Battery Life

Battery life is obviously one of the most important aspects of any mobile device, whether it be a laptop, a tablet, a smartphone, or a wearable device. To examine battery life on mobile devices we run them through a number of tests. The first is a web browsing test run both on WiFi and on LTE, which is primarily a display bound test. The next test is BaseMark OS II, which stresses the CPU. After that is PCMark which attempts to simulate various real world workloads, and is a good indicator of real world battery life. Finally, we test using GFXBench 3.0 to see how long a device lasts and how well it performs with a constant GPU load.

Web Browsing Battery Life (WiFi)

Web Browsing Battery Life (4G LTE)

In both of our web browsing battery tests the Moto G performs very well. Through a combination of reduced platform power and a larger battery we see the 2015 Moto G last nearly 2.5 hours longer than its predecessor in the WiFi test. Unfortunately I don't have data for the 2014 model on LTE, but at 9.27 hours the Moto G's lifetime when browsing on cellular is also very respectable.

BaseMark OS II Battery Life

BaseMark OS II Battery Score

BaseMark OS II's battery test stresses the CPU a great deal, and in it we see the 2015 Moto G lasts roughly as long as its predecessor. Since the 2015 model has a significantly larger battery this implies a greater amount of battery drain in a given unit of time, which is what leads to the lower battery score for the 2015 model. If Snapdragon 410 were produced on a lower leakage process like 28nm HPm or HPC rather than 28nm LP we would see a significant improvement to power consumption in CPU heavy workloads.

PCMark - Work Battery Life

In PCMark's battery test the Moto G is in a league of its own. Due to its relatively large battery it pulls ahead of other mid range devices by a large margin. The downside of course is that if you were a user going through the workloads PCMark performs you would have substantially worse performance than a device like the Zenfone 2. I think the Moto G's runtime in PCMark demonstrates an important consideration for consumers, with a device like the Zenfone 2 being much faster than the Moto G at roughly the same price, but offering only a little more than half the battery life in a mixed workload. If battery life is your priority in a mid range device the 2015 Moto G appears to be the best option by far.

GFXBench 3.0 Performance Degradation

GFXBench 3.0 Battery Life

Low and and mid range devices with big batteries and relatively low GPU performance tend to do well in GFXBench's battery test. While they do last long, the performance during the T-Rex HD test that continually loops is well below what would be considered a playable frame rate, and so it's not really worth discussing in much detail.

Overall, I'm very happy with the new Moto G's battery life. Both the web browsing results and the PCMark result confirm my experience in the real world which is that the Moto G lasts for a really long time. I often found myself only charging it every other day unless I had been using it very heavily, and it's really one of the only devices I own where I didn't even bother to take a look at the battery percentage from time to time. The only disappointment is the knowledge that if Snapdragon 410 were produced on a lower leakage process we could see even higher performance with the same great battery life that the Moto G achieves.

Charge Time

While the Moto G has a fairly substantial battery life, it will eventually die and need to be recharged. We've seen a large improvement in the charge time of mobile devices with the adoption of fast chargers that supply as much as 18W of power to a device. Unfortunately, this hasn't trickled down to low end and mid range devices yet, and as a result they often suffer from very long charge times using their included chargers.

Charge Time

The combination of a 9.39Wh battery and a 2.75W charger leads to the longest charge time on record for a mobile device. While it's only a couple minutes longer than the Huawei P8 Lite, it's substantially longer than most other phones. Since the Moto G has very good battery life users can just charge their phone at night, which puts it in a better situation than the P8 Lite. Despite that, I wish Motorola had considered the additional charge time their larger battery would require and included a 5W charging block to compensate. If a user has a spare 5W or higher charging block or lives in a region where the Moto G comes with one they will see the charge time drop to as low as 2 hours and 50 minutes, which is much more reasonable.

Camera and WiFi Final Words
Comments Locked

90 Comments

View All Comments

  • kmmatney - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    They are in the $115 - $130 range on Swappa (at least the Sprint version). Of course that is used - but the phones I've bought from Swappa all looked brand-new when I received them. You can also get a used Galaxy S4 for ~$130, and will come with 2 GB of RAM and 16GB of storgae, and will be faster.
  • Moto1 - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    Nope, sorry
  • amdwilliam1985 - Thursday, August 20, 2015 - link

    Moto G 2015 will probably beat Galaxy S6 and Note 5 in general phone usage speed test, lol. So Galaxy S4 is probably not a good comparison to.
  • 3DoubleD - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    It is not clear in the charging section whether the Moto G is limited to 2.75 W charging internally, or whether it is because a 2.75 W charger was used (because it was shipped with one). Could one conceivably use a 5 W or 10 W charger and cut the charge time in half or a quarter? This is not clear. I honestly didn't know they made 2.75 W chargers, the smallest charger I've ever seen is 1 A @ 5 V.

    Also, how crippling is this GPU performance? From what I can tell, an Adreno 305 is about 1/4 of the speed of the Nexus 5 (2013) in offscreen testing with Basemark X. But this doesn't describe the context of what it is like to use an Adreno 306 device. Does the UI studder? Does video playback work flawlessly? Does it play most games? Are there any notable games it does not play?

    Also, I take issue with the comment that waterproofing is not a desirable feature because you can't use the display while wet. That is an insane comment to make! Most people would like some piece of mind that if their phone gets a little wet it won't become an expensive paper weight. That is a huge feature, especially considering the target market for this phone - a group that may likely be careless with their phone that it needs to be inexpensive and waterproof. So I'll say this in the comments since it wasn't said in the review: Motorola, good job making this phone waterproof.

    Lastly, I don't think Motorola was praised enough for adding a bigger battery at the cost of not decreasing the thinness of the device. Phone manufacturers frequently shift the balance the wrong way, and finally Motorola stepped up and did it right.

    Despite all of my question and critiques, I really appreciate the timely review! Thanks!
  • hans_ober - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    Yeah, nice to see Moto worked on the battery and didn't go for 'omg 7mm slim' type of device.
    Thick phone > dead slim paperweight.
  • Brandon Chester - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    1. It's just that the phone is shipped with a 2.75W charger. I will be listing a charge time using a 5W charging block, but to my knowledge there's no quick charge support so there's no additional advantage to using an even higher wattage QC 2.0 block

    2. You can play 2D games and very simple 3D ones like temple run, but there's not much hope for what one would call AAA mobile games. My big issue is the lack of GPU performance in mid range Android devices ends up limiting the availability and quality of those games on Android as a whole.

    3. At no point did I ever say that waterproofing was not a desirable feature, or anything of that sort. I said it's nice to have, but I don't think it's a selling point. There's no evidence that any significant number of consumers are buying devices specifically because they're waterproof, so I don't think my observation was incorrect.

    4. Not everyone shares the opinion that devices should get substantially larger to fit bigger batteries.
  • hans_ober - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    Thanks. Yeah, theres no QC 2.0 support, but using 5W and even 10W chargers has reportedly cut short charging time. No harm in adding QC 2.0 to the graph too; it will show max possible charge rate, with the phone as bottleneck.
  • Brandon Chester - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    I'm just trying to kill the phone's battery now so I can charge it.
  • hans_ober - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    Having a bad time? :)
  • hans_ober - Tuesday, August 25, 2015 - link

    Update on charging time?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now