The sub-$200 smartphone market is fiercely competitive, and the Motorola Moto E15 and Xiaomi Poco C65 represent compelling options for budget-conscious buyers. While both devices leverage Mediatek’s Helio G-series chipsets, they diverge significantly in areas like battery endurance and display brightness, creating distinct user experiences. This comparison dissects these differences to help you choose the right phone.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For users prioritizing all-day battery life and extended device longevity, the Motorola Moto E15 is the clear winner, boasting a remarkable 68:26h endurance and 1000 charge cycles. However, the Xiaomi Poco C65 counters with a brighter, more visually appealing display, making it a better choice for media consumption.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 - International |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66 - International |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2024, December 17 | 2023, November 05 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, January 22 | Available. Released 2023, November 06 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic frame, silicone polymer back (eco leather) | Glass front (Gorilla Glass), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 165.7 x 76 x 8.2 mm (6.52 x 2.99 x 0.32 in) | 168 x 78 x 8.1 mm (6.61 x 3.07 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 188.8 g (6.67 oz) | 192 g (6.77 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass 3, Mohs level 6 | Corning Gorilla Glass |
| Resolution | 720 x 1604 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~264 ppi density) | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~260 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.67 inches, 107.2 cm2 (~85.2% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.74 inches, 109.7 cm2 (~83.7% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz | IPS LCD, 90Hz, 450 nits (typ), 600 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.7 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Helio G81 Extreme (12 nm) | Mediatek MT6769Z Helio G85 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G52 MC2 | Mali-G52 MC2 |
| OS | Android 14 (Go edition) | Android 13, upgradable to Android 15, HyperOS 2 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 2GB RAM | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | - | 50 MP, f/1.8, 28mm (wide), 0.64µm, PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Features | LED flash, HDR | LED flash, HDR |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 0.64µm, PDAF | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.1, (wide), 1.12µm | 8 MP, f/2.0 |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio (no radio in FR, IT) | FM radio, recording |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 2.0 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 18W wired, PD |
| Type | 5200 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Fresh Lavender, Misty Blue, Denim Blue | Black, Blue, Purple |
| Models | XT2523-6, XT2523-8 | 2310FPCA4G, 2310FPCA4I |
| Price | $ 85.00 / C$ 100.00 / £ 60.99 / € 75.99 | € 99.95 / $ 139.99 / £ 115.99 / ₹ 8,999 |
| SAR EU | - | 0.99 W/kg (head) 1.00 W/kg (body) |
| EU LABEL |
|---|
| Battery | 68:26h endurance, 1000 cycles | - |
| Energy | Class A | - |
| Free fall | Class B (180 falls) | - |
| Repairability | Class B | - |
Motorola Moto E15
- Exceptional battery life (68:26h endurance)
- High battery cycle count (1000 cycles)
- Potentially better long-term battery health
- Display specifications are unknown
- Camera details are unavailable
Xiaomi Poco C65
- Bright display (607 nits)
- High contrast ratio (1555:1)
- Power Delivery (PD) fast charging
- Significantly shorter battery life (11:31h)
- Camera quality is uncertain
- 2MP macro camera likely offers limited value
Display Comparison
The Xiaomi Poco C65 immediately stands out with its significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 607 nits. This is crucial for outdoor visibility, a common pain point in this price bracket. While the Moto E15’s display specifications are absent, the Poco C65’s 1555:1 contrast ratio suggests deeper blacks and more vibrant colors. The lack of information on the Moto E15’s panel type makes it difficult to assess its color accuracy or viewing angles, but the Poco C65’s brightness advantage is undeniable for users who frequently use their phones in sunlight.
Camera Comparison
Camera details for both phones are limited. The Poco C65 is listed as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, implying a standard camera setup. However, without sensor size or aperture information, it’s impossible to assess its image quality. The Moto E15’s camera specifications are entirely absent. Given the price point, it’s reasonable to expect both phones to struggle in low-light conditions. The inclusion of a 2MP macro camera on the Poco C65 is a common, but often underwhelming, feature in this segment; its utility is questionable for most users.
Performance
Both the Moto E15 and Poco C65 utilize Mediatek’s Helio G8x series, but with subtle differences. The Moto E15 features the Helio G81 Extreme, while the Poco C65 uses the Helio G85. Both chipsets employ an octa-core configuration with 2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 and 6x1.7/1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. The Poco C65’s slightly higher Cortex-A55 clock speed (1.8 GHz vs 1.7 GHz) may offer a marginal performance boost in multi-threaded tasks, but the real-world difference will likely be minimal. Neither phone is a gaming powerhouse, but both should handle everyday tasks and light gaming adequately. Thermal management will be key, and without specific testing data, it’s difficult to predict which phone will throttle less under sustained load.
Battery Life
The Motorola Moto E15 dominates in battery endurance, achieving an impressive 68:26h of usage. This is a substantial lead over the Poco C65’s 11:31h active use score. While 'active use' is a less standardized metric, the difference is significant. The Moto E15 also boasts a claimed 1000 charge cycles, suggesting superior long-term battery health. Both phones support 18W wired charging, but the Poco C65 adds Power Delivery (PD) support, offering potentially faster and more efficient charging with compatible chargers. However, the Moto E15’s massive battery capacity mitigates the need for ultra-fast charging.
Buying Guide
Buy the Motorola Moto E15 if you need a phone that will reliably last through a full day – and many more – of heavy use, and if long-term battery health is a concern. Its exceptional endurance is ideal for travelers, field workers, or anyone who dislikes frequent charging. Buy the Xiaomi Poco C65 if you prioritize a vibrant viewing experience, particularly outdoors, and appreciate the convenience of Power Delivery (PD) fast charging, even if it comes at the cost of some battery longevity.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Motorola Moto E15's battery degrade quickly with frequent charging, despite the 1000 cycle claim?
While 1000 charge cycles is a high number, battery degradation is inevitable. However, the Moto E15's massive battery capacity (implied by its 68:26h endurance) means each cycle represents a larger amount of usable energy, potentially delaying noticeable degradation compared to phones with smaller batteries.
❓ Is the Poco C65's Power Delivery (PD) charging significantly faster than standard 18W charging?
The speed difference depends on the charger used. PD allows for negotiation between the phone and charger to deliver optimal power. With a compatible PD charger, the Poco C65 *could* charge faster and more efficiently than with a standard 18W charger, but the difference may not be dramatic.
❓ Will either phone struggle with popular apps like TikTok or Instagram?
Both phones, powered by the Helio G81 and G85 respectively, should handle social media apps like TikTok and Instagram without major issues. However, expect some occasional lag or slowdown when multitasking or running demanding features within those apps. They are not designed for intensive, sustained use.
