself having to charge it in the early evening. The Lumia 640's battery life is certainly better than devices like the ZenFone 2 and Lumia 930, but it definitely doesn't compare to the Moto E and the Moto G.

Charge Time

The Lumia 640 ships with a 5V, 0.75A charger. This is a lower wattage than the 5W chargers that ship with most phones, and it's significantly lower than the high power chargers that are now reaching as high as 18W. Something worth noting is that at least with the North American Cricket Wireless version I received, the cord on the charging block is permanently connected, so you can't separate the block and the cable like on most devices.

Charge Time

With its relatively slow charger, the Lumia 640 has a fairly long charge time. It's actually the fastest of our group of low end devices though, with the Moto E being noticeably longer, and the Lumia 735 being substantially longer at 5.57 hours. Not including a super fast charger is obviously done for cost reasons, but I do wish these devices would ship with at least a 5W charger. Thankfully, if you do have 5W charger it will charge the Lumia 640 faster than the one included in the box.

Camera Performance Software: Thoughts On Windows Phone
Comments Locked

130 Comments

View All Comments

  • kevloral - Tuesday, June 9, 2015 - link

    "After declining sales of Symbian devices, the company decided to go all in with Microsoft's Windows Phone platform"

    Why is this false mantra repeated again and again? When Nokia decided to go Windows Phone, Symbian devices were being sold more than ever. Just check the statistics from the time.
  • danbob999 - Tuesday, June 9, 2015 - link

    Declining market share.
  • niva - Tuesday, June 9, 2015 - link

    Nokia used to be to the cell phone market kind of what Apple has become today. It's amazing how quickly they failed and were never able to recover. Failing to jump on the Android bandwagon early ultimately led to their demise.
  • Brandon Chester - Tuesday, June 9, 2015 - link

    That's not true. Reports from Gartner and IDC both agree that Nokia shipped significantly fewer devices in each quarter of 2011 than that same quarter in 2010.
  • hemedans - Tuesday, June 9, 2015 - link

    last symbian flagship was nokia n8 which come out 2010, in 2011 n9 was nokia flagship and 2012 we saw lumia 900 and 920.

    last s60v3 were nokia c5 and e5 both of them come out 2010, elop killed symbian at low end in favour of nokia asha. symbian was killed by nokia before the official anouncement in 2012.
  • Cryio - Tuesday, June 9, 2015 - link

    Last Symbian Flagship was the 808 which launched in 2012.
  • hemedans - Wednesday, June 10, 2015 - link

    808 was niche device to introduce nokia camera capability, at that time nokia already anounce symbian was dead platform. in 2012 nokia 900 and 920 were nokia flagship
  • Penti - Tuesday, June 9, 2015 - link

    They had effectively already killed Symbian early 2011 and sales didn't decline until the burning platform memo, plus canceling already announced/showed phones and giving up on Symbian development, which they transfered to Accenture already in the summer which later fired almost everybody within a year or so. By the time the N9 was out/showed they had made it clear the platform (MeeGo/Harmattan) was dead before the phone shipped and wouldn't receive any major updates or any new development.
  • Penti - Tuesday, June 9, 2015 - link

    They didn't really have a WP device of their own until Lumia 900 either. Lumia 800 was a Clevo-built/designed device. Thus they had nothing to sell between feb 2011 and april-june 2012 at all that they hadn't decided to stop development of and spoken out against. Neither did they have a WP8 device until November 2012.
  • Klimax - Saturday, June 13, 2015 - link

    Sales at the cost of profits. They made near zero on them as they HAD to make them extremely cheap. Otherwise you'd see sales going down much sooner and much faster.

    Symbian was dead, it just didn't noticed it for short time...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now