Sony Xperia E5 Smartphone Review

Name: Sony Xperia E5
Brand: Sony

Solid entry into the smartphone world. In our test, Sony's Xperia E5 entry model presents itself as a solid smartphone in the lower price range. You can find out in our review whether a purchase is worthwhile in light of the strong competition.

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, ✓ Stefanie Voigt (translated by Mark Riege), Published 06/09/2017 🇩🇪 🇪🇸 ...

Android Touchscreen Smartphone

For the original German review, see here.

With the fifth generation of the E series, the Japanese electronics manufacturer extends its product portfolio by another entry model. For a current street price of about 130 Euros (~$145, in the US it is available for example from Wal-Mart for $179), the Sony Xperia E5 offers a MediaTek quad-core processor which is supported by 1.5 GB of RAM, an NFC chip, and a 13-MP main camera. The smartphone has 16 GB of internal storage.

The 5-inch single-SIM device is available in black or white color. There are many competitors in this price range, and imported smartphones in particular offer technical specs that are considerably better in some parts. Among them are the UMI Max and the Vernee Mars. But there are also entry models in the local market, such as the Acer Liquid Zest Plus, Coolpad Modena 2, Gigaset GS160, LG K8 2017, and ZTE Blade V7 Lite, that are competing models.

Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Sony Xperia E5 (Xperia Series)

Processor

Mediatek MT6735 4 x 1.5 GHz, Cortex-A53

Graphics adapter

ARM Mali-T720 MP2

Memory

1536 MB

Display

5.00 inch 16:9, 1280 x 720 pixel 294 PPI, capacitive, LCD, IPS, glossy: yes

Storage

16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB

, 10.6 GB free

Connections

1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm jack, Card Reader: 200 GB storage via microSD card, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: proximity sensor, accelerometer, gyro, hall Sensor, compass, Mircacast

Networking

802.11a/b/g/n (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/), Bluetooth 4.1, GSM: 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 MHz, 3G / UMTS: 850 / 900 / 1900 / 1700 / 2100 MHz, 4G/LTE: 700 / 800 / 850 / 1900 / 2600 / 2100 MHz , LTE, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 8 x 144 x 69 ( = 0.31 x 5.67 x 2.72 in)

Battery

2300 mAh Lithium-Ion

Operating System

Android 6.0 Marshmallow

Camera

Primary Camera: 13 MPix AF, HDR
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix

Additional features

Speakers: mono, Keyboard: onscreen, Keyboard Light: yes, modular power supply, USB cable, Sony UI, 24 Months Warranty, SAR value: 0,461 W/kg (body), fanless

Weight

147 g ( = 5.19 oz / 0.32 pounds), Power Supply: 37 g ( = 1.31 oz / 0.08 pounds)

Price

200 Euro

Links

Sony homepage
Sony notebook section

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

[+] Add to comparison

» Compare devices

Case

With a size of 144 x 69 millimeters (~5.7 x 2.71 inches), the Xperia E5 is a compact device for current standards that lies in the hand comfortably. As is typical for Sony, the display bezels at the top and bottom are relatively large, which is reflected in a display to surface ratio of only 69%.

The workmanship and selection of materials are on a satisfactory level for an entry device. The back cover does not feel cheap by any means, but it does not advertise the quality of the UHANS S1 or Vernee Mars, which are made from glass and metal respectively. The key for volume adjustment and the on/off key on the right side of the device are made from plastic as well and offer a slightly spongy pressure point, although they are positioned well and can be reached easily.

Features

The 16 GB internal eMMC storage is appropriate for an entry device. After subtracting the operation system storage, about 10.6 GB remains available for the user. In addition, the storage can be extended by up to 200 GB via a microSD card, which can also be incorporated into the internal storage.

A micro USB 2.0 connector at the bottom of the device serves to charge the Xperia E5. Connecting external data storage via USB OTG does not work. Further features of the Sony smartphone include a status LED for notifications and an NFC chip and Miracast for wireless media-streaming. In our test with a Sony Android TV, transferring the display content to an external monitor works without problems.

Software

For the operating system, Sony bets on Google's Android version 6.0 and overlays it with its own manufacturer user interface. Since its appearance in summer of 2016, there was no update to the current Android 7 version until now. Seeing that the current security patch is on the level of September 2016, an update seems rather unlikely.

Even though compared to Google's stock Android, the system interface reworked by Sony shows some visual adjustments in particular in the settings menu and notification bar, it seems to closely follow vanilla Android. It is also positive that there are only few preinstalled apps and there is hardly any bloatware.

Communication and GPS

As we can also see in other devices in this price range, the integrated WLAN module of the Xperia E5 only masters the IEEE-802.11 a/b/g/n standards. At almost -40 dBm in close proximity to the router (Telekom Speedport, W921V), the damping is comparatively low for an entry device. The Wi-Fi transfer rates between the Xperia E5 and our Linksys EA 8500 reference router are in a typical range for entry level smartphones.

Thanks to LTE Cat. 4, the single-SIM smartphone accesses the Internet at up to 150 Mbit/s for downloads. All the LTE frequencies relevant in Germany as well as quad-band GSM and the UMTS frequencies of 850, 900, 1900, 1700, and 2100 MHz are supported. In addition, the Sony smartphone has version 4.1 of Bluetooth and an NFC chip for near field communication between mobile devices.

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus Mali-G71 MP20, Exynos 8895, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	656 MBit/s ∼100% +734%
UMI Max Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 16 GB eMMC Flash	98.8 MBit/s ∼15% +26%
Sony Xperia E5 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	78.7 MBit/s ∼12%
LG K8 2017 Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash	49.2 MBit/s ∼8% -37%
Coolpad Modena 2 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	48.4 MBit/s ∼7% -39%
Gigaset GS160 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash	48.2 MBit/s ∼7% -39%
iperf3 receive AX12
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus Mali-G71 MP20, Exynos 8895, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	368 MBit/s ∼100% +361%
UMI Max Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 16 GB eMMC Flash	103 MBit/s ∼28% +29%
Sony Xperia E5 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	79.9 MBit/s ∼22%
LG K8 2017 Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash	54.1 MBit/s ∼15% -32%
Coolpad Modena 2 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	44.5 MBit/s ∼12% -44%
Gigaset GS160 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash	33.5 MBit/s ∼9% -58%
iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m
Vernee Mars Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 32 GB eMMC Flash	81.1 MBit/s ∼100%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	47.6 MBit/s ∼59%
iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m
Acer Liquid Zest Plus Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	50 MBit/s ∼100%
Vernee Mars Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 32 GB eMMC Flash	38.9 MBit/s ∼78%

An integrated GPS receiver enables the Sony smartphone to locate its position. Outdoors, the position is located with an accuracy of four meters. Indoors, the satellite signal was insufficient to locate the position.

In our practically relevant test where we record the route distance with the GPS module of the Xperia E5 and the Garmin Edge 500 bicycle computer in parallel, on the almost 12-km (~7.5 miles) route, the Sony smartphone shows a discrepancy of about 100 meters to the professional GPS reference device. The achieved accuracy is very good for an affordable device like the Xperia E5.

Telephone and Call Quality

In the test, we liked the call quality of the Xperia E5 very much. The caller is easily understandable and we were also understood clearly. The telephone app corresponds to a large extent to the standard Google telephone app. The user interface is simple and comprehensible.

Cameras

The camera module on the back of the Xperia E5 has a 13 MP resolution. In optimal light conditions, the pictures offer a good color reproduction rich in contrast. However, the white balance and richness of detail in the photos cannot convince. The sharpness achieved by the auto-focus is also not optimal. As soon as the light conditions worsen, the image starts to become noisy, and in sunny surroundings the camera shows problems with overexposure.

On the front of the device is a built-in 5-MP camera, the quality of which is satisfactory for selfies and video-calling. Overall, the pictures taken with the camera module turn out too dark. Videos can be recorded with the main camera as well as the front camera in 1080p quality at 30 images per second.

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

Accessories and Warranty

Besides the test device, the carton contains some short instructions, a modular power supply rated at 4.25 watts (5 V, 0.85 A), and a USB charging cable. Earphones are not included with the Xperia E5.

Sony offers a 24-month warranty for its entry-level smartphone. Please see our Guarantees, Return policies and Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices and Operation

Navigation of the device occurs through the usual Android onscreen keys for "Back," "Multitasking," and "Home." The capacitive multi-touchscreen reacts reliably to input with up to five fingers, which is implemented quickly and without long delays.

As input options, both the SoftKey and Google's stock Android keyboard are preinstalled.

Display

The LCD display of the Xperia E5 measures 12.7 cm (5-inches) in the diagonal and has a high-definition resolution (1280x720 pixels). With this, the IPS panel achieves a pixel density of 294 ppi, which should ensure a sufficiently sharp reproduction of the display content in everyday life. However, from a normal viewing distance, pixel structures are quite visible.

Displaying a pure white area, the liquid crystal display achieves an average brightness of 534 cd/m² and so is illuminated brighter than the competition. The minimum display brightness of the display is quite high at 50.2 cd/m². In addition, our test evaluates the brightness with an even distribution of bright and dark areas (APL-50). Here we could only measure a brightness of 451 cd/m².


539 cd/m²	542 cd/m²	543 cd/m²
521 cd/m²	538 cd/m²	539 cd/m²
531 cd/m²	526 cd/m²	523 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

LCD

X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maximum: 543 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 533.6 cd/m² Minimum: 50.23 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 538 cd/m²
Contrast: 1630:1 (Black: 0.33 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.7 | 0.55-29.43 Ø5.2
ΔE Greyscale 4.7 | 0.57-98 Ø5.4
Gamma: 2.51

	Sony Xperia E5 IPS, 1280x720, 5.00	LG K8 2017 IPS, 1280x720, 5.00	Gigaset GS160 IPS, 1280x720, 5.00	Vernee Mars IPS, 1920x1080, 5.50	ZTE Blade V7 Lite IPS, 1280x720, 5.00	Acer Liquid Zest Plus IPS, 1280x720, 5.50	UMI Max IPS, 1920x1080, 5.50	LG G6 IPS LCD, 2880x1440, 5.70
Screen		-34%	-37%	-9%	-26%	-30%	-10%	18%
Brightness middle	538	358 -33%	489 -9%	345 -36%	312 -42%	414 -23%	522 -3%	646 20%
Brightness	534	351 -34%	479 -10%	339 -37%	302 -43%	420 -21%	498 -7%	611 14%
Brightness Distribution	96	93 -3%	95 -1%	85 -11%	79 -18%	94 -2%	86 -10%	89 -7%
Black Level *	0.33	0.49 -48%	0.55 -67%	0.14 58%	0.15 55%	0.33 -0%	0.23 30%	0.23 30%
Contrast	1630	731 -55%	889 -45%	2464 51%	2080 28%	1255 -23%	2270 39%	2809 72%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	5.7	7.1 -25%	8.3 -46%	7.1 -25%	8.2 -44%	8.1 -42%	6.9 -21%	4.5 21%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	11	14.9 -35%	14.4 -31%	13.9 -26%	16.5 -50%	13.8 -25%	12.3 -12%	8.3 25%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	4.7	6.5 -38%	8.7 -85%	6.7 -43%	9.2 -96%	9.6 -104%	9.2 -96%	6 -28%
Gamma	2.51 ^88%	2.12 ^104%	2.08 ^106%	2.47 ^89%	2.29 ^96%	2 ^110%	2.38 ^92%	2.27 ^97%
CCT	7264 ^89%	8166 ^80%	9034 ^72%	7711 ^84%	9017 ^72%	7754 ^84%	8687 ^75%	7996 ^81%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)								67.74
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)								99.05

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

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 18878 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

For an IPS panel, the contrast ratio (1630:1) as well as the black value (0.33 cd/m²) are merely a good average, falling into the middle of the field of competitors. In our practically relevant APL50 test, the black value of the panel slightly improved to 0.31 cd/m² at a contrast of 1455:1. The deviations in the color reproduction measured with the photo spectrometer and the CalMAN analysis software are relatively low, considering the cost of the device. In the bright areas, the grayscale also shows a barely visible blue tint, causing the image to appear slightly cool. The sRGB color-space coverage is very good.

CalMAN color accuracy (sRGB target color space)

CalMAN color space (sRGB target color space)

CalMAN saturation (sRGB target color space)

CalMAN grayscale (sRGB target color space)

Display Response Times

ℹ

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.

↔ Response Time Black to White
38.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 23.6 ms rise
38.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 15.2 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. » 96 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (22.3 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
42.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 19.2 ms rise
42.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 23.6 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 64 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (35.2 ms).

Outdoors, the liquid crystal display is easily readable. On sunny days, the brightness and the contrast of the display are slightly too low to reliably allow easy reading of the content in direct sunlight. Thanks to IPS technology, the viewing-angle stability is very good. From very steep viewing angles, the image appears slightly darker and depending on the tilt of the display, a slight yellow or blue color inversion becomes visible.

Performance

The MediaTek MT6735 built into the Sony Xperia is an ARM SoC (System-on-a-Chip) with a clock speed of 1.3 GHz. The mid-range processor is manufactured in the 28-nm process and has four CPU cores based on the 64-bit capable Cortex A53 architecture. The CPU is supported by an ARM Mali T720 (MP1) graphics processor and 1.5 GB DDR3 RAM.

In everyday life, the performance ensures a smoothly running system and is very good for the MediaTek MT6735. There are hardly any stutters or hanging, and if there is, it is only during multitasking - Sony did a really good job here. Our subjective performance impression is confirmed by the benchmarks and browser performance. Compared to the MT6735 competition, the results of the Xperia E5 are very good. However, our Chinese Vernee Mars and UMi Max competitors offer the clearly better MediaTek SoC with the Helio P10 MT6755 and therefore also have correspondingly higher benchmark results.

The performance of the internal 16 GB eMMC storage while reading and writing data is in the higher range of the comparison values. The performance capabilities of the integrated microSD-card slot are above average for the price class as well. We checked its speed with our Toshiba Exceria Pro M401 reference storage card (max. read: 95 MB/s, write: 80 MB/s) and at 65 MB/s (read) and 46 MB/s (write), the access rates are above the competing devices. Only the LG K8 2017 offers even faster read and write rates.

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	32477 Points ∼11%
LG K8 2017	30924 Points ∼11% -5%
Gigaset GS160	28459 Points ∼10% -12%
Vernee Mars	51008 Points ∼17% +57%
Coolpad Modena 2	24875 Points ∼8% -23%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	23822 Points ∼8% -27%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	30676 Points ∼10% -6%
UMI Max	49057 Points ∼17% +51%

AndroBench 3-5
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	45.56 MB/s ∼52%
LG K8 2017	52.2 MB/s ∼60% +15%
Gigaset GS160	19.19 MB/s ∼22% -58%
Vernee Mars	24 MB/s ∼28% -47%
Coolpad Modena 2	18.25 MB/s ∼21% -60%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	12.62 MB/s ∼14% -72%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	16.17 MB/s ∼19% -65%
UMI Max	18.07 MB/s ∼21% -60%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	65 MB/s ∼42%
LG K8 2017	78.6 MB/s ∼51% +21%
Gigaset GS160	30.71 MB/s ∼20% -53%
Vernee Mars	44.5 MB/s ∼29% -32%
Coolpad Modena 2	35.59 MB/s ∼23% -45%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	22.77 MB/s ∼15% -65%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	27.68 MB/s ∼18% -57%
UMI Max	36.64 MB/s ∼24% -44%
Random Write 4KB (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	9.84 MB/s ∼2%
LG K8 2017	12.5 MB/s ∼2% +27%
Gigaset GS160	6.8 MB/s ∼1% -31%
Vernee Mars	15.77 MB/s ∼3% +60%
Coolpad Modena 2	6.79 MB/s ∼1% -31%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	8.26 MB/s ∼1% -16%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	7.95 MB/s ∼1% -19%
UMI Max	10.91 MB/s ∼2% +11%
Random Read 4KB (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	26.04 MB/s ∼5%
LG K8 2017	41.6 MB/s ∼8% +60%
Gigaset GS160	18.5 MB/s ∼3% -29%
Vernee Mars	21.66 MB/s ∼4% -17%
Coolpad Modena 2	23.03 MB/s ∼4% -12%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	18.24 MB/s ∼3% -30%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	20.25 MB/s ∼4% -22%
UMI Max	26.66 MB/s ∼5% +2%
Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	83.1 MB/s ∼3%
LG K8 2017	84.6 MB/s ∼3% +2%
Gigaset GS160	46.6 MB/s ∼2% -44%
Vernee Mars	71.6 MB/s ∼2% -14%
Coolpad Modena 2	42.56 MB/s ∼1% -49%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	70.3 MB/s ∼2% -15%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	39.51 MB/s ∼1% -52%
UMI Max	69.5 MB/s ∼2% -16%
Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	209.7 MB/s ∼5%
LG K8 2017	270.8 MB/s ∼6% +29%
Gigaset GS160	200.5 MB/s ∼4% -4%
Vernee Mars	255.9 MB/s ∼6% +22%
Coolpad Modena 2	147 MB/s ∼3% -30%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	187.3 MB/s ∼4% -11%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	178.6 MB/s ∼4% -15%
UMI Max	257.9 MB/s ∼6% +23%

Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Gigaset GS160	518 Points ∼7%
Vernee Mars	729 Points ∼10%
Coolpad Modena 2	459 Points ∼7%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	572 Points ∼8%
UMI Max	734 Points ∼10%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Gigaset GS160	1453 Points ∼4%
Vernee Mars	2903 Points ∼7%
Coolpad Modena 2	1274 Points ∼3%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	1588 Points ∼4%
UMI Max	2701 Points ∼7%

Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	1527 Points ∼2%
LG K8 2017	1737 Points ∼2% +14%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	556 Points ∼6%
LG K8 2017	642 Points ∼7% +15%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	5200 Points ∼2%
LG K8 2017	2951 Points ∼1% -43%
Gigaset GS160	3780 Points ∼1% -27%
Vernee Mars	10702 Points ∼3% +106%
Coolpad Modena 2	3222 Points ∼1% -38%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	3070 Points ∼1% -41%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	4944 Points ∼1% -5%
UMI Max	10942 Points ∼3% +110%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	4615 Points ∼1%
LG K8 2017	2546 Points ∼0% -45%
Gigaset GS160	3291 Points ∼0% -29%
Vernee Mars	10685 Points ∼1% +132%
Coolpad Modena 2	2789 Points ∼0% -40%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	2645 Points ∼0% -43%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	4333 Points ∼1% -6%
UMI Max	10612 Points ∼1% +130%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	9349 Points ∼8%
LG K8 2017	6656 Points ∼6% -29%
Gigaset GS160	7881 Points ∼7% -16%
Vernee Mars	10762 Points ∼9% +15%
Coolpad Modena 2	7061 Points ∼6% -24%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	7026 Points ∼6% -25%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	9768 Points ∼8% +4%
UMI Max	12239 Points ∼10% +31%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	212 Points ∼2%
LG K8 2017	39 Points ∼0% -82%
Vernee Mars	602 Points ∼5% +184%
Coolpad Modena 2	130 Points ∼1% -39%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	124 Points ∼1% -42%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	209 Points ∼2% -1%
UMI Max	598 Points ∼5% +182%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	175 Points ∼1%
LG K8 2017	31 Points ∼0% -82%
Vernee Mars	523 Points ∼3% +199%
Coolpad Modena 2	106 Points ∼1% -39%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	101 Points ∼1% -42%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	172 Points ∼1% -2%
UMI Max	521 Points ∼3% +198%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	817 Points ∼15%
LG K8 2017	622 Points ∼11% -24%
Vernee Mars	1100 Points ∼20% +35%
Coolpad Modena 2	621 Points ∼11% -24%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	618 Points ∼11% -24%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	831 Points ∼15% +2%
UMI Max	1239 Points ∼23% +52%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	124 Points ∼1%
LG K8 2017	Points ∼0% -100%
Vernee Mars	425 Points ∼2% +243%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	81 Points ∼0% -35%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	127 Points ∼1% +2%
UMI Max	421 Points ∼2% +240%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	100 Points ∼1%
LG K8 2017	Points ∼0% -100%
Vernee Mars	356 Points ∼3% +256%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	65 Points ∼1% -35%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	102 Points ∼1% +2%
UMI Max	354 Points ∼3% +254%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	835 Points ∼14%
LG K8 2017	Points ∼0% -100%
Vernee Mars	1338 Points ∼23% +60%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	609 Points ∼10% -27%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	882 Points ∼15% +6%
UMI Max	1247 Points ∼21% +49%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	15 fps ∼0%
LG K8 2017	6.4 fps ∼0% -57%
Gigaset GS160	11 fps ∼0% -27%
Vernee Mars	18 fps ∼1% +20%
Coolpad Modena 2	8.9 fps ∼0% -41%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	8.2 fps ∼0% -45%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	8.4 fps ∼0% -44%
UMI Max	17 fps ∼1% +13%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	8.4 fps ∼0%
LG K8 2017	3.4 fps ∼0% -60%
Gigaset GS160	6 fps ∼0% -29%
Vernee Mars	17 fps ∼0% +102%
Coolpad Modena 2	5 fps ∼0% -40%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	4.9 fps ∼0% -42%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	14 fps ∼0% +67%
UMI Max	17 fps ∼0% +102%

GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	6 fps ∼2%
LG K8 2017	3.7 fps ∼1% -38%
Gigaset GS160	4.7 fps ∼1% -22%
Vernee Mars	7.6 fps ∼2% +27%
Coolpad Modena 2	4 fps ∼1% -33%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	1.8 fps ∼0% -70%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	3 fps ∼1% -50%
UMI Max	7.1 fps ∼2% +18%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	3 fps ∼0%
LG K8 2017	1.3 fps ∼0% -57%
Gigaset GS160	2.1 fps ∼0% -30%
Vernee Mars	7.1 fps ∼0% +137%
Coolpad Modena 2	1.8 fps ∼0% -40%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	3.4 fps ∼0% +13%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	6 fps ∼0% +100%
UMI Max	7.1 fps ∼0% +137%

GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	3.4 fps ∼0%
LG K8 2017	fps ∼0% -100%
Gigaset GS160	3.4 fps ∼0% 0%
Vernee Mars	5.1 fps ∼0% +50%
Coolpad Modena 2	1.2 fps ∼0% -65%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	1.2 fps ∼0% -65%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	1.9 fps ∼0% -44%
UMI Max	4.7 fps ∼0% +38%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	1.9 fps ∼0%
LG K8 2017	fps ∼0% -100%
Gigaset GS160	1.4 fps ∼0% -26%
Vernee Mars	4.8 fps ∼0% +153%
Coolpad Modena 2	2.9 fps ∼0% +53%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	2.5 fps ∼0% +32%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	4.4 fps ∼0% +132%
UMI Max	4.7 fps ∼0% +147%

PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	3817 Points ∼19%
LG K8 2017	4673 Points ∼23% +22%
Gigaset GS160	2563 Points ∼13% -33%
Vernee Mars	4554 Points ∼23% +19%
Coolpad Modena 2	3119 Points ∼16% -18%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	3813 Points ∼19% 0%
UMI Max	4485 Points ∼22% +18%

BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	567 Points ∼6%
LG K8 2017	371 Points ∼4% -35%
Gigaset GS160	178 Points ∼2% -69%
Vernee Mars	348 Points ∼4% -39%
Coolpad Modena 2	483 Points ∼5% -15%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	448 Points ∼5% -21%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	192 Points ∼2% -66%
UMI Max	341 Points ∼4% -40%
System (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	1091 Points ∼6%
LG K8 2017	1191 Points ∼6% +9%
Gigaset GS160	1029 Points ∼5% -6%
Vernee Mars	2291 Points ∼12% +110%
Coolpad Modena 2	909 Points ∼5% -17%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	801 Points ∼4% -27%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	1090 Points ∼6% 0%
UMI Max	2123 Points ∼11% +95%
Memory (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	552 Points ∼5%
LG K8 2017	634 Points ∼5% +15%
Gigaset GS160	497 Points ∼4% -10%
Vernee Mars	1005 Points ∼9% +82%
Coolpad Modena 2	598 Points ∼5% +8%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	487 Points ∼4% -12%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	450 Points ∼4% -18%
UMI Max	998 Points ∼9% +81%
Graphics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	280 Points ∼1%
LG K8 2017	436 Points ∼1% +56%
Gigaset GS160	208 Points ∼1% -26%
Vernee Mars	665 Points ∼2% +138%
Coolpad Modena 2	178 Points ∼1% -36%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	174 Points ∼1% -38%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	286 Points ∼1% +2%
UMI Max	666 Points ∼2% +138%
Web (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	639 Points ∼27%
LG K8 2017	616 Points ∼26% -4%
Gigaset GS160	9 Points ∼0% -99%
Vernee Mars	10 Points ∼0% -98%
Coolpad Modena 2	565 Points ∼24% -12%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	592 Points ∼25% -7%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	10 Points ∼0% -98%
UMI Max	10 Points ∼0% -98%

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	17.89 Points ∼3%
LG K8 2017	17.12 Points ∼3% -4%
Gigaset GS160	14.43 Points ∼3% -19%
Vernee Mars	27.1 Points ∼5% +51%
Coolpad Modena 2	13.15 Points ∼2% -26%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	12.73 Points ∼2% -29%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	18.03 Points ∼3% +1%
UMI Max	25.5 Points ∼5% +43%

Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	2910 Points ∼3%
LG K8 2017	3052 Points ∼3% +5%
Gigaset GS160	2493 Points ∼2% -14%
Vernee Mars	4073 Points ∼4% +40%
Coolpad Modena 2	1975 Points ∼2% -32%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	1910 Points ∼2% -34%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	2697 Points ∼3% -7%
UMI Max	4231 Points ∼4% +45%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	13232 ms * ∼15%
LG K8 2017	10742 ms * ∼13% +19%
Gigaset GS160	13907 ms * ∼16% -5%
Vernee Mars	9376 ms * ∼11% +29%
Coolpad Modena 2	19647 ms * ∼23% -48%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	19234 ms * ∼22% -45%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	12910 ms * ∼15% +2%
UMI Max	9796 ms * ∼11% +26%

Legend

Sony Xperia E5 Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

LG K8 2017 Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Qualcomm Adreno 308, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Gigaset GS160 Mediatek MT6737, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Vernee Mars Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Coolpad Modena 2 Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

ZTE Blade V7 Lite Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Acer Liquid Zest Plus Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

UMI Max Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

* ... smaller is better

Games

Besides OpenGL ES 3.1, the Mali-T720 graphics unit also masters OpenCL 1.1 and DirectX 11. However, the MP1 variant inside the Xperia E5 is only scaled by a single cluster which clocks at 600 MHz. 3D games from the Android Play Store that are more extravagant cannot be played smoothly. During the Modern Combat 5 and Real Racing 3 game titles we tested, there was repeated stuttering and long loading times were the rule. The touchscreen and position sensor worked well in the test.

Emissions

Temperature

During load, the back and the front of the Xperia E5 warm up unevenly. While in the test we measure a maximum of 44 °C (111 °F) in the front, the back has a slightly higher maximum surface temperature of 45.6 °C (114 °F). The temperatures that develop under load can be clearly felt in everyday operation, in particular in the bottom third of the case.

Max. Load

Idle


44 °C 111 F	41.1 °C 106 F	35.3 °C 96 F
42.6 °C 109 F	43.3 °C 110 F	36.9 °C 98 F
41.8 °C 107 F	43 °C 109 F	35.5 °C 96 F

Maximum: 44 °C = 111 F
Average: 40.4 °C = 105 F


35.9 °C 97 F	38.7 °C 102 F	45.6 °C 114 F
34.4 °C 94 F	41 °C 106 F	45.6 °C 114 F
34 °C 93 F	39.2 °C 103 F	44.2 °C 112 F

Maximum: 45.6 °C = 114 F
Average: 39.8 °C = 104 F

Power Supply (max.) 30.8 °C = 87 F | Room Temperature 21.5 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260

(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 40.4 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 32.6 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44 °C / 111 F, compared to the average of 34.9 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 45.6 °C / 114 F, compared to the average of 33.7 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.6 °C / 89 F, compared to the device average of 32.6 °C / 91 F.

Speaker

The speaker on the bottom of the case only achieves a maximum volume of 77 dB(A) in our test. With that, the mono speaker is not really the most powerful in the smartphone segment, although the volume is sufficient for everyday life.

The Xperia E5 cannot really score with sound quality in the test: at higher volumes the sound becomes tinny and distorted. As expected, the sound image is not very linear and overemphasizes the highs. The pink-noise diagram shows that lower frequencies are barely audible.

For a reproduction with more bass, you can use the 3.5 mm connector. Earphones are not included with the phone.

Sony Xperia E5 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (28.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 84% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 11% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 90% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 8% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Coolpad Modena 2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 40.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 7.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (31.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 92% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 94% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 4% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

LG K8 2017 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 38.8% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 13.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (14.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (35.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 97% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 2% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 97% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 2% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Frequency diagram in comparison (checkboxes above can be checked/unchecked!)

Battery Life

Power Consumption

In our measurement of the power consumption, the Xperia E5 is relatively inefficient. Compared to the UMi Max, the power consumption is clearly higher despite the smaller display and weaker processor.

Power Consumption

Off / Standby	0.01 / 0.34 Watt
Idle	1.03 / 2.06 / 2.12 Watt
Load	5.01 / 5.04 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.

	Sony Xperia E5 2300 mAh	LG K8 2017 2500 mAh	Gigaset GS160 2500 mAh	Vernee Mars 3000 mAh	Coolpad Modena 2 2500 mAh	ZTE Blade V7 Lite 2500 mAh	Acer Liquid Zest Plus 5000 mAh	UMI Max 4000 mAh
Power Consumption		28%	19%	2%	8%	34%	12%	27%
Idle Minimum *	1.03	0.65 37%	0.56 46%	1.02 1%	0.64 38%	0.63 39%	0.83 19%	1.02 1%
Idle Average *	2.06	1.6 22%	1.7 17%	1.69 18%	1.96 5%	1.37 33%	2.06 -0%	1.53 26%
Idle Maximum *	2.12	1.62 24%	1.75 17%	1.82 14%	1.98 7%	1.71 19%	2.08 2%	1.62 24%
Load Average *	5.01	2.97 41%	4.17 17%	4.39 12%	4.99 -0%	2.82 44%	3.53 30%	2.91 42%
Load Maximum *	5.04	4.34 14%	5.07 -1%	6.79 -35%	5.48 -9%	3.36 33%	4.49 11%	2.93 42%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

At 7 hours and 2 minutes in our WLAN test with an adjusted display brightness of 150 cd/m², the inefficient power consumption of the Sony smartphone prevents a very good result. Considering the nominal capacity of 2300 mAh of the lithium-polymer battery, the Xperia E5 should last considerably longer compared to the runtime of the LG K8 (2017) in light of the built-in hardware.

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing		7h 02min

	Sony Xperia E5 2300 mAh	LG K8 2017 2500 mAh	Gigaset GS160 2500 mAh	Vernee Mars 3000 mAh	Coolpad Modena 2 2500 mAh	ZTE Blade V7 Lite 2500 mAh	Acer Liquid Zest Plus 5000 mAh	UMI Max 4000 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3	422	594 41%	615 46%	427 1%	518 23%	517 23%	815 93%	588 39%

Pros

+ bright IPS panel

+ exact GPS module

+ performance (considering the SoC)

+ NFC

+ design and workmanship

+ fast SD-card slot

Cons

- slow SoC

- high heat development in parts

- speaker

- battery life (compared to the competition)

- camera

Verdict

In the test: Sony Xperia E5. Test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de

In our test, the Sony entry model scores with a high-contrast IPS HD panel and handiness. The Xperia E5 is well-built but only offers a plastic case that appears thin, although it feels okay. The competition that is made from glass (UHANS S1) or metal (Vernee Mars) has a clearly higher-quality appearance.

The interaction between the low-performance MediaTek quad-core SoC and 1.5 GB RAM ensures a (surprisingly) fluid system performance in everyday life, and thanks to the relatively fast 16 GB eMMC storage, the apps open without too long load times. In addition, the GPS module of the Xperia E5 is very exact for its price class.

We comment negatively that due to the comparatively high power consumption and waste heat development, the runtimes of the Sony smartphone are below average compared to the competition. Moreover, the quality of the camera module and speaker are not very compelling.

The Xperia E5 is a solid everyday companion of the lower price segment. However, the fancy glass design of higher-priced Xperia smartphones typical for Sony would have benefited the entry device as a unique feature.

Sony Xperia E5 - 2017-06-06 06/06/2017 v6^(old)
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis

80%

Keyboard

60 / 75 → 79%

Pointing Device

84%

Connectivity

41 / 60 → 68%

Weight

93%

Battery

89%

Display

83%

Games Performance

8 / 63 → 13%

Application Performance

34 / 70 → 49%

Temperature

86%

Noise

100%

Audio

48 / 91 → 52%

Camera

48%

Average

66%

77%

Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Loading Comments

Comment on this article

Editor of the original article: Marcus Herbrich - Senior Tech Writer - 373 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2016

I have always been very passionately interested in mobile technologies, especially smartphones. Being a tech enthusiast means the half-life of my devices isn’t exactly long, and being the latest hardware is not enough to suffice as the manufacturer and operating system play a minor role – the most important aspect for me is that the device is state-of-the-art. After posting for Mobi Test I joined Notebookcheck in 2016, where I have been pursuing my enthusiasm for technology by reviewing the latest smartphone, tablet, and accessory trends.

contact me via: @Marcus_Herbrich

Please share our article, every link counts!

.170

> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Sony Xperia E5 Smartphone Review

Marcus Herbrich, 2017-06- 9 (Update: 2020-05-19)

Sony Xperia E5 Smartphone Review

Case

Size Comparison

Features

Software

Communication and GPS

Telephone and Call Quality

Cameras

Accessories and Warranty

Input Devices and Operation

Display

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Display Response Times

Performance

Games

Emissions

Temperature

Speaker

Sony Xperia E5 audio analysis

Coolpad Modena 2 audio analysis

LG K8 2017 audio analysis

Battery Life

Power Consumption

Battery Life

Pros

Cons

Verdict

More articles related to this device

Pricecompare