GPU Performance

While CPU performance has improved significantly in low-end and mid-range smartphones, the same can't be said of GPU performance. Adreno 306 is really just a variant of Adreno 305, which we have covered time and time again in reviews of Snapdragon 400 devices. I already discussed in my Moto E review that I'm not happy with the graphics performance in Snapdragon 410 and with the GPU configuration in the Moto G being exactly the same there won't be any significant changes to graphics performance.

3DMark 1.2 Unlimited - Graphics

3DMark 1.2 Unlimited - Physics

3DMark 1.2 Unlimited - Overall

Due to the way 3DMark calculates its overall score, it's not possible for a device to pull ahead based on the score of one test being substantially higher than the other. Because of this, the Moto G's improvement in the physics test doesn't lead to it coming on top overall due to its slightly lower graphics score. I would just attribute the lower graphics test score to testing variance, and so in reality the Moto G will be slightly faster than the Moto E or older Moto G in any physics heavy games.

BaseMark X 1.1 - Dunes (High Quality, Onscreen)

BaseMark X 1.1 - Hangar (High Quality, Onscreen)

BaseMark X 1.1 - Dunes (High Quality, Offscreen)

BaseMark X 1.1 - Hangar (High Quality, Offscreen)

BaseMark X 1.1 - Overall (High Quality)

Driver bugs had previously prevented me from running BaseMark X on Snapdragon 410 devices. This appears to have been resolved, as the test runs and completes on the Moto G. There's not much to be said about the scores, which are at the bottom of the charts in every single test.

GFXBench 3.0 T-Rex HD (Onscreen)

GFXBench 3.0 Manhattan (Onscreen)

GFXBench 3.0 T-Rex HD (Offscreen)

GFXBench 3.0 Manhattan (Offscreen)

As expected, performance in GFXBench on the new Moto G is essentially identical to that of other Adreno 305/306 devices. Unfortunately they all share a space at the very bottom of each chart, and end up being between 1/3 and 1/2 the speed of the Adreno 405 GPU in Snapdragon 615.

When I reviewed the Moto E I gave the GPU performance a pass because the phone sold for $100-130. With the Moto G priced as high as $219 for the high end model, I have to say that $30 more gets you the Huawei P8 Lite which uses Snapdragon 615 and Adreno 405 which is substantially faster. There's not much Motorola could do about this apart from using a completely different SoC, but obviously that wasn't a possibility when building a device that does start at $179 even if it scales up to $219. I just hope that we see some improvement in GPU performance on devices at this price point in the near future.

NAND Performance

Flash memory performance can often be an invisible performance bottleneck when applications are running in the background, writing files, or performing updates. Low-end and mid-range devices often suffer from very poor NAND performance which can cause stuttering or slowness whenever there's heavy I/O activity occurring.

Internal NAND - Random Read

Internal NAND - Random Write

Random read speeds on the Moto G are much faster than the Moto E or the Huawei P8 Lite. They're certainly not the fastest on record, but they're at the point where I wouldn't worry about them causing performance problems in most circumstances. The random write speed is a very curious case, with it being faster than every other device on record. There doesn't appear to be any problem with the testing, and it seems that the Moto G's NAND simply has relatively fast random write speeds.

Internal NAND - Sequential Read

Internal NAND - Sequential Write

Sequential read speeds on the Moto G are faster than other mid range phones, but not as fast as the Zenfone 2 or flagship Android devices. Sequential writes sit right in the middle of the chart and are around the same speed as the NAND in LG's flagship devices. Whether it's random or sequential access I don't expect users will encounter any performance issues on the Moto G caused by poor NAND performance.

System Performance Display
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Cod3rror - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    I wish Motorola hadn't released two different versions (1GB / 2GB). I knew what would happen and what I expected is exactly what happened... almost all retailers and carriers in Europe/UK are stocking only the 1GB version and 2GB is nowhere to be found. Plus, because of the weak Euro, the 2GB version, if ordered from Motorola UK, comes out at 300 euro, which is very expensive. But don't get me wrong, even if it cost almost the same, the retailers and carriers would still stock the cheaper version.
  • dan.swain - Saturday, September 12, 2015 - link

    I agree with you, My wife has the Moto G 2015 16GB. Got it from Moto website the sales experience was terrible but I couldn't just buy the 16Gb in a shop so frustration ensued. The phone itself is great though, my wife can get multiple days out if it. At just over £200 it seemed a better deal than £200 Apple wanted for a refurbished IPhone 5c.
  • wurizen - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    It seems like this review confirms my suspicion of the new Moto G 2015 regarding the back cover flush gate. Feeling the back cover of a phone inch forward or push inwards when gripping it is a sign of a cheap phone to me. And we know that this is a cheap, budget phone, but, the Moto G 2014 doesn't have this issue. I am also looking at the profile picture of the Moto G 2015 and it looks bulkier than the Moto G 2014. Or it seems bulkier because the removable back cover of the 2015 is not halfway but below the Power and Volume buttons. Whereas, the Moto G 2014's back cover is exactly halfway from front to back, so it goes halfway up from the Power and Volume buttons making the phone--on a design perspective--look and feel balanced!

    What makes me sad is that I don't think Motorola had to sacrifice this decrease in "Phone Feel" and "Phone Ergonomics" or "Phone Design." Whatever you wanna call it.

    I mean, did the design of the Moto G 2015 change because Motorola wanted it to be waterproof? Or, did Motorola purposely make a fatter Moto G 2015 so people will buy their other more expensive phones? Let the conspiracy theories begin!

    My other gripe is that Best Buy, which is the only store I know in the U.S. that carries the Moto G unlocked version doesn't even have the new Moto G 2015 on display so customers can feel and hold it in their hands. I mean, imagine Samsung or Apple doing this? It would never happen. Yet, Motorola is letting Best Buy not have a display version. I also asked if they had the phone on sale and if they could open a box and let me hold one. But, they said that they didn't have any available. I then asked if they had sold out and they said, yes.

    Also, there is no white version available at Best Buy and no 2 GB/16 GB variant available. Just the 1GB RAM and black one.

    Can someone tell me why this is? What kind of marketing scheme is at work here?
  • Demon-Xanth - Thursday, August 20, 2015 - link

    The reason why no 2/16 variant is that they are basically sold out everywhere. I'm guessing production focused on the black 1/8 due to anticipated demand. They aren't mythical devices. Just selling like cold beer at a county fair. Yes, I will be replacing my ATT XT1045 with a retail 2/16 when I can. The only problems I've had have been I'd like more RAM, a better camera, less "extra apps", and updates that aren't delayed until the second coming of christ. This covers all of them.
  • stlc8tr - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    "I don't think anyone buying a device like the Moto G will have adopted an 802.11ac router at this point anyway due to cost reasons."

    An AC router is roughly $75 on Amazon. It's not exactly a huge outlay so I think more points should be deducted for the lack of 5Ghz support. The 2.4Ghz band can be very crowded so being limited to only 2.4Ghz is a serious flaw, IMO.
  • Moto1 - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    Dude, its 179$. Seriously?
  • stlc8tr - Thursday, August 20, 2015 - link

    Yes, I'm serious. In my neighborhood, there are so many 2.4Ghz WiFi networks that using my 2.4Ghz WiFi is hit or miss. I can't even use a Chromecast as the streaming times out half the time.

    So I avoid any devices that are 2.4Ghz only.
  • neogodless - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    As this is a phone, could you comment on the speaker quality at all? It sounds like it still has stereo speakers like the 2014 model. Are they the exact same?
  • hans_ober - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link

    They're not stereo, bottom is a loudspeaker.
  • neogodless - Tuesday, August 25, 2015 - link

    That's too bad! The 2014 had stereo. In the search for "no compromises" including stereo speakers, I ended up with a Nexus 6.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now