15.3 hours of talk time or "up to 10"? - Nexus 4 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting

I'm really confused by Google about this.
Various websites (including androidcentral and androidandme) show google's press release to show that the phone has 15.3 hours of talk, and 390 hours of standby time.
But Google has told the verge that it will have "up to 10" hours of talk time.
Then my friend found this: http://support.google.com/nexus/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2840740&topic=2775467&ctx=topic
Which essentially says "up to 10" hours of talk time, and 250 hours standby.
If that is the case, and it looks like it is, I am disappointed. With my OEM 2000 Mah battery in my Galaxy Nexus, I can also obtain about 10 hours of talk time. So then that leads me to believe this Li-polymer battery is no more efficient than the regular li-ion that we have currently...and most of all, I don't see how the phone's crappy "screen on time" (which is a measely 4 hours on mine) will improve.

It's not how big the battery is that determines the length of time it takes to drain it. It's how the battery is used. We have to wait for reviews before making judgements.

ksc6000 said:
I'm really confused by Google about this.
Various websites (including androidcentral and androidandme) show google's press release to show that the phone has 15.3 hours of talk, and 390 hours of standby time.
But Google has told the verge that it will have "up to 10" hours of talk time.
Then my friend found this: http://support.google.com/nexus/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2840740&topic=2775467&ctx=topic
Which essentially says "up to 10" hours of talk time, and 250 hours standby.
If that is the case, and it looks like it is, I am disappointed. With my OEM 2000 Mah battery in my Galaxy Nexus, I can also obtain about 10 hours of talk time. So then that leads me to believe this Li-polymer battery is no more efficient than the regular li-ion that we have currently...and most of all, I don't see how the phone's crappy "screen on time" (which is a measely 4 hours on mine) will improve.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's the point of speculating? I've never seen any device's battery last as long as the product data sheet says it will. Once the phone is more thoroughly reviewed we'll have a better idea. Even then, the battery life is completely relative to how it's being used.

comminus said:
What's the point of speculating? I've never seen any device's battery last as long as the product data sheet says it will. Once the phone is more thoroughly reviewed we'll have a better idea. Even then, the battery life is completely relative to how it's being used.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand what you're saying about relativity to use, but ratings have to have some stem of truth to them, and even if they are inaccurate, they are measuring points.
The point is, they rated the Galaxy Nexus's original 1750Mah battery at 8 hours of talk time.
They've rated this phone's 2100 mah battery at "up to 10".
1750 is 83% of 2100 mah. 83% of 10 hours is 8 hours and 19 minutes. So if in fact by their measurement, the new li-ion-polymer battery in this does only yield "up to 10" hours of battery life, then it's not any significantly more efficient than the Galaxy Nexus' batteries.
In the press releases that all the android websites have seemed to have recieved, it says 15.3 hours of talk time. If that is true, that means this battery is 63% more efficient. That's HUGE. So it's not something to be glossed over. Something is not right. And honestly when I first read those press releases, that made me very excited.
Androidcentral did a poll and found battery life to be at the top of people's concerns with their phones. So this is definitely relevant.
With that in mind, I'm guessing a lot of people, like myself included were hoping for an increase in our screen on time, and now I'm pessemistic about that.

Battery life should be comparable to the one of LG Optimus G (battery is from LG, too, and it is stated, like for the LG that the charging cycles are 800, instead of the usual 500). Hardware is nearly the same.
http://www.phonearena.com/news/LG-O...-Galaxy-S-III-claims-an-LG-experiment_id35585
This experiment was made by LG itself, so it isn't confident but I believe that it could be around 15hrs.

ksc6000 said:
I understand what you're saying about relativity to use, but ratings have to have some stem of truth to them, and even if they are inaccurate, they are measuring points.
The point is, they rated the Galaxy Nexus's original 1750Mah battery at 8 hours of talk time.
They've rated this phone's 2100 mah battery at "up to 10".
1750 is 83% of 2100 mah. 83% of 10 hours is 8 hours and 19 minutes. So if in fact by their measurement, the new li-ion-polymer battery in this does only yield "up to 10" hours of battery life, then it's not any significantly more efficient than the Galaxy Nexus' batteries.
In the press releases that all the android websites have seemed to have recieved, it says 15.3 hours of talk time. If that is true, that means this battery is 63% more efficient. That's HUGE. So it's not something to be glossed over. Something is not right. And honestly when I first read those press releases, that made me very excited.
Androidcentral did a poll and found battery life to be at the top of people's concerns with their phones. So this is definitely relevant.
With that in mind, I'm guessing a lot of people, like myself included were hoping for an increase in our screen on time, and now I'm pessemistic about that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that battery life is a huge area of concern for Android users, and I too hope that there are improvements with the Nexus 4 over the Galaxy Nexus. My point is that the variance in how these devices are used from person to person, what types of applications are running, signal strength, etc makes a numbers like 15.3 or 10 hours of talk time generally moot.
Given the extremely limited amount of information to work with due to so few in-depth reviews being released at the moment, we need to wait and see. Will we all see 15.3 hours of talk time? Probably not. Will it be better than the Galaxy Nexus? I think it will, but how much better remains to be seen and will vary.

comminus said:
I agree that battery life is a huge area of concern for Android users, and I too hope that there are improvements with the Nexus 4 over the Galaxy Nexus. My point is that the variance in how these devices are used from person to person, what types of applications are running, signal strength, etc makes a numbers like 15.3 or 10 hours of talk time generally moot.
Given the extremely limited amount of information to work with due to so few in-depth reviews being released at the moment, we need to wait and see. Will we all see 15.3 hours of talk time? Probably not. Will it be better than the Galaxy Nexus? I think it will, but how much better remains to be seen and will vary.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope you're right, that it is better. Of course I don't actually expect the battery to be a whole 63% more efficient, but I hope that there is some truth to it being more efficient. Maybe 40% more efficient?
The implications could be very good if it's true, because LG is also claiming that this screen is 60% more efficient.
Now let's look at it another way:
If I can get 4.5 hours of screen on, on the Galaxy Nexus, then if their claims were fully true (which we'll know is not the case, but let's look at it for fun's sake)...then 4.5 x 1.63 (63% more efficient battery) x 1.60 (60% more efficient screen) = 11.736 of screen on time.
Is that realistic? I HIGHLY doubt it.
What if their claims were somewhat true?
Let's say it's only 40% for either:
4.5 x 1.4 x 1.4 = 8.82. That's still something I would love.
Is it a pipe dream? Probably. But one can dream.

OP you're not comparing apples to apples here; the Nexus 4 is completely different hardware so trying to compare the efficiency of the different battery technologies is a pointless exercise.
trying to do math when you've got the underlying assumptions wrong will just yield wrong answers.

Related

Found this: Maybe "training" the battery isn't such a great idea afterall

It's allot to read but got some good answers.
http://www.batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Like I said in a previous thread, there does seem to be opinions on both sides of the isle regarding "training" a new battery. My experience has always that it definitely helps. Every device I've ever owned with a Li-Ion or Li-Polymer, I've found by training it I get a bit more than the reported average battery life.
With my Vibrant right now, I have 35 percent left after being off of the charger for 1 day and 5 hours. This is with light to moderate use, meaning some browsing, some phone calls, some market downloads, about 20 minutes of gaming, syncing, and reading e-mails. Of course my mileage varies if use the phone more.
MMcCraryNJ said:
Like I said in a previous thread, there does seem to be opinions on both sides of the isle regarding "training" a new battery. My experience has always that it definitely helps. Every device I've ever owned with a Li-Ion or Li-Polymer, I've found by training it I get a bit more than the reported average battery life.
With my Vibrant right now, I have 35 percent left after being off of the charger for 1 day and 5 hours. This is with light to moderate use, meaning some browsing, some phone calls, some market downloads, about 20 minutes of gaming, syncing, and reading e-mails. Of course my mileage varies if use the phone more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That looks about right even without "training" on mine. I probably wouldn't worry about it. One less thing to worry about you know?
Well, technically, both trains of thought are correct. Yes, calibrating your battery several times in a row will help battery life. But at the expense of total battery longevity. All full charge calibration cycles shorten the life of the battery. However, it is more annoying to have an inaccurate battery meter. So calibration cycles are a necessary evil.
Personally, I do a calibration cycle within a week of getting the phone. And then one calibration cycle every other month after that. I don't see any benefit to doing more than that. However, these phones are basically throw away after 2 years, so I am not sure that it matters much if you do it a whole bunch. Plus, the batteries are user replaceable. So it matters even less.
t1n0m3n said:
Well, technically, both trains of thought are correct. Yes, calibrating your battery several times in a row will help battery life. But at the expense of total battery longevity. All full charge calibration cycles shorten the life of the battery. However, it is more annoying to have an inaccurate battery meter. So calibration cycles are a necessary evil.
Personally, I do a calibration cycle within a week of getting the phone. And then one calibration cycle every other month after that. I don't see any benefit to doing more than that. However, these phones are basically throw away after 2 years, so I am not sure that it matters much if you do it a whole bunch. Plus, the batteries are user replaceable. So it matters even less.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's an interesting theory. Unfortunately it goes the opposite direction of my experience. My last battery lasted 3 years (I've quit using that phone, the battery is still good) and I deep cycle it every time.
It's not theory. It's the chemistry of Li ion batteries.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
And in the end, if your battery dies out, you can just replace it, right? This isn't an iphone where the battery isn't replaceable.

General Battery Life question

Can anyone tell me why the Android phones have battery life issues? Here's a scenario...my friend has an iphone, i have the fascinate. We both put our phones in our locker in the morning for work. We both come out for break and he still has well over 90% of battery life while mine is down to 70%. Why do the android phones drain so quickly. Yes I could put it in airplane mode and such but my friend doesn't have to on his Iphone.
Just wondering why these phones have such a tough time with battery life. I notice in a lot of the forums people are trying different things to get better battery life. I have tried different roms, kernels, radios, etc...and really don't notice a huge difference. I am not a heavy user of my phone and it lasts just about the day and dies. I may hit the net for few mins, do some texting, and check email from time to time. I would think the battery should last a couple days just doing this...not drain when the phone is just sitting idle. Anyway just wondering about this.
Apple has complete control over their phones. Designed in house, software developed in house, and carriers have no say in the software.
I have a feeling that has a lot to do with it.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Premium App
Which ROM? Of course you are aware of the many workarounds needed to keep froyo idle drain under control? These will eventually be fixed for good.
I have even more of a complaint about the active screen-on drain. Using auto brightness indoors, its impossible to get more than 2.5-3.0 hours of screen time. (WIFI or 3g) This is way less than iphone 4's capability of around 8 hours. There are some things that help explain it like androids 100% cpu usage when scrolling or animating the UI. However, there must be massive differences in the screen power consumption. Yea, yea, SAMOLED, power draw depends heavily on displaying black vs. white etc, but my random usage never gets more than about 2.5 hours screen usage over a day. Say what you will about apple, but they optimized the hell out of battery life.
Which kernel are you using? After moderate usage for me (games, browsing web with wifi, phone calls, etc) my battery life is around 70% after 15 hours.
Kaze105 said:
Which kernel are you using? After moderate usage for me (games, browsing web with wifi, phone calls, etc) my battery life is around 70% after 15 hours.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Guys, since screen-on time dominates battery usage, it'd be nice to note how much screen-on time you get and your brightness setting. Defining "light" usage over a number of hours could mean just about anything... very subjective.
Scrappy1 said:
Guys, since screen-on time dominates battery usage, it'd be nice to note how much screen-on time you get and your brightness setting. Defining "light" usage over a number of hours could mean just about anything... very subjective.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True enough. I set my light to auto and since im usually in a room, the light setting is at lowest. When im outside, its goes to the brightest settings.
Shakes The AssClown said:
Can anyone tell me why the Android phones have battery life issues? Here's a scenario...my friend has an iphone, i have the fascinate. We both put our phones in our locker in the morning for work. We both come out for break and he still has well over 90% of battery life while mine is down to 70%. Why do the android phones drain so quickly. Yes I could put it in airplane mode and such but my friend doesn't have to on his Iphone.
Just wondering why these phones have such a tough time with battery life. I notice in a lot of the forums people are trying different things to get better battery life. I have tried different roms, kernels, radios, etc...and really don't notice a huge difference. I am not a heavy user of my phone and it lasts just about the day and dies. I may hit the net for few mins, do some texting, and check email from time to time. I would think the battery should last a couple days just doing this...not drain when the phone is just sitting idle. Anyway just wondering about this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Iphone pretty much have more or less the same battery life problems.
Scrappy1 said:
There are some things that help explain it like androids 100% cpu usage when scrolling or animating the UI. However, there must be massive differences in the screen power consumption. Yea, yea, SAMOLED, power draw depends heavily on displaying black vs. white etc, but my random usage never gets more than about 2.5 hours screen usage over a day. Say what you will about apple, but they optimized the hell out of battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you use Google Navigation and constantly force rerouting to destination by taking wrong turn/path, your 100% charged phone would hit empty within 2HRs or less with the screen brightness set at minimum.
Anandtech reveiw of several real world tests shows iphone 4 smokes the fascinate bad. Not even close.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3957/samsung-fascinate-review-verizons-galaxy-s-smartphone/8
Scrappy1 said:
Anandtech reveiw of several real world tests shows iphone 4 smokes the fascinate bad. Not even close.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3957/samsung-fascinate-review-verizons-galaxy-s-smartphone/8
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We have a more powerful phone than the iphone 4, of course our battery is shorter. (better screen, faster cpu, etc) Also seems like our antenna is the best according to the review.
Android is made to constantly sync with the internet for updates and notifications. It's just the nature of the operating system to draw a lot of power because in theory it is a more powerful and complicated system. Also keep in mind that the battery inside an iPhone is huge and it is lithium polymer which lasts longer but is more expensive. These larger lithium polymer batteries are the main reason iPads and MacBooks get good battery life as well as their less powerful chip sets.
EDIT: Oh, and also iOS doesn't use as much RAM as Android so that also factors in to the battery life being generally better.
Kaze105 said:
We have a more powerful phone than the iphone 4, of course our battery is shorter. (better screen, faster cpu, etc) Also seems like our antenna is the best according to the review.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dunno about you but my Fascinate get's poor signal compared to other phones. Also slower network speeds.
Kaze105 said:
We have a more powerful phone than the iphone 4, of course our battery is shorter. (better screen, faster cpu, etc) Also seems like our antenna is the best according to the review.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I appreciate the more open, easy to modify nature of android over apple. But to trying and explain the 2x worse battery life on android as arising from "better" processor and screen is wishful thinking at best... blatent android fanboy propaganda at worst. We need to learn how apple has optimized things, not turn an overconfident blind eye.
Scrappy1 said:
I appreciate the more open, easy to modify nature of android over apple. But to trying and explain the 2x worse battery life on android as arising from "better" processor and screen is wishful thinking at best... blatent android fanboy propaganda at worst. We need to learn how apple has optimized things, not turn an overconfident blind eye.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's unfortunately that the Fascinate lacks the monthly software update support similar to Apple, but using the support from this forum by the devs, I had achieved 1% power usage for every 3 hour idled = max possible 300 HRS.
Zacisblack said:
Android is made to constantly sync with the internet for updates and notifications. It's just the nature of the operating system to draw a lot of power because in theory it is a more powerful and complicated system. Also keep in mind that the battery inside an iPhone is huge and it is lithium polymer which lasts longer but is more expensive. These larger lithium polymer batteries are the main reason iPads and MacBooks get good battery life as well as their less powerful chip sets.
EDIT: Oh, and also iOS doesn't use as much RAM as Android so that also factors in to the battery life being generally better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Guys, there's a lot of android fanboy propaganda going on in here. I'm not against android, but don't automatically defend it like its your mama. The ifixit link below shows iphone 4 has 1420 mah battery as opposed to fascinates 1500 mah. They also both have 512 MB RAM. So that's not the issue.
Also, the Anandtech tests were done with phone on and active. So are you trying to explain android was at a disadvantage because it was "doing things in the background"? Like what? Any background process or sync service that kills your battery that bad is implemented horribly. iOS is doing the important stuff in the background too... maybe just not the ESPN or weather widget. But no one in their right mind believes those things are the problem.
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPhone-4-Teardown/3130/1
Scrappy1 said:
I appreciate the more open, easy to modify nature of android over apple. But to trying and explain the 2x worse battery life on android as arising from "better" processor and screen is wishful thinking at best... blatent android fanboy propaganda at worst. We need to learn how apple has optimized things, not turn an overconfident blind eye.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sadly, I am the opposite of an android fanboy as I would have gotten the iphone for verizon asap if I havent gotten the fascinate back at November. (Iphone on Verizon were still rumors back then). Also note that review was done in October last year. Battery life is probably much better now with cleaned roms and froyo.
If you really need to browse the web over 4 hours a day on your phone (use computer?), why not just get a larger battery or even get the iphone?
Edit: Hardware mean a lot in battery usage. After checking the iphones CPU, seems like its pretty much the same or similar to the ones of the fascinate, except slower clock speeds.
Kaze105 said:
Sadly, I am the opposite of an android fanboy as I would have gotten the iphone for verizon asap if I havent gotten the fascinate back at November. (Iphone on Verizon were still rumors back then). Also note that review was done in October last year. Battery life is probably much better now with cleaned roms and froyo.
If you really need to browse the web over 4 hours a day on your phone (use computer?), why not just get a larger battery or even get the iphone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Personally I don't get any better battery life from froyo ROMS. My wife's fascinate with stock eclair usually gets as many if not more hours of screen time as I get with superclean 2.9.2 and jt's EC10 w/ slight undervolt. Sometimes I get much worse battery life when I forget to activate one of the 10 workaround hacks still needed to fix the idle drain issue.
I use 2.5 hours of screen time daily quite often and find my battery exhausted before the day is over. Maybe I'm the rare case, but I doubt it.
Zacisblack said:
Dunno about you but my Fascinate get's poor signal compared to other phones. Also slower network speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon is pretty much known for its slower network speeds compared to AT&T. I do get pretty good signal, overall.
Scrappy1 said:
Personally I don't get any better battery life from froyo ROMS. My wife's fascinate with stock eclair usually gets as many if not more hours of screen time as I get with superclean 2.9.2 and jt's EC10 w/ slight undervolt. Sometimes I get much worse battery life when I forget to activate one of the 10 workaround hacks still needed to fix the idle drain issue.
I use 2.5 hours of screen time daily quite often and find my battery exhausted before the day is over. Maybe I'm the rare case, but I doubt it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My battery life with imnuts undervolted kernel is much better than ones from previous EB01 kernels. I didnt find much difference between SC 2.9.2 ROM and Nameless V3 battery with the same kernel. I usually have around 75-50 percent battery life left from moderate usage. (Different from other people according to screen brightness and etc as stated in previous posts)
Kaze105 said:
My battery life with imnuts undervolted kernel is much better than ones from previous EB01 kernels. I didnt find much difference between SC 2.9.2 ROM and Nameless V3 battery with the same kernel. I usually have around 75-50 percent battery life left from moderate usage. (Different from other people according to screen brightness and etc as stated in previous posts)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Under battery details, what is your display "time on" at end of your day? What is Max "time on" you ever got? Without those numbers its hard to say anything objectively.
Scrappy1 said:
Under battery details, what is your display "time on" at end of your day? What is Max "time on" you ever got? Without those numbers its hard to say anything objectively.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since its monday tomorrow, ill test the max time on. At the end of the day, or rather when I start charging it again/installing kernels or roms, time on is 14 hours and 17 minutes.
On my fascinate I unplug phone at 645 check face book and xda for about a hour on auto brightness. I then go to school and check pulse and xda many times totaling around 2 hours. The rest of the time is idle so after 2-3 hours of screen time and then 3-4 hours of idle during the school day I get home with 85-89% left im using dark revenge with imnuts undervolted kernel. Im no android fanboy I'm just posting my stats.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Premium App

Battery Life Discussion Here

Since I usually start this thread I thought I would get it up here and ready to go!
Post all of your information regarding battery life, on screen times, tweaks, and tips here!
Hardcore73 said:
Since I usually start this thread I thought I would get it up here and ready to go!
Post all of your information regarding battery life, on screen times, tweaks, and tips here!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since i always post the same problem, battery life could be better, will probably get 8-9 hours, with 3-4 screen time. Gonna keep it stock kernal so its more stable.
i think 2800 mah battery not enough for daily usage
stormy_ugur said:
i think 2800 mah battery not enough for daily usage
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's 2600 mAh, not 2800 mAh. And why do you think it won't be enough? They're probably making AMOLED even more efficient than it was last year and the new Exynos SoC is up to 30% more efficient than current offers because of the 14 nm half node.
They are slapping power user in the face with non removable battery. Now instead of carrying spare battery I need to bring a chunky PowerBank. Can't Samsung realize they are not apple and they abandon their core audience do them no good?
dandroid13 said:
It's 2600 mAh, not 2800 mAh. And why do you think it won't be enough? They're probably making AMOLED even more efficient than it was last year and the new Exynos SoC is up to 30% more efficient than current offers because of the 14 nm half node.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is it not possible to insert 3000 mAh battery to s6? it won't be more usefull for users? why samsung still parsimonious? s5 has 2800 mAh battery & s4 has 2600 mAh battery and s6 will come with 2600 mAh battery. sometimes i can't understand to Samsung.
stormy_ugur said:
is it not possible to insert 3000 mAh battery to s6? it won't be more usefull for users? why samsung still parsimonious? s5 has 2800 mAh battery & s4 has 2600 mAh battery and s6 will come with 2600 mAh battery. sometimes i can't understand to Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like I said, if these rumors get confirmed, it's quite possible that the GS6 will perform better than current smartphones, even with a smaller battery. Which in that case allows a slimmer, lighter device.
Enviado do meu Galaxy S5
If the phone is getting a QHD Screen I doubt that there will be any better battery results than the other mainstream smartphones.
Just compare the Note 3 vs Note 4.
What about a poll with:
a) I want a phone slim like a post card with 3-5 hours SOT
b) I want a phone slim like a S3/One/Lumia with 12-15 hours SOT
LINK to GSMARENA Battery Leaks
It seems like a non removable battery with 2600mAh
http://www.gsmarena.com/newscomm-11252.php
The QHD on the Korean S5 LTE-A had about the same battery life as the US variant. Therefore, the QHD on the S6 should have the same...if not better battery life even with a smaller 2600 battery. I wouldn't worry too much about...my only complaint is that it'll be non-removable
http://www.androidauthority.com/galaxy-s5-lte-a-battery-benchmark-414550/
Sent from my XT1095 using XDA Free mobile app
dandroid13 said:
Like I said, if these rumors get confirmed, it's quite possible that the GS6 will perform better than current smartphones, even with a smaller battery. Which in that case allows a slimmer, lighter device.
Enviado do meu Galaxy S5
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i see bro. thanks for your explanation. i think you will buy a GS6 when it available for users
Since S6 was said to use Exynos7420 instead of Qualcomm........the consumption of cortex A57 would exceed A15 and Krait a lot according to Anandtech
pikatchu said:
What about a poll with:
a) I want a phone slim like a post card with 3-5 hours SOT
b) I want a phone slim like a S3/One/Lumia with 12-15 hours SOT
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll take Option C. A phone that is 12mm thin and has more like 20 hours of SOT.
There's no point in making super powerful smartphones, if we can't use them like the pocket sized PCs that they have evolved into. I'm sure there are many people who would love to use their phone to get actual work done without having to worry about the battery. Also, since batteries wear out over time, I'd rather have a bigger battery than what would seem to be big enough at first.
pikatchu said:
If the phone is getting a QHD Screen I doubt that there will be any better battery results than the other mainstream smartphones.
Just compare the Note 3 vs Note 4.
What about a poll with:
a) I want a phone slim like a post card with 3-5 hours SOT
b) I want a phone slim like a S3/One/Lumia with 12-15 hours SOT
LINK to GSMARENA Battery Leaks
It seems like a non removable battery with 2600mAh
http://www.gsmarena.com/newscomm-11252.php
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because the CPU/GPU only within the same generation range on 1080P(note3) and 2K(note4) though on paper spec. the latter one should be a lot better but still same generation and indeed that kind of power isn't enough to push 2K. Hence, the CPU/GPU will always require to run at a higher clock and battery draining even just on 2D.
S6 is running a whole new CPU with 14nm manufacturing process, the situation should be much better though but I agreed 1080P is enough on a tiny screen and I also prefer more battery life.
Is the battery removable?
I don't think so
The battery will NOT be 2600 for the MILLIONTH TIME. IT'S ANNOYING ME HOW blind all these websites and you lot are. The info is right in front of you the batteries were for G925 WHICH IS THE CODE FOR THE S EDGE. NOT S6
SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? S6 WILL BE MORE JUST LIKE WITH THE NOTE
NOTE 4 BATTERY 3220
NOTE EDGE BATTERY 3000
NOW STOP SAYING IT'LL BE 2600.
Its funny to see how rumors, leaks and teasers mess with people's brains and expectations, the media really knows how to get in your heads. We will know by sunday's time, then all of you will really have something solid to criticize until the next device comes up, so just hang in there. I just hope it lasts me the whole day on moderate use, so that I can charge it overnight
Butthurt much?
Battery size difference of 200 mah is meaningless. What matters is actual battery performance. Is there a correlation? Sure. Does every phone last same length of time with the same capacity battery? Hell, no.
chong67 said:
Is the battery removable?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Heard it is not, but I hope it is.
We will see next week.

Measurements of the battery usage of Moto Voice

GPS, BT off
Airplane mode ON
Few days of test.
After 6h measured in BBS:
With MV off, 0.3%h.
With MV on, 0.6%h
Moto voice comsumption is 0.3%h.
For me it's a very high comsumption, especially of something that are marketed as "almost no consumption".
Think of a regular day of usage, like 18 hours between plug-out in the morning and plug-in in the evening.
18 hours x 0.3% = 5.4% battery usage all day for Moto Voice
I don't think that's really much, one-twentieth is more like "almost no consumption" in my opinion.
Thats about 7% a day
If you are running out of battery its ANYTHING but Moto Voice
To compare, 4G Data utilizes 0.6%h.
Meh. 7% is low. I bet you waste more battery with the screen on without you intently looking at it.
erikiksaz said:
Meh. 7% is low. I bet you waste more battery with the screen on without you intently looking at it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol he wasted more battery testing the loss then the amount he would lose in a few days normal use lol. Also I will add in I just got a nice fast charger... not the overpriced moto one, paid $16 charged from 20% to 60% in 30 min, no longer a need to miserly conserve battery if in 30 min charge time I can recover that much battery
Justo to mention, quickcharge spoils your battery.
http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/how_to_prolong_lithium_based_batteries
Actually charging overnight does more damage. Either way most will get new phones before the battery is deteriorated enough to matter. 2 years is usually about max life for most on here
Besides that 7 percent savings over a whole day at the cost of what makes moto special seems a very poor trade off but each to their own. If you're not using moto features load aosp you can have a plain boring phone like everyone else with marginally better battery life
Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk 2
Don't judge the entire world based on your american standards. :cyclops:
onolox said:
Don't judge the entire world based on your american standards. :cyclops:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most of the time I would agree with you, but please explain why you said that.
Because the american market is driven by the latest top smartphone, in the rest of the world is not like that.
Here for example, just a very few people buy things in the launch, like me, I have to wait prices to fall, 6 months to a year.
Even in countries of europe, people keeps their gadgets for years.
Then, in america the habit is to change your phone 1 or in 2 years max. I don't like this type of thinking, this consumerism unbridled. If the entire world consumes eletronics like the US then we will need 3 or 4 more chinas and we will be buried in smartphones

Terrible, terrible battery life

Hi,
I recently bought the Moto X Pure Edition. Overall I am very pleased with it however there is one thing that constantly bugs me. The battery life is absolutely terrible. I'd seen no mention of this before I bought the device but having bought it, I'm realizing how terrible it is. I only get around 2-2.5 hours of screen on time. This is even worse than the moto g 2014 I owned before which i could easily get 3 hours with. Are other people having similar experiences and are there any potential solutions?
Also, can you guys suggest some custom ROMs for me with great battery life and very stable? Thanks!
Try TruPureXMM, it has the best battery life among other roms, AFAIK. Well, that's because it is based on stock. Try it out for yourself.
Sent from my XT1572 using Tapatalk
Am on stock and battery life is terrible. Can hardly end with 3h max with a full charge. And am one of those that stops most of the moto actions, low brightness, no wi-fi all time etc but still its worst battery life I've seen on a mobile. I think it has to do with the big screen it has!
xxhunterxx11 said:
Try TruPureXMM, it has the best battery life among other roms, AFAIK. Well, that's because it is based on stock. Try it out for yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What changes does it have from stock?
BruceWayne54 said:
What changes does it have from stock?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is debloated (forgot the others lol). Check the thread to see all the information you need.
Sent from my XT1572 using Tapatalk
check out frankenkernel. I get 5Hrs of SoT
I have a brand-new XT 1572 (on stock) and would not call its battery life terrible. I'm getting 5 hours continuous SoT on WiFi (not sure people are using the term "SoT" consistently - if the phone is on for 24 hours, I'd expect to get less than 5 hours SoT; same when I'm on a 4G connection, particularly a bad one). Not great, but acceptable (and not unexpected in light of XT 157x reviews).
I have a shortcut to Settings - battery on my home screen which I check frequently (while I'm in the process of getting familiar with the phone), I have OS Monitor on my home screen, and I occasionally check "running services" under "Developer Options". I use Nova Launcher which makes it very easy to force-stop an app just by long-tapping it, hitting "App info" and then stopping it.
All of this has caused me to uninstall a few power-hogging apps which I probably did not need in the first place; I also find I need to occasionally force-stop apps such as Neutron.
In an average day, from 6am-10pm of mixed WiFi/LTE usage I get about 3 hours total screen on time, and the majority of the time I have good-excellect signal strength... If I have average to poor signal strength, 2-2.5 hours SOT is normal. On WiFi with continuous usage I get 4+ hours. This is normal.
Sorry, but the battery life of this phone, especially if used in bright light or outdoors, is just not good. The display is gorgeous, but it is an unbelievable battery hog.
I have tried many ROMs and all have worse batter then stock... TruPureXMM is debloated stock but the battery life isn't much different because it's the screen that takes 80-90% of the power, no rom can change that.
acejavelin said:
In an average day, from 6am-10pm of mixed WiFi/LTE usage I get about 3 hours total screen on time, and the majority of the time I have good-excellect signal strength... If I have average to poor signal strength, 2-2.5 hours SOT is normal. On WiFi with continuous usage I get 4+ hours. This is normal.
Sorry, but the battery life of this phone, especially if used in bright light or outdoors, is just not good. The display is gorgeous, but it is an unbelievable battery hog.
I have tried many ROMs and all have worse batter then stock... TruPureXMM is debloated stock but the battery life isn't much different because it's the screen that takes 80-90% of the power, no rom can change that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't disagree with you - I call it "acceptable", you call it "just not good". I'd stop (far) short of calling it "terrible, terrible" though - and let's face it, this is why the device sells at the price point it does - which, to me, right now, is (a) close to the limit of what I'm prepared to pay for a smartphone and (b) great value for money. I'd rather be close to a charger or battery pack (in fact, I ordered a slim battery pack when I ordered the phone) with this phone at all times than owning a different phone (in this price range) with better battery life but other challenges/compromises I need to take. This devices's predecessor (for me) was the LG G3 - same thing, except that this device actually works.
acejavelin said:
...
I have tried many ROMs and all have worse batter then stock... TruPureXMM is debloated stock but the battery life isn't much different because it's the screen that takes 80-90% of the power, no rom can change that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I completely agree with the above. Thats main reason I havent used a custom Rom yet and still waiting for Stock 7 realease (hopefully we see it within the next 2 months) before trying a custom rom yet.
But i wanted to ask a question about the screen taking all that ℅ in the battery drain:
I remember i read somewhere in another thread an option that changes the screen resolution to FHD 1080 instead of QHD. You think that really makes the screen battery drain lighter or it doesnt matter !?
phony_user said:
I don't disagree with you - I call it "acceptable", you call it "just not good". I'd stop (far) short of calling it "terrible, terrible" though - and let's face it, this is why the device sells at the price point it does - which, to me, right now, is (a) close to the limit of what I'm prepared to pay for a smartphone and (b) great value for money. I'd rather be close to a charger or battery pack (in fact, I ordered a slim battery pack when I ordered the phone) with this phone at all times than owning a different phone (in this price range) with better battery life but other challenges/compromises I need to take. This devices's predecessor (for me) was the LG G3 - same thing, except that this device actually works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My prior phones were an LG G2 and an LG G4 and I was thinking that my 6 month old 2015 MXPE had good battery life. I'm not sure I have ever had a phone that lasted all day. I need to stop buying sub par phones I guess. My Pixel XL (once it gets here) will hopefully fix that.
This is from stock 6.0 - May 2016 Patches - using it on Verizon network
From GSam Battery Monitor, since August 15, 2016:
Averages Per Complete Charge -
Battery Life: 1d 5.3h (8h 29m Active)
Screen On: 3h 56m (5h 11m Max)
I pretty much just charge my phone for 45 - 50 minutes a day at work and do not leave it on the charger any longer than it has to be.
andromobilogy said:
I completely agree with the above. Thats main reason I havent used a custom Rom yet and still waiting for Stock 7 realease (hopefully we see it within the next 2 months) before trying a custom rom yet.
But i wanted to ask a question about the screen taking all that ℅ in the battery drain:
I remember i read somewhere in another thread an option that changes the screen resolution to FHD 1080 instead of QHD. You think that really makes the screen battery drain lighter or it doesnt matter !?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you read thread I believe that only worked on Lollipop... People who did it on Marshmallow claimed it made no difference.
acejavelin said:
If you read thread I believe that only worked on Lollipop... People who did it on Marshmallow claimed it made no difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, I was trying that method on Marshmallow. No positive changes on battery life, but got negative impact on Moto Display, it was to ugly for me to use.
phony_user said:
I don't disagree with you - I call it "acceptable", you call it "just not good". I'd stop (far) short of calling it "terrible, terrible" though - and let's face it, this is why the device sells at the price point it does - which, to me, right now, is (a) close to the limit of what I'm prepared to pay for a smartphone and (b) great value for money. I'd rather be close to a charger or battery pack (in fact, I ordered a slim battery pack when I ordered the phone) with this phone at all times than owning a different phone (in this price range) with better battery life but other challenges/compromises I need to take. This devices's predecessor (for me) was the LG G3 - same thing, except that this device actually works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Eh, to each there own... My previous phone was a Moto G 2015, it easily got 5 hours SOT in a day with battery to spare, so to me the battery life on the X is poor, but not terrible... I also carry mini power stick for charging on the go, and a QC adapter.
acejavelin said:
In an average day, from 6am-10pm of mixed WiFi/LTE usage I get about 3 hours total screen on time, and the majority of the time I have good-excellect signal strength... If I have average to poor signal strength, 2-2.5 hours SOT is normal. On WiFi with continuous usage I get 4+ hours. This is normal.
Sorry, but the battery life of this phone, especially if used in bright light or outdoors, is just not good. The display is gorgeous, but it is an unbelievable battery hog.
I have tried many ROMs and all have worse batter then stock... TruPureXMM is debloated stock but the battery life isn't much different because it's the screen that takes 80-90% of the power, no rom can change that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How about frankenclark with ghostpepper?
Sent from my XT1572 using Tapatalk
xxhunterxx11 said:
How about frankenclark with ghostpepper?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What about it? Kernels, roms, etc, can't do anything about how much power the display uses, it's like trying to make a 100w light bulb use 40 watts... they can only effect other things like SOC, syncing, etc.
acejavelin said:
What about it? Kernels, roms, etc, can't do anything about how much power the display uses, it's like trying to make a 100w light bulb use 40 watts... they can only effect other things like SOC, syncing, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree here. A 5.7" screen will require more power just to light up. As far as changing resolution, you are still powering a 5.7" display. You might notice some slight difference in battery (and maybe fps) when playing games, but it is really related to going a little easier on the chips.
I'm still on true pure, not even the most recent build, and I could always get a day and a half of battery use, or at least a full day with moderate use.
Hey folks, just wanted to chime in on this. I had the phone since it's release and got around 5 to 6 hours of SoT with WiFi, GPS enabled (but not while using maps lol) and brightness set to about 50%. Battery life has gotten worse with each update and now I am waiting for Android 7 and I will reset my phone after it's installed.
Btw I disable any build in app that I don't use and uninstall apps that use to much battery in the background.
Am on Telsa 03/02 Build. And the battery life is as good as Stock. 3hrs SOT on LTE with Data ON the whole time and 4hrs SOT on WiFi. All the while keeping GPS ON High Accuracy and Ambient display.
No Greenify or any other battery booster.
The performance is better than Stock and all the features working near perfectly. It's a good choice, you get to use Nougat without really compromising the battery much.
Here is the post: https://forum.xda-developers.com/mo...ms-validus-t3561477/post71196401#post71196401
Also I have recently changed the resolution to 1080p. It doesn't increase battery life much but definitely boosts the performance.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/mo...ing-screen-t3190234/post71194289#post71194289
All I can say is, despite the battery life being poor, you have TurboPower charger which definitely saves the day. The phone charges from 10% to 100% within half n hour.

Categories

Resources