The Moto E (2015) Review
by Brandon Chester on April 21, 2015 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Motorola
- Mobile
- Moto E (2015)
GPU Performance
The Adreno 306 GPU in Snapdragon 410 is more or less just a variant of the Adreno 305 used in the Snapdragon 400 series SoCs. Because of this, there's not likely to be much improvement in terms of overall GPU performance when comparing the Moto E to older Snapdragon 400 devices like the One Mini 2 or the Moto G.
As expected, Adreno 306 performs roughly the same as Adreno 305. In the graphics test the Moto E does slightly worse than the Moto G, while it does substantially better in the physics test. Due to the heavier weighting of the graphics test, and the harmonic mean used to calculate the overall score, the Moto E actually performs every so slightly worse than the Moto G overall. I would consider the difference in graphics scores to be within the margin of error, and in general users can expect essentially the same level of performance from Adreno 306 as that of Adreno 305.
While I would normally run BaseMark X after 3DMark, a GPU driver bug prevents the test from finishing properly and no results are reported. Because of this, our last GPU test is GFXBench 3.0. In both T-Rex HD and Manhattan, the offscreen performance of Adreno 306 is roughly comparable to that of Adreno 305 in Snapdragon 400. Onscreen performance pulls ahead of the Moto G due to the Moto E's lower display resolution.
Overall, the GPU performance of the 2015 Moto E is what you'd expect from a budget device. It would be nice if there was a larger performance improvement over Snapdragon 400, but Motorola can't be faulted for that. Buyers shouldn't expect to be able to play any intensive 3D games, but the performance is more than sufficient for simple 2D games and rendering the Android interface.
NAND Performance
NAND performance is another important aspect of mobile devices. While in the PC world vendors will sometimes make note of their HDD/SSD speeds, in the mobile world we haven't reached a point where anything beyond the amount of flash memory is stated by manufacturers. Despite this, poor NAND can be a serious bottleneck of system performance whenever something is being loaded from the internal storage, or when a background app is doing reads and writes or downloading updates.
Random read speeds on the Moto E are fairly slow, and random writes are right in the middle of our comparison devices. While I don't think the random write will cause any issues, the slow random read speed may contribute to some slowness whenever applications are loading files.
For those who are keeping track, the Moto E does not come with Android's full device encryption (FDE) enabled by default. Google appears to have stepped back from requiring FDE, and instead just recommends that it be enabled. Despite it not being enabled on the Moto E, the sequential read performance is not quite as fast as some other budget devices like the One Mini 2, although it is in line with the 2014 Moto G. Sequential write performance is unfortunately one of the lowest results on our list, although with only 5GB of accessible storage I don't imagine users will be writing many large files where it becomes a noticeable issue.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
90 Comments
View All Comments
Hubb1e - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link
While the camera performance is pretty meh, I really don't see how you can complain about 802.11n being a downside. AC wireless is nowhere near ubiquitous and N is surely fast enough for low end users. AC is decidedly a high end feature in phones and even computers these days. Most users of this phone probably still have wireless G in their homes or coffee shop hotspots which I would argue is still plenty of speed for a phone with a low end mobile chipset.hans_ober - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link
Yeah, it makes more sense to upgrade the cameras to 8MP/2MP than to switch to 802.11ac.Olaf van der Spek - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link
The E makes the much more expensive but slower G seem a bit expensive. Is Moto planning a new G?Cryio - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link
"It wasn't that long ago that I recommended buyers looking for inexpensive smartphones avoid Android devices in favor of Windows Phone."" With Android Lollipop and new budget devices like the Moto E, my opinion about the quality of low end Android devices has changed."
While all these may be true, the Lumia 640 is a true challenger. There are still reaasons to recommend the 640 over this.
sprockkets - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link
Problem is what is the price, and two, it's a 5 inch phone. It was made to compete with the Moto G, not the Moto E.Currently I find WP to be great at first, but after a few days of trying again WP with the Lumia 635, it just flat out tries to annoy me. Today's annoyance is opening up the weather app goes to the store telling me there is a pending update. Then it disappears to the home screen. Before that when I told it to update all apps, it updates 16 out of 26. Why does the next 10 have to have me tell it again to download and install?
After the update it took two tries to open the weather app as it keeps crashing to the home screen.
The camera on it works good for pictures, but is utterly useless at night for video. Why can't they allow exp control for video?
Also learned they won't issue GDR1 or 2 updates for WP8.1 since it will go to WP10. Too bad the latest build is a buggy mess.
BMNify - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link
You seem to have a defective Lumia 635, get it replaced, never seen or used such a buggy Lumia, Even the old and humble Lumia 520 performs much better than what you describe.Kakti - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link
I bought this phone about two weeks ago from Best Buy - it's $79.99 for the Verizon one with NO contract. Not $120, not $150. $80 bucks. I can buy six of these for the same price as a new galaxy.The size of the phone is perfect, the screen is very nice, and due to the low resolution (compared to flagship phones), the battery actually lasts a really long time. Charging is fast and mine did come with a charger.
I've already recommended this phone to several family members and friends who are sick of 2 year contracts, gigantic phones that don't fit in your pocket, etc. Yes the camera sucks, no it doesn't beat a flagship in bench tests. But I don't run benchmarks, I have maybe 5-6 apps open at once and it has never slowed down or locked up on me.
Honestly if you're looking to save money and not have a laptop jammed into your pocket, take a look at this. The only reason I didn't get the Moto E last year was it didn't have 4G and we don't know how long until the 2015 Moto G comes out. 80 bucks no contract is pretty hard to beat.
BMNify - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link
No contract does not mean Unlocked, it is still a Verizon locked phone and that is why you are getting for a lower price. As long as people keep buying locked phones from Carriers they cannot and should not complain about software updates. You become a carrier slave and slaves don't ask.sonicmerlin - Wednesday, April 22, 2015 - link
If it runs on Verizon's LTE then it comes unlocked.RealTheXev - Wednesday, April 29, 2015 - link
I'm pretty sure all Verizon phones on LTE come unlocked. It sucks because some bands that it would normally access will probably require hacking (whenever that might happen), but all of my Verizon LTE phones are unlocked by default.