Battery Life

The original Moto E shipped with a 7.52Wh battery. While we don't have data for battery life on the original, it's safe to say that the new Moto E with its 9.08Wh battery and more efficient SoC should have no trouble surpassing the battery life of the original. I've highlighted the 2014 Moto G in the graphs below just to provide an interesting point of comparison.

Web Browsing Battery Life (WiFi)

The combination of a fairly large battery with a power efficient SoC allows the Moto E to take one of the highest spots in our WiFi web browsing test with a runtime of 11.65 hours.

BaseMark OS II Battery Life

BaseMark OS II Battery Score

In the BaseMark OS II battery test we see the Moto E pull off a very respectable battery life of 4.35hrs. The score in the battery test is also fairly high, indicating that Snapdradon 410 was able to sustain a high load throughout the test.

GFXBench 3.0 Battery Life

GFXBench 3.0 Performance Degradation

The Moto E does very well in GFXBench's battery test, with a score that sits well above most other smartphones. While the performance for the final run is not as fast as flagship smartphones, it actually doesn't really drop at all from the performance of the very first run.

Overall I think the battery life on the Moto E is stellar, and I don't think buyers will have any complaints about it. The Moto E includes a larger battery than the Moto G, and with a smaller display and more efficient components this gives it a significant lead in every test. There's not much more that you can ask for.

Charge Time

The other side of battery life is the time it takes to charge the battery. If a device has a battery life that falls short of the competition, it can be somewhat excused if the time to charge it is very short which minimizes the amount of time the device is dead for. The opposite can also be true, where a device with a long battery life can end up having longer periods of downtime due to a long charge time.

Charge Time

At 4.23 hours, the Moto E has the longest charge time of the devices we've tested to date. While it's not a big issue if you end up charging it overnight, it feels like an eternity when you end up charging it during the day. The problem is that Motorola packages the Moto E with a 5V 550mA charger, which makes it the slowest USB charger I have in my possession. This is definitely another concession for budget reasons, and my recommendation for any buyers is to use the charging block from another device.

Camera Performance Software
POST A COMMENT

91 Comments

View All Comments

  • zepi - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link

    How much does a 1A or 2A rated charger drop the charging times?

    I think it is a bit silly to compare chargers instead of phones.
    Reply
  • arnoudw - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link

    Exactly. I reviewed the phone as well (the European version) and the one that's for sale on this side of the ocean hasn't got a charger at all in the box. I just used another charger that I have to charge the phone and charge times were pretty normal: around 2,5 hours from zero to full.

    AT would maybe consider a disclaimer that chargers can differ per country or region and that can infuence the outcome of this particular test immensely. AT has got a worldwide audience and a lot of the potential buyers of this phone reading the review here might be from another part of the world. That's something for AT to consider, I guess.

    TLDR; tested it as well, there was no charger included, charges normally with another charger.
    Reply
  • sovking - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link

    I agree. Charge time comparison should be done with the same charger or better with 2 or 3 chargers.
    Chargers for smarphone are universal, all devices connect to micro-usb chargers with 5V. At home we have more chargers for more smartphone and we do not matter which charger we are using.
    So create a table showing a charging time when using 0.5A, 1A charger, 2A charger.
    Some smartphone like Moto G 2014, limit input current, so it worth using until 1.5 A charger, more current is not used.
    Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link

    To be clear here, the purpose is to test the charge time of the phone in its default configuration. It's not to compare just the chargers, but the entire package. Reply
  • hans_ober - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link

    You've got a point; anyone who is buying this as their first Android (upgrading from an old Nokia), will most probably use the included charger and it was right to include the charge time using the 'package' the user would most probably use. However, since this is a case where the charger is to blame for the slow charging speeds, it would have been useful to include another result with another high powered charger, which would confirm that the phone IS capable of higher charging speeds if another charger is used and how much time could probably be saved by using a high powered charger. Reply
  • hans_ober - Wednesday, April 29, 2015 - link

    Do you have a Quick charge 2.0 charger? The Motorola Turbo Charger? Just curious to see whether it works, because iirc QC 2.0 support was mentioned somewhere. Reply
  • victorson - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link

    There is a mistake, the Moto E is not $109, it's actually $120 for the slow Snapdragon 200 version, and a not-so-cheap $150 for the Snadpragon 400 version. It's funny how the author can't think of competition when you have devices from Xiaomi and Meizu (among tens if not hundred others) that deliver better value for the money. Reply
  • close - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link

    In EU the Moto E LTE is ~130E while the cheapest Xiaomi starts at ~170E. I wouldn't think twice. Reply
  • Brandon Chester - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link

    The number of markets that you can purchase Xiaomi phones in is extremely small, you can count them on one hand. Also I apologize about the pricing error. There have been a few sales on it recently and for whatever reason I noted the price as $109. That being said, it does drop below Motorola's price very often. For example, it's currently available in India on Flipkart for $127 USD. India does happen to be an Xiaomi market and so I would definitely urge buyers there to check out their devices as well. But that's not an option for most buyers. Reply
  • victorson - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link

    Thanks for the reply, Brandon! I agree that you can get the phone cheaper on sales and I wouldn't argue against the Moto E being an overall good value for the money, but it's also true that you can buy said Xiaomi phones (or many others for that matter, I don't want this to sound like an ad) from retailers like Pandawill.com, Coolicool.com, or others that ship internationally for free. And the user who said that Xiaomi starts at 170 euro, may want to pay a visit and see that prices on those sites start at around $120, not 170 euro. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now