Jump to content
nexuss4g

Moto X 2015 "Pure Edition" [users thread]

Recommended Posts

uploadfromtaptalk1438726090951.png

 

Sent from my Sprint LG G4

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes please! I know what I'm getting for my birthday!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't I tell you that it was going to work with Sprint?  :rolleyes:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't I tell you that it was going to work with Sprint? :rolleyes:

Good to know Sprint is onboard. Hopefully more OEM's jump the direct-sales bandwagon with quality multiband unlocked devices. Win-win.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A win for the whitelisting of compatible devices.  Thanks, Marcelo!

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just FYI, staff has known for several weeks that the tested RF performance of this Moto X is only about average. In other words, not great. It may be a jack of all trades, master of none. We will run an update to our existing article, write a follow up article, or post here with ERP/EIRP figures -- once we have confirmed with Sprint that this handset will be whitelisted.

 

AJ

Now that it has been confirmed when can we expect an update on the article or an official write up? And are the figures close to Nexus 6 or less than?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that it has been confirmed when can we expect an update on the article or an official write up?

 

Soon™.

 

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just FYI, staff has known for several weeks that the tested RF performance of this Moto X is only about average. In other words, not great. It may be a jack of all trades, master of none. We will run an update to our existing article, write a follow up article, or post here with ERP/EIRP figures -- once we have confirmed with Sprint that this handset will be whitelisted.

 

AJ

That's interesting. Did they get rid of the dynamic antenna that was supposed to help out with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's interesting. Did they get rid of the dynamic antenna that was supposed to help out with that?

They probably removed that feature to cut costs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They probably removed that feature to cut costs. 

Please say that isn't the case when it is officially released. That is a major pain point for devices as they lose signal just from picking up the device! I hope that isn't the case one reason I really wanted last years Moto X 2014 model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's interesting. Did they get rid of the dynamic antenna that was supposed to help out with that?

 

Yeah, that possibility crossed my mind, too.  Fortunately, we will know for certain at some point.  Since the 2015 Moto X is operator agnostic and exclusively sold unlocked, AnandTech surely will do an extensive review, including a breakdown of the RF components.

 

In the meantime, staff here is working on putting together a side by side comparison of the FCC OET RF testing figures for the 2015 Moto X, Nexus 6, and 2014 Moto X.

 

AJ

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly as long as performance stays consistent I would be fine with a just average radio. But that's just me coming from a Nexus 5 whose radio seemingly got nerfed and the iPhone 6 which has had a crappy carrier update for the summer...we will see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You asked for a comparison -- you got it.

 

 

AJ

 

 

 [/size]

Those numbers aren't discouraging! On par and between the two devices for the necessary bands for Sprint it appears but slightly depressed overall as you said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was worried it would be closer to the results of the SGS6, which at $250  cheaper than the former's msrp, is much more acceptable for me. Only gripe really would be lack of fingerprint sensor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those numbers aren't discouraging! On par and between the two devices for the necessary bands for Sprint it appears but slightly depressed overall as you said.

 

No, they are not bad.  They are what I would call average.  I just doubt that the 2015 Moto X will live up to the RF performance standards set by the 2014 Moto X and the Nexus 6.

 

Keep in mind that 2-3 dB differences may not seem like a lot, but if you look at the figures in mW instead, the differences become apparent.  For example, 20 dBm is 100 mW, while 23 dBm is 200 mW.

 

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they are not bad. They are what I would call average. I just doubt that the 2015 Moto X will live up to the RF performance standards set by the 2014 Moto X and the Nexus 6.

 

Keep in mind that 2-3 dB differences may not seem like a lot, but if you look at the figures in mW instead, the differences become apparent. For example, 20 dBm is 100 mW, while 23 dBm is 200 mW.

 

AJ

Can someone either explain or link me to an article that explains the significance of the numbers above in context. I've been looking, but can't find much of an explanation and I know we have people who enjoy helping those less fortunate (me in this case). Any takers?
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they are not bad.  They are what I would call average.  I just doubt that the 2015 Moto X will live up to the RF performance standards set by the 2014 Moto X and the Nexus 6.

 

Keep in mind that 2-3 dB differences may not seem like a lot, but if you look at the figures in mW instead, the differences become apparent.  For example, 20 dBm is 100 mW, while 23 dBm is 200 mW.

 

AJ

This may be true, but it will be a definite upgrade to my HTC one m8! I noticed that it drops off in fringe situations on band 41 a lot faster than my partners LG g3! That's something I would appreciate not happen as often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AJ, how do the numbers compare to the Galaxy S4T?  I'm looking at an upgrade in the next 8 weeks and I'm really impressed with the specs, etc for this device.  I just need something that is comparable to my current phone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AJ, how do the numbers compare to the Galaxy S4T? I'm looking at an upgrade in the next 8 weeks and I'm really impressed with the specs, etc for this device. I just need something that is comparable to my current phone.

Comparable how? According to the numbers, RF performance is really the only thing that the S4T outclasses the new Moto X in.

 

Sent from my M8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comparable how? According to the numbers, RF performance is really the only thing that the S4T outclasses the new Moto X in.

 

Sent from my M8

RF is my concern, how large is the gap between S4T and the Moto X Pure in the OET docs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moto X Pure available 09/03/15

 

It’s all happening September 3rd. 21MP camera. 30hr battery on 1 charge. Octa/Hexa core processor. 5.7in Quad HD Display. http://bit.ly/1J3S5ZZ #MotoX#MyMoto

 

 

Source: https://plus.google.com/+Motorola/posts/NLVymP7iiWV

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RF is my concern, how large is the gap between S4T and the Moto X Pure in the OET docs?

No idea on the S4T numbers, but here's the Moto X 2015 RF comparisons with the previous devices.

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/7063-moto-x-2015/?p=435129

 

The S4T had great RF performance, possibly the best tri-band device on Sprint's network (aside from the N5.)  But the article (and FCC doc) does not show the values needed to judge.

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-356-teaser-samsung-galaxy-s4-2-3/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

    • By nexuss4g
      Network bands (by model)
      4G LTE (Cat11 DL, Cat5 UL)
      CDMA / EVDO Rev A
      UMTS / HSPA+
      GSM / EDGE
      2G: GSM band 2/3/5/8
      CDMA BC 0/1/10
      3G: WCDMA band 1/2/4/5/8
      4G: FDD LTE band 1/2/3/4/5/7/8/12/13/17/20/25/26/28/66
      TDD LTE band 38/41
       
      https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-x-gen-4
       
       
    • By haasbat
      Not sure if this has come up elsewhere, regarding the Moto X/M leak a few weeks ago (just move it if it has), but I can't seem to find any information on the SOC that is being reported. Only thing I seem to find is that it's Cat-6 compatible, but it doesn't appear that this chipset is used in any existing Sprint phones (or other US phone, seems only to be overseas) to get an idea of how well the radios work and what the connectivity would be like.
       
      https://gfxbench.com/device.jsp?benchmark=gfx40&os=Android&api=gl&D=Motorola+XT1663&testgroup=info
       
      Obviously, it would only have 2-band CA as well as other limitations, but do we have anything comparable to this to give us an idea if we should be watching for a mid-range phone that will be hitting above its weight class? Or should we all just suck it up and go with the next Nexus and the Snapdragon 82X? I'm really gunning for the 4.6" Moto, but if the reception is lacking (whether LTE or WiFi), or it's not Sprint LTE Plus compatible, I'd rather just not waste my time. I'm still rocking my 2013 Moto X, I just really wish it were LTE Plus at this point, with a little bit better RAM management.
    • By nexuss4g
      The Moto G also unlocked with full Sprint support
       
      Moto G—XT1625
      CDMA (850, 1900 MHz)
      GSM / GPRS / EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz)
      UMTS / HSPA+ (850, 900, 1700, 1900, 2100 MHz)
      4G LTE (B1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 25, 26, 41)
      Band coverage varies by model, country, and carrier.
       
      http://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-g
    • By Geesmill
      Verge video on Moto's new headquarters and the upcoming 360 wearable.
       

  • Posts

    • 600 repack is reported as finished. https://twitter.com/AjitPaiFCC/status/1282720582447124482?s=19
    • I just got that same email for my Magic box that has been on Ethernet backhaul for 9+ months (I checked and the serial number matched that unit). It was still on Ethernet when I got the email, since I speed tested faster than Sprint's nearby macros (they're fairly congested even on B41). So they're just blanket sending it out to everyone, even people who are already off of LTE backhaul.      
    • T-Mobile must've heard my complaints about n41 because I ran into it a bunch of times today in Manhattan and in Brooklyn. I've also seen a bunch of sites that have n41 panels installed but that aren't active. A few of the sites with inactive n41 also have those new Ericsson AIR 3446 antennas that support mid-band FDD 5GNR. Fun fact for people wanting to test n41. If you're on the Prospect Expressway in Brooklyn, there is a site that is eye-level with the highway that has n41. Here is a speed test from it and take a look at that signal strength and upload!
    • Yep and even buy dishes AWS spectrum. SoftBank has the money for all that Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk
    • I 100% agree. Everything this man had invested in had gone to shit and the. Looks to sell off shares. At this point I believe he doesn’t know what he’s doing. What Sprint really needed was someone who actually cared Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...