Anand's new battery tests? iPhone 5 hits 8 hrs LTE!

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/13

This is interesting. LTE battery life significantly blows away 3G in surf tests.

I'm kinda curious about this. I know LTE is faster significantly, but look at how a change in testing methodology totally skews results?

I think the issue is depending on your workload LTE could rock. I'm not sure what the difference in testing is but I think we used to feel LTE kills battery, but using Anand's new tests you could argue LTE is better for battery life? It all depends of course.

Edit: Also my apologies to mods for being a retard and hitting back and editing the post. I thought I was editing and not creating a new post so I created 3 threads... Whoops. Brain dead day.

 

[Red Storm]

Why is the Razr Maxx missing from the last chart? 😕

Also the S3 (Verizon) went from 6.6 hours of LTE web browsing to 4.3 hours in the iPhone review?

 

[mikegg]

Why is the Razr Maxx missing from the last chart? 😕

Also the S3 (Verizon) went from 6.6 hours of LTE web browsing to 4.3 hours in the iPhone review?

Anandtech probably tests phones at the same time using latest techniques for each review so they get common factors.

But either way, I think the S3 just got embarrassed really bad.

 

[runawayprisoner]

Funny that the iPhone 5 on 3G lasts half as long as on LTE.

Something doesn't seem right there. My experience is like the polar opposite of that.

Does he load a website, wait until the cell radio dies down, then load another site? Seems like extremely... relaxed usage behavior if you ask me.

 

[dagamer34]

Funny that the iPhone 5 on 3G lasts half as long as on LTE.

Something doesn't seem right there. My experience is like the polar opposite of that.

Does he load a website, wait until the cell radio dies down, then load another site? Seems like extremely... relaxed usage behavior if you ask me.

Uhh... the testing methodology is right there on the page. You should read it.

 

[MrX8503]

The battery life is pretty amazing. I'm on constant lte and the battery life is actually better than my iPhone 4. Wonder where those doubters are...

 

[eelw]

I did a continous video streaming test. On 3G, got 2:55 and on LTE, got 2:46.

 

[Nothinman]

It's not surprising that it will have better battery life than other LTE phones since Apple chose not to have separate antennas for LTE and 3G which is also why you don't have voice and data at the same time even with LTE.

 

[runawayprisoner]

Uhh... the testing methodology is right there on the page. You should read it.

And it doesn't give any information regarding how often pages were reloaded.

It looks almost as if on 3G, the phone constantly had to reload websites, thus giving no chance for the radio to die down whatsoever.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

And it doesn't give any information regarding how often pages were reloaded.

It looks almost as if on 3G, the phone constantly had to reload websites, thus giving no chance for the radio to die down whatsoever.

exactly. the old test was different, and i'd like an explanation on how either test is representative of actual phone use.

because essentially anand is putting to rest any fears of LTE and battery life.

 

[Mopetar]

It looks almost as if on 3G, the phone constantly had to reload websites, thus giving no chance for the radio to die down whatsoever.

That would be my guess as well.

 

[golem]

And it doesn't give any information regarding how often pages were reloaded.

It looks almost as if on 3G, the phone constantly had to reload websites, thus giving no chance for the radio to die down whatsoever.

My understanding of that test was that on both 3g and 4g, the phone had to load a page at certain timed intervals. Once it finished a page, it could go to sleep until it was time to load another page again. Since LTE was so much faster, it could load a page and go to sleep while the 3g radio had to stay on longer.

This would be the usage model if you were looking for specific information and then stopped once you got it. If you were just bored and consumed information as fast as it could come for a set length of time, the 3g battery life would last longer, but you would surf less sites.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

My understanding of that test was that on both 3g and 4g, the phone had to load a page at certain timed intervals. Once it finished a page, it could go to sleep until it was time to load another page again. Since LTE was so much faster, it could load a page and go to sleep while the 3g radio had to stay on longer.

This would be the usage model if you were looking for specific information and then stopped once you got it. If you were just bored and consumed information as fast as it could come for a set length of time, the 3g battery life would last longer, but you would surf less sites.

Both 3G and 4G times decreased in the new tests though so i don't know.

 

[Skurge]

Why is the Razr Maxx missing from the last chart? 😕

Also the S3 (Verizon) went from 6.6 hours of LTE web browsing to 4.3 hours in the iPhone review?

It is a little strange. The other phone on LTE that was also in the old test, the OneX on ATT got better life in the new tests, but the s3 got worse. All the 3G phones got worse battery life so I'm not sure what going on.

Unless there is something going on with Verizon's network.

 

[Eug]

I guess this refutes the lame excuse that manufacturers are making brand new late 2012 Android phones 3G only because of LTE power utilization concerns.

 

[Skurge]

I guess this refutes the lame excuse that manufacturers are making brand new late 2012 Android phones 3G only because of LTE power utilization concerns.

Pretty much.

I think LTE is mostly used in North America and Asia. Not so much in Europe. You can tell from the fact that phones that are sold only in the EU don't have LTE, but in Asia and NA they do.

The japanese S3 has LTE, so does the new 5inch HTC phone available in japan only. We have LTE here. Most of they phones that were sold on contract we got from the EU, but now phones sold on LTE contracts are from Japan.

 

[runawayprisoner]

My understanding of that test was that on both 3g and 4g, the phone had to load a page at certain timed intervals. Once it finished a page, it could go to sleep until it was time to load another page again. Since LTE was so much faster, it could load a page and go to sleep while the 3g radio had to stay on longer.

This would be the usage model if you were looking for specific information and then stopped once you got it. If you were just bored and consumed information as fast as it could come for a set length of time, the 3g battery life would last longer, but you would surf less sites.

Doesn't explain why the HTC One X on the same AT&T 3G network has better battery life than iPhone 4S or iPhone 5. 4S I can understand, but the iPhone 5 should be comparable to the HTC One X in page rendering time after cell radio finishes loading the site. Considering both phones are on the same network, they should load the same sites at the same speed, finish processing the pages at the same time, and go to idle at the same time as well. Bigger battery on the One X is offset by the bigger screen because Anand has also stated that all screens are calibrated to 200 nits.

Same reasoning for Galaxy S3. Or in fact... why does the One X on AT&T with S4 chip do worse than the international version with Tegra 3!?

If we are reasoning that faster page rendering allows the phone to idle faster, then... what's the reasoning for the iPhone 5 to fall behind the 4S?

Also as a matter of fact, for all that Anand said about poor power consumption of the Atom chip in the RAZR i, it unexpectedly pulls ahead of the other phones on 3G network. In fact, it's the longest-lasting 3G phone on that chart.

Something is fundamentally wrong with this chart to me. There are so many contradicting elements in it.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Pretty much.

I think LTE is mostly used in North America and Asia. Not so much in Europe. You can tell from the fact that phones that are sold only in the EU don't have LTE, but in Asia and NA they do.

The japanese S3 has LTE, so does the new 5inch HTC phone available in japan only. We have LTE here. Most of they phones that were sold on contract we got from the EU, but now phones sold on LTE contracts are from Japan.

Japan uses a different network, Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan, Hong Kong, etc and others which are huge on HTC and Samsung phones don't have LTE phones either. It's the same with Europe.

Japan is its own little market kinda like the US.

 

[grkM3]

Im sorry but these dont make any sence,I dodnt bother to read the review but are these phones docked with the screen off on the testing?

A gs3 in airplane mode wont last 8 hours with the screen on and not even doing anything but having the home screen up.

the longest I have seen on mine with a 2700mah battery is 5 hours onscreen time and thats with screen brighteness at 35-40%

 

[Dari]

Wait a minute, so all this talk about the GS3 having a bigger (and removable) battery is bupkis? People here complain about the One X but the One X has a better battery life in these tests. What a joke.

 

[grkM3]

Wait a minute, so all this talk about the GS3 having a bigger (and removable) battery is bupkis? People here complain about the One X but the One X has a better battery life in these tests. What a joke.

signal strenth,apps running in backround and screen brightness can change results by more than an hour!

 

[Red Storm]

Wait a minute, so all this talk about the GS3 having a bigger (and removable) battery is bupkis? People here complain about the One X but the One X has a better battery life in these tests. What a joke.

No, phones that don't have a removable battery are supposed to have better battery life because they can (but often don't) put a bigger one in there.

Look at the first two charts, the S3 is better. Then somehow in the 2nd (iPhone review) chart the S3 suddenly loses 2+ hours.

I don't think AT is fudging the numbers, I just think their battery testing methodology is odd and don't really trust it (or any site for that matter. Battery life tests are best done on your own)

 

[ChAoTiCpInOy]

I don't think AT is fudging the numbers, I just think their battery testing methodology is odd and don't really trust it (or any site for that matter. Battery life tests are best done on your own)

Not a lot of people have the resources to have all these phones for testing.

I think Anand's methodology was that it would be "normal" use for the majority of people. I remember in the iPhone 5 review he was saying that you'll see better battery life because LTE can load the page faster and then sleep, but if you consume more data because of the faster speeds you won't get any battery improvement.

 

[Dari]

No, phones that don't have a removable battery are supposed to have better battery life because they can (but often don't) put a bigger one in there.

Look at the first two charts, the S3 is better. Then somehow in the 2nd (iPhone review) chart the S3 suddenly loses 2+ hours.

I don't think AT is fudging the numbers, I just think their battery testing methodology is odd and don't really trust it (or any site for that matter. Battery life tests are best done on your own)

The S3 loses in 2 of the posted graphs. All this big deal over a larger battery was over nothing.

 

[TuxDave]

I think the issue is depending on your workload LTE could rock. I'm not sure what the difference in testing is but I think we used to feel LTE kills battery, but using Anand's new tests you could argue LTE is better for battery life? It all depends of course.

Edit: Also my apologies to mods for being a retard and hitting back and editing the post. I thought I was editing and not creating a new post so I created 3 threads... Whoops. Brain dead day.

I think it was more like the 1st gen LTE kills battery life (Galaxy Nexus). After the 2nd gen came out, I had no fears of moving up to LTE.