Battery Life

Our battery life tests have also been upgraded for 2016. Our web browsing test was previously shown in the first part of the Galaxy S7 review, and since that time it has been tweaked to the point that we're happy with the workload it puts on devices. We've also migrated to GFXBench's Manhattan test for examining battery life with a heavy GPU workload.

Web Browsing Battery Battery Life 2016 (WiFi)

In our WiFi web browsing test the iPhone SE does quite well. When Apple originally advertised that the SE has better web browsing battery life than the 6s and 6s Plus I saw some confusion from many people, but it's actually not a surprising outcome. The SE is using a much smaller and lower resolution LCD display than the other iPhones, which significantly reduces the total platform power. The boost in battery capacity from the iPhone 5s helps as well. Apple advertises that the SE can last two hours longer on WiFi than the 6s, and in our test it almost meets that target. 

Due to a recent move, I'm still trying to find a place with sufficient signal strength that I can use for LTE battery life testing. Until such a time, I'm unable to post LTE battery life results for the SE. In general you can expect LTE battery life to be a couple hours shorter than on WiFi, and Apple advertises that the SE can last three hours longer on LTE than the 6s, so if they get anywhere close to that then LTE battery life should be quite good.

GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 / Metal Battery Life

GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 / Metal Final Frame Rate

The 4-inch iPhones have never lasted long in GFXBench's battery test. With the new Manhattan test the GPU is doing a lot more work than it was with T-Rex HD, and there aren't any periods of idle. The iPhone SE achieves the lowest battery lifetime of just 1.46 hours. However, the on screen frame rate during the test is hitting Vsync, which is actually concerning because we moved to Manhattan to avoid the problem of devices hitting that cap and then idling in the middle of the test. As I've said in the past, you need to consider both performance and battery life in this test. The iPhone SE is obviously an improvement over the 5s even though it dies half an hour earlier, because by the end of the test the iPhone SE is giving you 6x the performance of the 5s due to the A7 SoC's greater degree of thermal throttling.

Charge Time

Like the iPhone 6s and 6s Plus, the iPhone SE ships with Apple's 5W charging block. While this can be quite problematic on a large phone like the iPhone 6s Plus, on a small phone it won't pose as much of an issue as the phone's battery capacity is much lower. Ideally we'd like to see a time to charge that is under three hours, and coming in under two hours is even better.

Charge Time

The iPhone SE charges quite quickly. We've seen improvements to charge time on the iPhone since the era of the iPhone 5s, and with the SE having a smaller battery than the iPhone 6s it makes sense that the charge time would be shorter. I do wonder how long it would take to get to full charge if Apple bundled a 10-15W charger with the phone, although with the current time being under two hours you also need to consider if the potential reduction in battery longevity from quicker charging is worth it.

System Performance Display Analysis
Comments Locked

138 Comments

View All Comments

  • michael2k - Tuesday, May 17, 2016 - link

    What exactly did you want to see? S7 is slightly slower than the iPhone SE in CPU, slower NAND, slightly faster in GPU offscreen, slightly slower in GPU onscreen (due to larger and higher resolution screen), several hundred dollars more, and about the same battery life.
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/10120/the-samsung-ga...
  • Che - Wednesday, May 18, 2016 - link

    I want to read reviews for the various android phones released this year. I am not in the market for an iPhone, personal preference.

    I think you missed my point.
  • michael2k - Friday, May 20, 2016 - link

    I did, sorry. When you said 'lack of review of Galaxy S7' I had misinterpreted your comment as a complaint that they didn't compare the SE to the S7.
  • jav_eee - Tuesday, May 17, 2016 - link

    The only part I disagree with is where you mention that the 6 feels better in the hand. I don't think it does. It is much too slippery. The 5 was perfect.
  • Silvio6 - Tuesday, May 17, 2016 - link

    This looks like the benchmarks were extracted from a tool, and not realy real-life tests. For example, i was told the fingerprint sensor was slower than the one from the 6 and 6s. How much slower ? The one in the 6 is acceptable, but i wish there was the one in the 6s. There is no mention of it in the tests, and this is something anyone would be confronted to multiple times a day.
  • bodonnell - Wednesday, May 18, 2016 - link

    It is slower than the 6s, but at worst it should perform similar to Touch ID in the 6 as both use the 1st gen sensor. In practice it may be slightly faster than the 6 as the A9 chip processes the unlock faster than the A8 in the 6.
  • heartinpiece - Tuesday, May 17, 2016 - link

    For the NAND tests are the read/writes to NAND encrypted?
    I'm guessing some of the other compared devices are not encrypted... Could you elaborate, or distinguish the encrypted from unencrypted devices?
  • Brandon Chester - Tuesday, May 17, 2016 - link

    In mobile if a device is encrypted then you're usually stuck with that, so I don't see any point in differentiating. In the end we're still comparing devices as they work within the limitations of their hardware and software, not the hardware components individually.
  • gochichi - Wednesday, May 18, 2016 - link

    I'm really happy with the Nexus 5X, including the great price, camera, 32GB option, etc. I'm a happy camper.
  • Nick Arthur - Wednesday, May 18, 2016 - link

    It seems a transitional version between 5 and 6 but combines some advantages of the two version together. The price is much cheaper, exactly.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now