x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

LG G4 battery life test: nothing's changed since the G3

Posted: , by Daniel P.

Tags :

LG G4 battery life test: nothing's changed since the G3

The LG G4 is the most impressive flagship that the company has whipped up to date, with a bunch of "firsts" under its belt, like a tri-axis image stabilizer, color spectrum sensor, and a stitched genuine leather exterior option.

We took it for a spin over the weekend, and just released our review of the new LG flagship, basically determining that it lives up to the claims in the press release, and then some. It shoots some of the best photos you can obtain from a mobile phone (including in low-light conditions), offers a bright and ultra high-res display, and has a removable battery plus a microSD slot - a combo that no other flagship this year can claim.

There is the inevitable weak spot, though, which, just as with its predecessor, appears to be the battery life. The LG G4 lasted a tad north of six hours of screen-on time in our standardized battery benchmark test, which falls a bit short of the LG G3 even, let alone battery life monsters like the Sony Xperia Z3. Granted, it is not that far off from the direct competitors, like the Galaxy S6, the iPhone 6 Plus, or the HTC One M9, but this only comes to show that we don't have any significant gains in battery life with the flagship crop so far.

On the charging time front, the G4 delivered a bit over two hours for a full top-up with the supplied LG charger. This puts it in line with most other flagships, save for the Galaxy S6, which charges blazingly fast. All in all, you will likely have to juice up the G4 at the end of each day with normal usage, as is typical. Thus, it is a wise decision to create it with a swappable battery, so you can carry a quick spare with you, if you are leaving for a weekend away from a charger.

Battery Benchmarks

Battery life (hours)
Higher is better
Sony Xperia Z3 9h 29 min (Excellent)
Samsung Galaxy S6 7h 14 min (Good)
HTC One M9 6h 25 min (Average)
LG G3 6h 14 min (Average)
LG G4 6h 6 min (Average)
Charging time (minutes)
Lower is better
Sony Xperia Z3 235
Samsung Galaxy S6 78
HTC One M9 106
LG G3 120
LG G4 127
View all

81 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 04 May 2015, 08:22 21

1. shiftt (Posts: 333; Member since: 03 May 2015)


Wow, the LG G4 has bigger bezels than the LG G3 and it has worse battery performance? See, reason #2,234 why I'm disappointed in LG this time around. Rating 9.2?... Smh

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:44 17

9. rd_nest (Posts: 1593; Member since: 06 Jun 2010)


Let's do some maths, shall we?

S6 --> 434 min / 2550 mAh --> 10.21 sec/mAh

G4 --> 366 min / 3000 mAh --> 7.32 sec/mAh

Do you guys see how much efficient is Exynos now? Now consider the fact that the Exynos is easily much faster than Snapdragon, this just shows a huge advantage of efficiency for Samsung.

Faster processor --> less time to perform a task --> processor goes back to sleep faster --> combined with higher efficiency, this makes it a killer combo.

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:52 12

14. talon95 (Posts: 546; Member since: 31 Jul 2012)


Screen has more impact than processor, I'd say the latest AMOLED must have a big impact as well.

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:58 2

19. rd_nest (Posts: 1593; Member since: 06 Jun 2010)


Yes, defnitely. I am not including screen here beacuse PA mentioned they run a webscript to test battery life. If it cycles through various web pages and apps, then many times the screen would display a lot of whites, which could be little disadvantage for AMOLED.

posted on 04 May 2015, 17:00

58. epdm2be (Posts: 487; Member since: 20 Apr 2012)


You probably mean "...the screen would display a lot of whites, which would be BIG disadvantage for AMOLED."

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:15

26. ShaikhJGI (Posts: 167; Member since: 10 Jan 2014)


+1 Well said.

That Amoled panel on S6 is one killer of a display in every aspect.

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:40 1

33. hellbread (Posts: 309; Member since: 21 Nov 2014)


So, why is than Sony on first place here with old plain LCD?

posted on 04 May 2015, 10:01 6

36. TyrionLannister (unregistered)


Sony phones don't have LCD LOL. Z3 has a quantum dot backplane with an IPS panel on it.

Also, they have huge batteries.

posted on 04 May 2015, 13:56

48. hellbread (Posts: 309; Member since: 21 Nov 2014)


Why are you being smartass?

IPS (In-plane switching) is a screen technology used for liquid crystal displays (LCDs)...

google it next time
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPS_panel

Or just look at PA under display / technology part.
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Sony-Xperia-Z3_id8764

posted on 04 May 2015, 21:58

66. TyrionLannister (unregistered)


Why are you being dumbass?

IPS is just a switching technology. It doesn't mean the thing underneath is LCD. Z3 uses a blue backlight with phosphor on top of it.

posted on 05 May 2015, 00:15

70. Kakarotto (Posts: 253; Member since: 07 Dec 2010)


IPS = LCD

posted on 05 May 2015, 01:09

71. TyrionLannister (unregistered)


IPS is usually used in the panel of LCDs. But the Xperia phones have a quantum dot display with IPS on top.

What it means is it's kind of hybrid between a QD and an LCD. The backplane is made from blue quantum dots and not the usual white LEDs.

posted on 04 May 2015, 14:10

51. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


Sony has some kind of software where they use already loaded pages when still available so it doesn't have to refresh. I forgot what it is called but it seems quite effective.

I think AMOLED and plasma displays have to refresh instantly in order to operate which is why they don't have those 60 hertz or 120 hertz ratings and that software trick doesn't apply.

posted on 05 May 2015, 06:33

75. rd_nest (Posts: 1593; Member since: 06 Jun 2010)


That's called PSR - panel self refresh. It's a standard technology used by many vendors. Nothing out of ordinary.
It was available from the time of Exynos 5250 (your SOC also needs to support this feature). Pretty standard stuuf for most vendors.

And AMOLED displays can have much high frequency compared to any other display. 60/120 Hz is nothing compared to what AMOLED can give you. Now whether you need such frequency is a totally different question entirely.

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:56 1

17. shiftt (Posts: 333; Member since: 03 May 2015)


Sorry, but um.. where does the S6 come in? I was comparing the LG G3 and G4. I could care less, the S6 beats the G4 hands down but that's pathetic that they have the same battery capacity and still the G4 dies before the G3. Your "math" is irrelevant to anything I said.

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:08

22. fonelover123 (Posts: 153; Member since: 04 May 2015)


i dont trust their review on the battery performance its impossible for the g4 to got a weaker battery than g3.

there were already reviews conducted by other experts and they found out that g4's battery has really improved from last year's g3 and proven better and performed longer than the g3.

this is not accurate battery test. i don't know if you guys can still remember sometimes PA did mistakes in their battery tests for the G3 and other phones so i will not be suprised if sooner there will be a changes for this.

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:16 1

27. ShaikhJGI (Posts: 167; Member since: 10 Jan 2014)


Link from other experts please.

posted on 04 May 2015, 10:03 2

37. remotespeed (Posts: 6; Member since: 16 Mar 2015)


By the same Math's - would the Sony z3 not be even more efficient than S6?

posted on 05 May 2015, 07:00

76. rd_nest (Posts: 1593; Member since: 06 Jun 2010)


Yes, that's obvious. Because it's has much lesser pixels and the SOC is much weaker.
It's isn't that hard to grasp right?

posted on 04 May 2015, 19:35

63. sunjay140 (Posts: 118; Member since: 19 Mar 2015)


It's the screen and not the processor.....Mr "Muh Exynos".

posted on 04 May 2015, 21:30

65. SherlockHolmestr (Posts: 2; Member since: 04 May 2015)


Ummm, you do realize the s6 has quick charging 2.0 and the g4 doesn't right?

posted on 12 May 2015, 04:22 1

79. Bocan (Posts: 1; Member since: 12 May 2015)


I registered only to tell you how dumb you really are. Phonearena's test had a major flaw. They set the screen brightness at the same percentage, but little did they know that, for example, 50% brightness on the S6 is less bright than 50% on the G4.

In Ars Technica's test, which is more accurate, all screens were set at 200 nit (unit for measuring brightness on screens), and the G4 lasted for 583 minutes while the S6 only lasted for 439 minutes.

The AMOLED is only efficient when showing deep blacks, but when showing white, it actually consumes more energy than an LCD.

The Exynos chip is more efficiant than Snapdragon, but that's only because it's made with 14nm technology, meaning it can fit more transistors, while Snapdragon is still on 20nm. This will however change with Snapdragon 820 coming later this year.

One thing that's really bad about Exynos is the lacking of custom ROM's. Most devs aren't supporting Exynos due to the lack of a proper source and documentation of the chip.

posted on 12 May 2015, 13:00

80. SherlockHolmestr (Posts: 2; Member since: 04 May 2015)


False. If you are comparing nits (dude they know what nits are...) you are inaccurately measuring the two devices. One device that can achieve 575 nits vs. one that can reach 675 is NOT an accurate comparison. 200 nits on one display would be handled very differently than on the other. 50% brightness shows how well each phone can handle it's OWN display at a given brightness level in comparison to another. Using 50% shows how efficient the display itself is. If one phone is far worse at it's own half percent than another, you can show that the phone is worse at managing the display it has on it. Nits are not an accurate test because the minimum and maximum of each phone is different thus throwing results. Also 200 nits is less than 50% on both of these phones.

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:45 1

10. Simona (unregistered)


well it is weird as here : G4 has 2900 battery ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLGeWxqV_k4

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:57

18. rd_nest (Posts: 1593; Member since: 06 Jun 2010)


Generally battery capacity is mentioned as Typical and Minimum. LG's specs page mentions:

3,000mAh (Typ.) 2,900mAh (Min.)

Meaning you could get either of these, normally that would specify the larger number.

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:45 1

11. KParks23 (Posts: 618; Member since: 13 Oct 2010)


No way it has worse than my g3 with this POS lolipop update my phone gets 105 degrees and dies in 5 hr 100% to 0% 5 damn hours!

posted on 04 May 2015, 14:29

55. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


I still have the Z3 and lolipop knocked like a day or a day and a half from it as well but it's still crazy. Even with location services always on I still get a day and a half of relatively heavy use but it's not invincible 3 days easily like it was on kit kat.

I have to turn location services off for my GS6 to beat the Z3 with location on,

Lolipop is still one power hungry sob though.

posted on 04 May 2015, 17:08

59. epdm2be (Posts: 487; Member since: 20 Apr 2012)


"... knocked like a day or a day and a half from it as well..."

Weird isn't it? It has a flat and ugly UI (which uses less resources), there's supposed to be that "project Volta" as one o/t main attractions and there's a supposedly better run-time (ART instead of Dalvik) etc...

Yet they can't seem to fix the bugs and it performs worse instead of better? I mean, come on, on the same device (that runs Kitkat) e.g. G3, Lollipop SHOULD run better than KitKat!

I wrote before. Since Andy Rubin is gone from Google Android is getting from bad to worse. Coupled with manufacturers aping iPhone S6-devices in design and no wonder why the Android geeks are upset. If we wanted locked down iPhone-clones then we'd bought them... We didn't because we want an open platform that can be used longer then the usual lifespan of a fly!

posted on 05 May 2015, 02:40

72. jesus_sheep (Posts: 257; Member since: 18 Apr 2015)


I have a question. How long have you been having the Z3 for and does it have any cracks yet?

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:49 3

12. donrox (Posts: 145; Member since: 18 Jul 2014)


The G4 is taller, wider, thicker and heavier than the G3 with an even worse battery life! it also performs worse than all flagships released thus far.
I'd consider it a pretty good mid ranger if it was priced accordingly, but it isn't. the G4 is a failure imho

posted on 07 May 2015, 10:58 1

78. LGisgood (Posts: 833; Member since: 23 Jun 2012)


HOW IS THE G4 BATTERY PERFORMANCE?
During this last week of testing, the G4 stood up to my usual workload -- chatting up storms on Slack or Hangouts, listening to lengthy tomes in Audible, playing games in the bathroom and so on -- for entire workdays before it gave up the ghost. There were even a few times where, after having fallen asleep through episodes of Daredevil, I'd wake up the next day to see my phone had only just fired up its battery saver mode. On average, that worked out to between 13 and 14 hours of pretty consistent use a day before needing a trip to a power outlet -- the Galaxy S6 twins, on the other hand, usually stuck around for closer to 12. When I put the G4 through the standard Engadget video-rundown test (looping a 720p video with screen brightness set to 50 percent), it lasted for 11 hours and two minutes, clearly beating the S6's nearly nine-hour runtime.

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:24 15

2. SamsungPhanboy (banned) (Posts: 765; Member since: 31 Mar 2015)


9.2? LMAO

This phone would be lucky to get a damn 7. Do yourself a favor and buy the Samsung GS6. Phenomenal device.

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:31 8

5. Neros (Posts: 1016; Member since: 19 Dec 2014)


You're overreacting. G4 desrves at least 8.5-8.9, but giving it 9.2 was a huge mistake on PA's part when s6 got 9.3.

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:18 1

28. ShaikhJGI (Posts: 167; Member since: 10 Jan 2014)


Agreed 8.5 seems legit to me :)

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:54 1

16. Simona (unregistered)


NO BEST phone is Huawei P8 !! Ppl get P8 cheaper it DOES what expensive phones.. and has elegant design

posted on 04 May 2015, 14:00

50. javy108 (Posts: 1004; Member since: 27 Jul 2014)


If It was famous enough it will be the best but not....

posted on 04 May 2015, 14:13

52. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


If it had something better than the Kirin it would definitely be a contender.

posted on 04 May 2015, 12:20

45. hotelman2 (banned) (Posts: 56; Member since: 24 Apr 2015)


do us a favor and get lost! ip6 is still the best right now!!!

posted on 04 May 2015, 13:28 3

47. AppleCultist (banned) (Posts: 335; Member since: 18 Feb 2015)


iPhone 6 is low quality. Doesn't feel like a premium phone with its cheap components and build quality.

posted on 04 May 2015, 14:00 2

49. javy108 (Posts: 1004; Member since: 27 Jul 2014)


iPhone 6 is a joke..........

posted on 04 May 2015, 16:26

57. pyradark (Posts: 852; Member since: 10 Jun 2012)


Phonearena hear your prayers, check the rating of G4 now, 9.0 hahaha

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:29 3

3. Neros (Posts: 1016; Member since: 19 Dec 2014)


But it did change; it's even worse ;P.

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:10 3

23. fonelover123 (Posts: 153; Member since: 04 May 2015)


i dont trust their review on the battery performance its impossible for the g4 to got a weaker battery than g3.

there were already reviews conducted by other experts and they found out that g4's battery has really improved from last year's g3 and proven better and performed longer than the g3.

this is not accurate battery test. i don't know if you guys can still remember sometimes PA did mistakes in their battery tests for the G3 and other phones so i will not be suprised if sooner there will be a changes for this.

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:32 3

30. alouden (unregistered)


Thought it was just me. I don't trust these results either. I have seen at least one other review stating that the battery life was at least better than the G3. PA's battery results have been questioned before.

Look, if they are proven correct, fine. But I will not just take PA's word for it. they are not above making mistakes. I also question their brightness assessment of the G4.

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:40 1

32. fonelover123 (Posts: 153; Member since: 04 May 2015)


Once again PA has just changed the G4 review' score from 9.2 down to 9.0? yes they did its only means this review is not yet finalized?

i have a supect there was a mistake in the battery just like what happen to g3 last year.

im now reducing my trust to PA they always changeable minded they should finalized thier review before showing it to the World.

posted on 05 May 2015, 07:01 1

77. DONUT (Posts: 424; Member since: 27 Jun 2013)


it might have been rushed to be the "first" G4 review

posted on 04 May 2015, 11:45 1

43. alouden (unregistered)


Okay, PC Mag has results with pre-release software. Results were better than the M9 but not as good as the GS6. Interesting....I guess i will have to wait on official results with final releases.

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:40 2

31. Busyboy (Posts: 553; Member since: 07 Jan 2015)


I agree. There's no way it got worse results than the G3. It uses a more efficient and powerful SoC, 64 bit chip to fully utilize project Volta, and a more efficient quantum dot display. I've been hearing great battery results from both the S6 and M9 with reports of up to 8h SOT. You really need to update these tests PA

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:44 1

35. fonelover123 (Posts: 153; Member since: 04 May 2015)


Elsewhere, battery life is an improvement on last year’s G3, both in terms of its capacity and according to the results from our tests. Streaming a 720p video in flight mode with the screen set to a brightness of 120cd/m2 drained it at 6.3% per hour while audio streaming over 4G drained it at 3.6%.

That can’t quite match the Samsung Galaxy S6’s figures of 5.5% and 3%, but it's better than the MTC One M9 (9.7% and 2.6%), and with a user-replaceable battery, it's more flexible than both.

LG credits the phone’s improved efficiency to a number of changes, not least a more efficient screen. The G4 uses what LG calls “N-type liquid crystals”, which it says allows the light from the screen’s backlight through the structure of the liquid crystal more easily.

REVIEW by; PC pro

posted on 04 May 2015, 10:36

39. AnySmarterIdRunLinux (Posts: 1; Member since: 04 May 2015)


More efficient processor and less efficient OS. Haven't seen or ready _anyone_ saying their battery life improved after upgrading to 5.x. Why would this be any different.

Google is going to need to enable people to upgrade their new phones to 4.4 like MS allowed Vista users to upgrade to XP.

posted on 04 May 2015, 17:11

60. epdm2be (Posts: 487; Member since: 20 Apr 2012)


"64 bit chip to fully utilize project Volta"

WTH has a 64-bit chip to do with "project Volta"?

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:29 3

4. Atrixboyyy (Posts: 348; Member since: 03 Nov 2011)


I've been telling my friend to stay away from this one.. hopefully he listens

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:37 3

6. note4 (Posts: 8; Member since: 19 Oct 2014)


how 9.2? this phone diserved 8.5

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:38 1

7. RajRicardo (Posts: 394; Member since: 28 Feb 2014)


removable battery and SD card slot.

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:13 1

24. fonelover123 (Posts: 153; Member since: 04 May 2015)


maybe someone from PA's team knows this phone is rally great and deserves even morethan the 9.2 scores.

it just so happen they really need to praise the favorite one s6 or the iphone6? in order to do that they must say more bad things for the competitor "G4"

posted on 04 May 2015, 09:43 3

34. Rydsmith (Posts: 530; Member since: 20 Jun 2012)


Ling Ling, you're really annoying.

posted on 04 May 2015, 10:09

38. fonelover123 (Posts: 153; Member since: 04 May 2015)


why you always care of me lol?

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:41

8. iloveinnovation (Posts: 11; Member since: 03 May 2015)


For hardcore users maybe it is not enough, but for people like me that uses a phone just for some calls, some texts, some browsing, a bit of games, it is already good enough.

I have the lg g2 and g3 so I know what I am saying here. 100% from 7am and when I reach home with at least 20%-30% batt life, 4 hours or more SOT.

posted on 04 May 2015, 08:54 3

15. donrox (Posts: 145; Member since: 18 Jul 2014)


if you use your phone "just for some calls, some texts, some browsing, a bit of games" why pay a premium for a flagship device?

posted on 04 May 2015, 17:17

61. epdm2be (Posts: 487; Member since: 20 Apr 2012)


Some mid-rangers weren't good enough to play some games (e.g. Asphalt 8).

Perhaps this has changed with the 2015-mid-range models. PA or any others could perhaps pit them up against flagships of yesteryear. But I still think that e.g. SGS4 and HTC One M7 are faster than today's mid-range devices and thus still a better option.

It's just a pity that handset manufacturers f**k up their Lolipop upgrades on these older models (if provided). I mean... why has the S6 themes and the S5 not? Why has the S6 nice soft shadows under its icons on the homescreen (which make that fugly UI at least a bit bearable) and the S5 not?

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories