Final Words

LG's strategy with their low-end and mid-range smartphones has been to segment them into products that all focus on a single feature. You have the LG X Style, the LG X Screen, the LG X Mach, the LG X Max, and of course, the LG X Power. I suppose that the thinking behind this strategy is that consumers tend to value one thing in a smartphone more than all the others, and by providing different models that focus on one thing you can hopefully attract the attention of the consumers who care most about that feature.

Unfortunately, I think LG's strategy has really missed the mark. Consumers definitely do value some things more than others in smartphones, but just by looking at LG's smartphones you can see that they sacrifice the quality of other aspects to focus on a single feature. No consumer wants a phone that only does one thing well, they just have priorities about what a phone should do best. In that situation, a phone that tries to provide a good all-around experience is going to win every time, because a smartphone that only does one thing well and fails at everything else is just going to frustrate the user and drive them away from the device.

The LG X Power does live up to its name if you interpret its name as meaning it has a large battery. In our WiFi web test and PCMark's battery test it topped the charts. However, the victory wasn't always by a large margin. Xiaomi's Redmi Note 3 was very close, and it's a phone that does many things well, which contrasts with the LG X Power that really only focuses on providing long battery life. To me this really signifies the failure of LG's strategy. You can build a good all-around smartphone that isn't really much worse than the LG X Power as far as battery life goes, and better in every other respect.

When you set aside battery life, the LG X Power is mediocre at best, and often a lot worse. The camera isn't very good in daylight, although it's better than I expected when shooting in the dark. The display is not pleasing to look at, with a low brightness, dull colors, and a ghastly blue cast. I don't know why the display was even produced, but it never should have shipped on a modern smartphone.

As for performance, it's just completely unacceptable on the North American model. The UI is janky and slow, and the process of opening apps is painful because there's not enough RAM to keep even a modest group of apps resident in memory. It's the only device I've seen where the DiscoMark launch times were barely any faster when launching apps that could and should have been in RAM. General performance within apps is no better, with the jankiness remaining and the SoC being too slow to keep up with tasks like web browsing and general UI navigation. These issues may not be as pronounced on the international model, but the fact that LG is shipping two vastly different models is a huge problem in its own right.

I mentioned this once before, but I don't think the LG X Power even needs its large battery to provide long battery life. The phone's experience is bad enough that users will want to avoid using it, and by virtue of that it will last a long time by being constantly idle in a pocket or a drawer. In that sense, the phone is really a failure at its one key task, because the phone has a giant battery but nothing worth powering.

I never mean to be overly negative in reviews, but in the case of the LG X Power it's really just a case of there being very few positive things to point out. It's a phone that can last a long time, but the user experience is poor and the phone is slow enough that it isn't plesant to use. The display is basically not usable outdoors, and it has a lifeless feeling to it that I didn't think I'd see on a smartphone again. There are just so many better options than the LG X Power in the crowded sub-$200 market, and some of them like the 2015 Moto G are a year old by this point. You simply cannot make a good smartphone by focusing on a single feature, because good smartphones care about every feature.

Camera Performance
Comments Locked

48 Comments

View All Comments

  • velanapontinha - Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - link

    Why oh why do they release two phones with same brand and model and so many different specs?
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - link

    MediaTek offers more bang for the buck; but doesn't have the CDMA support needed for the VZW/Sprint networks. At the low price this thing is selling for they can't afford a few extra dollars on the BOM without wiping out their entire margin on the device.
  • Samus - Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - link

    Yeah, it's annoying, but because of our carrier saturation in the USA we generally get unique versions (or two versions) of phones. This is one reason why Apple arranged with only one carrier for so many years, and many phones are carrier exclusives.

    There is nothing preventing you from importing the international version for T-mobile but the LTE bands don't line up so you will only get HSPA+ (which isn't a bad thing on T-mob) however, I'd be surprised if the performance difference between these two models is even relevant, both SoC's are bottom barrel and will be outperformed by SoC's from years ago. The .5GB difference is probably more relevant, and both camera sensors suck so the pixel difference is a wash.
  • psyside1 - Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - link

    Opens article.

    See MT6753

    Close article.
  • WPX00 - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link

    It's not even MT6753. The 53 is an octa-core chip. This is the MT6735 with a quad-core chip.
  • okp11 - Tuesday, October 4, 2016 - link

    Based off of the LG and Sprint site it looks like this is a completely different phone then what is listed for sale by them.

    The Sprint site lists the X Power as an LS755, which has a MediaTek 1.8 GHz Octa-Core MT6755M and 2GB of RAM.

    The LG site also has a spec sheet for the Cricket and U.S. Cellular versions of the phones under the names K450 and US610. These both use quad core Snapdragon processors and 1.5GB of RAM...So it appears that almost everything negative about this phone is only applicable to those carriers, not Sprint or Boost's versions.

    Very disappointed that none of this was mentioned anywhere in the review, as I'm sure the largest market for this phone will be people on Sprint, which is offering a vastly different set of specs under the same moniker.
  • jgarcows - Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - link

    Thank you for reviewing a sub-$200 phone. They aren't as flashy, but this is the price point a lot of us want to shop at. Please do more reviews like this. I would be especially interested in some handsets with smaller screens.
  • Teknobug - Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - link

    Wow all the hardware skimped out but has a huge 4100mAh battery? Most top end phones barely has a 2800mAh.
  • zeeBomb - Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - link

    The NA version is a slap in the face tho. You're getting smartwatch power/Cortex A7 on a device like this where a 410 would be just as good as the mediatek version...okay display for a budget phone but sluggish performance. If it wasn't for the battery, this phone would easily be forgotten. Also the call quality is pretty abysmal too.
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - link

    "Unfortunately, I think LG's strategy has really missed the mark. Consumers definitely do value some things more than others in smartphones, but just by looking at LG's smartphones you can see that they sacrifice the quality of other aspects to focus on a single feature. No consumer wants a phone that only does one thing well, they just have priorities about what a phone should do best. In that situation, a phone that tries to provide a good all-around experience is going to win every time,"

    Potentially I see this as a valid strategy; but at a slightly higher pricepoint. Instead of adding a single halo feature to a phone that does everything badly to hit an ultralow pricepoint, use something like the Moto G - which does everything adequately - and add the halo feature to that instead.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now