Sony Xperia E4 Review: The Odd Successor: Performance

By 08:38 Sun, 15 Aug 2021 Comments


Benchmarks

The Sony Xperia E4 is definitely not a powerhoutilize and nobody really expects a lot of number-crunching performance out of a budacquire device. It is powered by a Mediatek MT6582 SoC, which can be considered last year's mid-range at best. Inside it, there are four Cortex-A7 cores, clocked at 1.3Giga Hertz (GHz) and a Mali-400MP2 GPU. That coupled with merely 1GB of Random-Access Memory (RAM) paints not so optimistic picture.

But Sony has really managed to squeeze all they can out of the modest hardware. And whatever the Xperia loses on paper, it quickly regains in usability and real-world performance. It runs surprisingly smooth and can definitely be a perfect match for an undemanding Android user, mainly becautilize it is reliable and simply works.

That being said, we will try not to be too harsh on the E4 when diving into its benchimprint results. It comes as no surprise that they are low, but we have picked out some quite fascinating competition to pin it up against and the results were often surprising.

First up, we have the raw Central Processing Units (CPU) performance test with GeekBench 3, so things should be pretty straightforward in this department. As we mentioned, we have devised a budacquire league for the Xperia to wrestle in and the MT6582 really holds its own. Here we see the E4 has shown more muscle than the Moto G and Moto G (2014), both running the elegant Qualcomm MSM8226 Snapdragon 400. This is quite understandable, as the once widely-spread SoC is also equipped with four Cortex-A7 chips, but clocked slightly lower at 1.2 GHz.

The situation is even clearer with the Moto E, which shares the same cores, but only has two of them. Interestingly enough, Sony has two other, quite similar Snapdragon 400 phones, both powered by four Cortex-A7 cores - the Xperia E3 and the Xperia M2. Both are in pretty much the same price range as the E4 and one is even its direct predecessor.

.jrGraphContainer { background: none !important; border-bottom: 1px solid #eee !important;} ul.jrGraph { left: 146px !important; } ul.jrGraphControls { padding: 0; margin-left: -10px !important; }

GeekBench 3

Higher is better

  • Samsung Galaxy Core Prime

    1492

  • Xiaomi Redmi 1S

    1492

  • Sony Xperia E4

    1180

  • Motorola Moto G (2014)

    1171

  • Motorola Moto G

    1120

  • Sony Xperia E3

    1118

  • Sony Xperia M2

    1074

  • Motorola Moto E

    611

AnTuTu is a compound benchmark, which also takes into account Random-Access Memory (RAM) and GPU performance. Here we see pretty much the same arrangement. The Xperia beats the two Moto G's and its predecessor, but is also dwarfed by the Xiaomi Redmi 1S and the Samsung Galaxy Core Prime. The Xiaomi ha, rather surprisingly, scored significantly higher that the E4, despite having an HD classy screen and a quad-core Cortex-A7-based CPU. It, however is clocked higher and 1.6 GHZ. Otherwise, Random-Access Memory (RAM) is the same at 1GB.

The Galaxy Core Prime is a different story. It is equipped with a superior elegant Qualcomm MSM8916 Snapdragon 410, along with an Adreno 306 GPU, so naturally it takes the lead amongst the competition.

Baseimprint Operating System (OS) II is another all-round benchmark. It gives an overall score along with single, multi-core performance, math performance and more. We focus on the overall score and the dedicated Central Processing Units (CPU) scores. Interestingly enough, the E4 scored lower than its predecessor, the E3, so there might sill be some room for tweaking and software improvements on Sony's end. Then again, the handset does feature a lot more services, out of the box, so the increased background load, may account for some of the benchimprint issues.

This theory is further backed up by the detailed single-core and multi-core result. In both instances the MT6582 shows some muscle.

Baseimprint Operating System (OS) II

Higher is better

  • Samsung Galaxy Core Prime

    564

  • Motorola Moto G (2014)

    526

  • Motorola Moto G

    516

  • Nokia Lumia 635

    451

  • Sony Xperia E3

    417

  • Microsoft Lumia 535 Dual SIM

    414

  • Xiaomi Redmi 1S

    394

  • Sony Xperia E4

    333

  • Sony Xperia M2

    298

  • Motorola Moto E

    116

Baseimprint Operating System (OS) II (single-core)

Higher is better

  • Xiaomi Redmi 1S

    1435

  • Samsung Galaxy Core Prime

    1313

  • Sony Xperia E4

    1311

  • Motorola Moto G

    1205

  • Sony Xperia E3

    1171

  • Sony Xperia M2

    1164

  • Motorola Moto G (2014)

    1123

  • Motorola Moto E

    1110

Baseimprint Operating System (OS) II (multi-core)

Higher is better

  • Sony Xperia E3

    5697

  • Sony Xperia E4

    5358

  • Samsung Galaxy Core Prime

    5283

  • Motorola Moto G

    5030

  • Motorola Moto G (2014)

    5001

  • Sony Xperia M2

    4927

  • Xiaomi Redmi 1S

    4875

  • Motorola Moto E

    2637

In fact, the multi-core score seemed so odd, that we thought there might have been some cheating on Sony's end, but running a tailored version of the same test, to prevent common cheating technique, revealed that the processors in the X4 does, in fact, perform very well.

Interestingly enough, however, the Xperia E3 seems to persistently outperform a lot of the competition, including its successor, which is quite odd, but the reasons could be numerous, ranging from increased system software load to poor optimization. And, at the discontinue of the day, there is always a room for error with standardized tests and a higher score does not necessarily translate into better real life performance.

Baseimprint Operating System (OS) II (anti-cheat)

Higher is better

  • Sony Xperia E3

    421

  • Sony Xperia E4

    337

Baseimprint Operating System (OS) II (single-core. anti-cheat)

Higher is better

  • Sony Xperia E4

    1464

  • Sony Xperia E3

    1269

Baseimprint Operating System (OS) II (multi-core. anti-cheat)

Higher is better

  • Sony Xperia E4

    6110

  • Sony Xperia E3

    5617

Moving on to pure graphics tests, the Xperia E4 really seems to lack behind. The Mali-400MP2 is really not up to par and gets blown away by the competition.

As it turns out, all of the other contenders in the test are powered by some implementation of the Adreno 305, except for the Moto E, which runs the Adreno 302. Utilization by the respective SoCs is obviously quite different, resulting in significantly different results. One thing is for sure, though, the Mali-400MP2 was a really poor choice for a graphics processor and it is a shame Sony didn't just stick with the Adreno used in the E3.

In fact the Mali was so bad, that it was incapable of running the GFX 3.0 Manhattan test, most-likely due to insufficient memory. The small classy screen resolution on the Xperia E4 does assist to some extent in the onclassy screen render, but it is not nearly enough to compensate.

GFX 2.7 T-Rex (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

  • Sony Xperia E3

    5.9

  • Sony Xperia M2

    5.9

  • Motorola Moto G (2014)

    5.8

  • Xiaomi Redmi 1S

    5.7

  • Motorola Moto G

    5.6

  • Motorola Moto E

    4.5

  • Sony Xperia E4

    4.2

GFX 2.7 T-Rex (onscreen)

Higher is better

  • Sony Xperia E3

    17.1

  • Sony Xperia M2

    15.4

  • Motorola Moto E

    11.2

  • Motorola Moto G (2014)

    10.8

  • Xiaomi Redmi 1S

    10.3

  • Sony Xperia E4

    9.5

The Xperia E4 did surprisingly well in the browser performance tests. Google Chrome is the browser, Sony has bundled with the budacquire phone and is surely attributes a lot to the high scores. Interestingly enough, though, the E3, yet again, surpasses its successor, which you really don't want to see in a recent smartphone.

Kraken 1.1

Lower is better

  • Xiaomi Redmi 1S

    12470

  • Motorola Moto G (2014)

    15988

  • Sony Xperia E3

    16059

  • Sony Xperia E4

    16137

  • Motorola Moto G

    16867

  • Motorola Moto E

    17213

  • Sony Xperia M2

    18047

  • Samsung Galaxy Core Prime

    18353

  • Microsoft Lumia 535 Dual SIM

    26981

BrowserMark 2.1

Higher is better

  • Motorola Moto G (2014)

    1085

  • Sony Xperia E3

    1044

  • Sony Xperia E4

    950

  • Sony Xperia M2

    903

  • Motorola Moto E

    784

  • Microsoft Lumia 535 Dual SIM

    480

One thing is clear, the Sony Xperia E4 isn't acing any benchmarks. On the contrary - its raw performance is average at best, barely touching some of its competitors. On a positive note - the synthetic benchimprint performance may not be a complete measure for the device performance as in real-life utilize we found it to operate quite well. It provides solid and smooth Android experience and will do OK for the occasional game.

Unfortunately, heavier 3D games may not run well or at all becautilize of insufficient Random-Access Memory (RAM) and poor GPU or both. Sony has rather oddly opted to combine a capable Central Processing Units (CPU) with a very underperforming GPU, often leaving the Xperia E4 at a disadvantage compared to even the Xperia E3.

The reality, however, is that being a budacquire device, the Xperia E4 is quite ok at what it does. And if you don't intdiscontinue to utilize it for more than web browsing, watching the occasional video, listening to music, or playing some Angry Birds, and, of course, messaging and calls, then you'd be fine for quite a while.


DOWNLOAD NOW

DOWNLOAD MUSIC





Related Article

Comment
Name




.....................

Please LOGIN or REGISTER To Gain Full Access To This Article