We put the Apple iPhone 15 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.
Overview
Key specifications:
- Battery capacity: 3290 mAh
- 30W charger (not included)
- 6.1-inch, 1179 x 2556, 120 Hz, OLED display
- Apple A17 Pro (3 nm)
- Tested ROM / RAM combination: 256 GB + 8 GB
Scoring
Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro
114
battery
122
Honor X7b
Best: Honor X7b (221)
106
Samsung Galaxy M51
Best: Samsung Galaxy M51 (195)
89
Samsung Galaxy M51
Best: Samsung Galaxy M51 (198)
110
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
Best: Realme GT Neo 5 (240W) (224)
113
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
Best: Realme GT Neo 5 (240W) (212)
109
Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
Best: Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro (205)
160
Apple iPhone 14 Pro
Best: Apple iPhone 14 Pro (194)
Key performances
These key points are derived from the lab measurements during testing and do not figure into the overall score. The lab measurements, however, are used for the overall score.
3h17 autonomy
after 5-minute charge
Position in Global Ranking
100
th
2. Honor Magic6 Lite (5800 mAh)
156
7. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)
150
8. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
147
13. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
142
23. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
136
23. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G
136
33. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
134
33. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
134
33. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G
134
37. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
133
37. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
133
37. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G
133
44. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G
132
44. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S
132
52. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
130
52. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
130
54. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
129
54. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
129
54. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G
129
54. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
129
70. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G
125
77. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
121
79. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G
120
79. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G
120
91. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
117
100. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
114
100. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
114
105. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
113
109. Motorola Moto G62 5G
112
113. Motorola Moto G9 Power
111
113. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
111
118. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
109
118. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
109
121. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
108
125. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
107
127. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
106
131. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
103
137. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
101
138. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
100
138. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022
100
143. Apple iPhone 13 mini
99
143. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
99
143. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
99
148. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
98
148. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
98
152. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
96
155. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
95
155. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
95
155. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
95
161. Apple iPhone 12 mini
93
161. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
93
164. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
92
165. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
90
170. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
84
172. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
82
176. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
75
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
22
nd
3. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
142
7. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
136
9. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
134
9. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
134
11. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
133
14. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
130
18. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
121
22. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
114
25. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
111
28. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
109
34. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
103
38. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
99
38. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
99
40. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
98
41. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
95
41. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
95
44. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
93
45. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
92
Pros
- Low discharge currents overall
- Low residual consumption for both wired and wireless charges
Cons
- Below-average autonomy in almost all calibrated tests
- Very low autonomy when gaming
- Longer than average charging times
The Apple iPhone 15 Pro showed very similar behavior to the iPhone 14 Pro, but its battery experience was slightly below that of its predecessor and quite average when compared to other devices we have tested.
The iPhone 15 Pro’s autonomy lasted a bit more than two days when it was used moderately, a decent result even if below average in our database. However, the device’s performance was less optimal when testing individual use cases, especially when gaming and listening to music, where the autonomy was poor.
In terms of charging experience, the iPhone 15 Pro took 1 hour and 56 minutes to fully charge with a 30W charger, which was longer than average.
The wireless charging time was also longer than average at 2 hours and 41 minutes. Moreover, the additional autonomy gained after a 5-minute charge was 3 hours and 17 minutes on average, which was lower than average in our database. The wireless charge efficiency was decent, but the wired charge efficiency was a bit low. However, the residual consumption of both wired and wireless chargers was well-controlled, with very low power drained. Finally, the strength of the device was its good discharge efficiency, providing low discharge currents for the majority of the use cases, meaning that the device was well-optimized.
Compared to the other devices in the Ultra-Premium segment, the battery experience of the iPhone 15 Pro was just above the average. Its efficiency score was very good for the segment, and the autonomy was decent, while the charging efficiency was slightly below average.
Test Summary
About DXOMARK Battery tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone battery reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests over a week-long period both indoors and outdoors. (See our introductory and how we test articles for more details about our smartphone Battery protocol.)
The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.
|
Battery |
Charger |
Wireless |
Display |
Processor |
| Apple iPhone 15 Pro |
3290mAh |
20W
(not included) |
15W |
AMOLED Retina XDR
1179 x 2556 |
Apple A17 Pro |
| Apple iPhone 14 Pro |
3200mAh |
20W
(not included) |
15W |
OLED
1179 x 2556 |
Apple A16 Bionic |
| Google Pixel 8 Pro |
5050mAh |
30W
(not included) |
23W |
OLED
1344 x 2992 |
Google Tensor G3 |
How Autonomy score is composed
Autonomy score is composed of three performance sub-scores: Home / Office, On the go, and Calibrated use cases. Each sub-score comprises the results of a comprehensive range of tests for measuring autonomy in all kinds of real-life scenarios.
76h
Light Usage
Active: 2h30/day
51h
Moderate Usage
Active: 4h/day
31h
Intense Usage
Active: 7h/day
Position in Global Ranking
Battery Life (moderate)
114
th
7. Honor Magic6 Lite (5800 mAh)
77h
9. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)
77h
15. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G
72h
20. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G
70h
23. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
69h
25. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G
69h
27. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
68h
28. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
67h
29. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
67h
30. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G
67h
36. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
65h
38. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
65h
40. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
64h
46. Motorola Moto G9 Power
64h
49. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G
62h
50. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
62h
51. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G
62h
52. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S
61h
54. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
61h
55. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
60h
77. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
56h
79. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
56h
80. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G
56h
82. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G
55h
83. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
55h
93. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
54h
103. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
52h
113. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
51h
114. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
51h
117. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
51h
123. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
50h
125. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
49h
132. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
49h
133. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
49h
135. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
48h
137. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
48h
140. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
47h
141. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
47h
142. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
47h
143. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
47h
145. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
46h
146. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
46h
148. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
46h
153. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
44h
156. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
43h
158. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
43h
159. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
42h
161. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
41h
163. Apple iPhone 13 mini
41h
164. Apple iPhone 12 mini
40h
166. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
40h
167. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
39h
170. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
38h
173. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
37h
175. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
35h
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
Battery Life (moderate)
25
th
4. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
69h
5. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
68h
6. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
67h
8. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
65h
12. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
61h
16. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
56h
19. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
54h
29. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
49h
30. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
49h
31. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
48h
34. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
47h
36. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
46h
37. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
44h
40. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
43h
42. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
43h
43. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
42h
45. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
41h
46. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
40h
A robot housed in a Faraday cage performs a set of touch-based user actions during what we call our “typical usage scenario” (TUS) — making calls, video streaming, etc. — 4 hours of active use over the course of a 16-hour period, plus 8 hours of “sleep.” The robot repeats this set of actions every day until the device runs out of power.
Typical Usage Scenario discharge curves
106
Samsung Galaxy M51
Samsung Galaxy M51
Using a smartphone on the go takes a toll on autonomy because of extra “hidden” demands, such as the continuous signaling associated with cellphone network selection, for example. DXOMARK Battery experts take the phone outdoors and perform a precisely defined set of activities while following the same three-hour travel itinerary (walking, taking the bus, the subway…) for each device
Autonomy for on the go use cases (full charge)
89
Samsung Galaxy M51
Samsung Galaxy M51
For this series of tests, the smartphone returns to the Faraday cage and our robots repeatedly perform actions linked to one specific use case (such as gaming, video streaming, etc.) at a time. Starting from an 80% charge, all devices are tested until they have expended at least 5% of their battery power.
Autonomy for calibrated use cases (full charge)
Charging
111
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
How Charging score is composed
Charging is fully part of the overall battery experience. In some situations where autonomy is at a minimum, knowing how fast you can charge becomes a concern. The DXOMARK Battery charging score is composed of two sub-scores, (1) Full charge and (2) Quick boost.
110
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
Full charge tests assess the reliability of the battery power gauge; measure how long and how much power the battery takes to charge from zero to 80% capacity, from 80 to 100% as shown by the UI, and until an actual full charge.
Position in Global Ranking
Charging Time 0-80%
117
th
1. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
0h08
22. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
0h22
29. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G
0h24
30. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
0h24
53. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G
0h31
57. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G
0h33
63. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h37
64. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
0h37
66. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
0h37
68. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
0h38
69. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G
0h38
72. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h39
73. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
0h40
74. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
0h40
81. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G
0h44
86. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
0h46
87. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)
0h47
91. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
0h48
92. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
0h48
93. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
0h49
97. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
0h49
99. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
0h49
102. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
0h50
102. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
0h50
104. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
0h51
105. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
0h51
107. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
0h51
107. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
0h51
109. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
0h51
110. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S
0h52
111. Apple iPhone 12 mini
0h52
112. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10
0h52
114. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
0h52
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
0h53
119. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
0h54
119. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G
0h54
121. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
0h54
122. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
0h55
123. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
0h56
124. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
0h56
125. Honor Magic6 Lite (5800 mAh)
0h56
127. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
0h57
128. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
0h57
129. Apple iPhone 13 mini
0h57
130. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
0h57
131. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
0h57
137. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
1h01
141. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
1h03
147. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
1h06
154. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
1h15
159. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G
1h22
161. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022
1h25
164. Motorola Moto G62 5G
1h26
165. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
1h28
166. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G
1h30
173. Motorola Moto G9 Power
1h53
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
Charging Time 0-80%
35
th
8. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
0h24
19. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h37
20. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
0h37
23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
0h37
24. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
0h38
25. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h39
26. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
0h40
28. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
0h46
29. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
0h48
32. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
0h51
33. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
0h51
37. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
0h56
38. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
0h56
39. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
0h57
40. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
0h57
41. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
0h57
43. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
1h01
49. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
1h06
Power consumption and battery level during full charge
The charging curves, in wired and wireless (if available) showing the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the power consumption in watts during the stages of charging toward full capacity.
Power consumption and battery level during wireless full charge
The charging curves, in wired and wireless (if available) showing the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the power consumption in watts during the stages of charging toward full capacity.
113
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
With the phone at different charge levels (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%), Quick boost tests measure the amount of charge the battery receives after being plugged in for 5 minutes. The chart here compares the average autonomy gain from a quick 5-minute charge.
Average autonomy gain for a 5 minute charge (wired)
Efficiency
141
Oppo Reno6 5G
Oppo Reno6 5G
How Efficiency score is composed
The DXOMARK power efficiency score consists of two sub-scores, Charge up and Discharge rate, both of which combine data obtained during robot-based typical usage scenario, calibrated tests and charging evaluation, taking into consideration the device’s battery capacity. DXOMARK calculate the annual power consumption of the product, shown on below graph, which is representative of the overall efficiency during a charge and when in use.
Annual Consumption Apple iPhone 15 Pro
3.5 kWh
Efficient
Good
Bad
Inefficient
109
Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
The charge up sub-score is a combination of four factors: the overall efficiency of a full charge, related to how much energy you need to fill up the battery compared to the energy that the battery can provide; the efficiency of the travel adapter when it comes to transferring power from an outlet to your phone; the residual consumption when your phone is fully charged and still plugged into the charger; and the residual consumption of the charger itself, when the smartphone is disconnected from it. The chart here below shows the overall efficiency of a full charge in %.
Overall charge efficiency
160
Apple iPhone 14 Pro
Apple iPhone 14 Pro
The discharge subscore rates the speed of a battery’s discharge during a test, which is independent of the battery’s capacity. It is the ratio of a battery’s capacity divided by its autonomy. A small-capacity battery could have the same autonomy as a large-capacity battery, indicating that the device is well-optimized, with a low discharge rate.
Average discharge current
English
Camera
Selfie
Audio
Display
DXOMARK encourages its readers to share comments on the articles. To read or post comments, Disqus cookies are required. Change your Cookies Preferences and read more about our Comment Policy.