Breve Análise do Smartphone Motorola Moto E4
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 87 %
iluminação com acumulador: 488 cd/m²
Contraste: 1627:1 (Preto: 0.3 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.4 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 5.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
96.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.27
| Lenovo Moto E4 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Huawei Y6 2017 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 PLS, 1280x720, 5" | Gigaset GS170 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | LG K8 2017 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Lenovo Moto E3 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 22% | 8% | -51% | -35% | -16% | |
| Brightness middle | 488 | 438 -10% | 502 3% | 418 -14% | 358 -27% | 436 -11% |
| Brightness | 474 | 432 -9% | 494 4% | 418 -12% | 351 -26% | 420 -11% |
| Brightness Distribution | 87 | 90 3% | 89 2% | 92 6% | 93 7% | 91 5% |
| Black Level * | 0.3 | 0.13 57% | 0.35 -17% | 0.45 -50% | 0.49 -63% | 0.41 -37% |
| Contrast | 1627 | 3369 107% | 1434 -12% | 929 -43% | 731 -55% | 1063 -35% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.4 | 4.8 11% | 4.6 15% | 9.7 -80% | 7.1 -31% | 5.4 -0% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 9 | 11.4 -27% | 8 11% | 18.9 -110% | 14.9 -66% | 10 -11% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 5.5 | 3.2 42% | 2.5 55% | 11.3 -105% | 6.5 -18% | 7 -27% |
| Gamma | 2.27 97% | 2.23 99% | 2.29 96% | 2.27 97% | 2.12 104% | 2.13 103% |
| CCT | 7397 88% | 7090 92% | 6351 102% | 10414 62% | 8166 80% | 8318 78% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8706 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 32 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 15 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 17 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 84 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 24 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 13 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 11 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 31 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 | |
| PCMark for Android | |
| Work performance score (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 | |
| Geekbench 4.4 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
| T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 | |
| 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 | |
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | |
| Gigaset GS170 | |
| LG K8 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 (Chrome 60) | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 (Chrome 59) | |
| LG K8 2017 (Chrome 57) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 (Chrome 60) | |
| Gigaset GS170 (Chrome Version 59) | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 (Chrome 56) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 (Chrome 60) | |
| LG K8 2017 (Chrome 57) | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 (Chrome 59) | |
| Gigaset GS170 (Chrome Version 59) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 (Chrome 60) | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 (Chrome 56) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 (Chrome 60) | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 (Chrome 56) | |
| Gigaset GS170 (Chrome Version 59) | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 (Chrome 59) | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 (Chrome 60) | |
| LG K8 2017 (Chrome 57) | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| Huawei Y6 2017 (Chrome 60) | |
| Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 (Chrome 59) | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 (Chrome 60) | |
| Lenovo Moto E3 (Chrome 56) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Lenovo Moto E4 | Huawei Y6 2017 | Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 | Gigaset GS170 | LG K8 2017 | Lenovo Moto E3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -0% | 2% | -26% | 39% | -41% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 187.6 | 202.6 8% | 177.7 -5% | 197.9 5% | 270.8 44% | 141.4 -25% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 45.3 | 66.9 48% | 51 13% | 44.79 -1% | 84.6 87% | 37.3 -18% |
| Random Read 4KB | 18.7 | 25.93 39% | 24 28% | 18.34 -2% | 41.6 122% | 16 -14% |
| Random Write 4KB | 29.2 | 20.54 -30% | 9.5 -67% | 10.45 -64% | 12.5 -57% | 8 -73% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 65.4 | 48.4 -26% | 70.3 7% | 37.41 ? -43% | 78.6 ? 20% | 29.78 ? -54% |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 44.9 | 26.4 -41% | 59.6 33% | 21.34 ? -52% | 52.2 ? 16% | 17.49 ? -61% |
| Asphalt 8: Airborne | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| high | 13 fps | ||
| very low | 29 fps | ||
| Dead Trigger 2 | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| high | 30 fps | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35 °C / 95 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 34.5 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.2 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Lenovo Moto E4 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 39.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 56% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 72% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 22% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Huawei Y6 2017 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.8% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 65% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 29% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 80% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 16% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0.11 / 0.23 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.87 / 2.38 / 2.47 Watt |
| Carga |
2.63 / 3.86 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Lenovo Moto E4 2800 mAh | Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 2400 mAh | Gigaset GS170 2500 mAh | LG K8 2017 2500 mAh | Lenovo Moto E3 2800 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 3% | 14% | 13% | 17% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.87 | 0.82 6% | 0.54 38% | 0.65 25% | 0.79 9% |
| Idle Average * | 2.38 | 1.94 18% | 1.56 34% | 1.6 33% | 1.7 29% |
| Idle Maximum * | 2.47 | 2.06 17% | 1.6 35% | 1.62 34% | 1.72 30% |
| Load Average * | 2.63 | 3.31 -26% | 3.18 -21% | 2.97 -13% | 2.65 -1% |
| Load Maximum * | 3.86 | 3.89 -1% | 4.42 -15% | 4.34 -12% | 3.16 18% |
* ... smaller is better
| Lenovo Moto E4 2800 mAh | Huawei Y6 2017 3000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 2400 mAh | Gigaset GS170 2500 mAh | LG K8 2017 2500 mAh | Lenovo Moto E3 2800 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 13% | 20% | -15% | 2% | 7% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1302 | 1522 17% | 1425 9% | 1325 2% | ||
| H.264 | 608 | 693 14% | 819 35% | 649 7% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 522 | 654 25% | 722 38% | 442 -15% | 594 14% | 621 19% |
| Load | 316 | 302 -4% | 305 -3% | 280 -11% | 315 0% |
Pro
Contra
O Moto E4 é um smartphone acessível que oferece alguns destaques, como um sensor de digitais, Android puro e bateria removível. Se você não estiver considerando a câmera como a característica mais importante em um smartphone ou depender de uma navegação exata, então você obtém o desempenho típico dessa classe de preço em todas as outras áreas: a qualidade da voz é decente, o desempenho apropriado e a duração da bateria adequada na prática.
Em comparação com o antecessor, o preço mais alto está sendo justificado pela carcaça de metal, o maior desempenho e o armazenamento adicional. A razão pela qual os telefones de nível de entrada, em particular, custam alguns euros a mais este ano, está, em grande medida, nos chips de armazenamento que atualmente são muito caros. O Moto E3, por exemplo, oferecia uma duração de bateria mais longa, o que faz com que valha a pena dar uma olhada. E como uma nota para qualquer um que atualmente olhe para o Moto E4 Plus: ele é muito maior e mais pesado, e a bateria não é removível, mas também tem uma capacidade muito maior. Comparado com o Moto E4, o desempenhio é quase o mesmo. Para qualquer um que gostaria de saber mais, temos uma análise do Moto E4 Plus.
O Moto E4 é um smartphone sólido de nível de entrada que possui apenas algumas fraquezas essenciais e convence com uma bateria removível e sensor de digitais. No entanto, a câmera não deve ser muito importante para o usuário, uma vez que a qualidade da imagem é bastante baixa.
Ao comprar um smartphone, você sempre deve pesar quais recursos são realmente importantes para você. Se uma bateria removível e um sensor de digitais pertencem a esses recursos, o Moto E4 certamente é um dispositivo que você deve considerar. Mas qualquer um que espera uma longa duração da bateria incorporada deve considerar o Samsung Galaxy J3, que neste ponto está na mesma faixa de preços do Moto E4. O Huawei Y6 oferece mais desempenho pelo seu dinheiro.
Lenovo Moto E4
- 09/08/2017 v6 (old)
Florian Wimmer
Price comparison
