1. popkurn611's Avatar
    I know any live wallpaper will use more battery than say a non live wallpaper, but has anyone noticed that the live wallpapers suck more battery life? I remember my pixel battery being amazing and now not so amazing. The only thing I can think of is I had changed to the live wallpaper and that is using more battery than before.

    Anyone ran any tests?
    01-30-2017 05:46 AM
  2. Tim1954's Avatar
    Yes is the short answer there.
    furbymac likes this.
    01-30-2017 05:56 AM
  3. anon(9408097)'s Avatar
    I know any live wallpaper will use more battery than say a non live wallpaper, but has anyone noticed that the live wallpapers suck more battery life? I remember my pixel battery being amazing and now not so amazing. The only thing I can think of is I had changed to the live wallpaper and that is using more battery than before.

    Anyone ran any tests?
    When I had the Pixel I used both live wallpapers and static wallpapers. Mostly used live wallpapers. Didn't have any effect on the battery life. My favourite were aurora and earth.

    I never noticed any difference. Got equal battery life with both.
    01-30-2017 06:41 AM
  4. WClark57's Avatar
    Really, you answered your own question before you asked . The more the screen is on the desktop, the more battery you'll use, but how much is questionable. I have Your world, solar system on mine and don't notice any large drain, but then I don't tend to have the desktop displayed all that long.
    anon(470989) likes this.
    01-30-2017 02:52 PM
  5. popkurn611's Avatar
    Really, you answered your own question before you asked . The more the screen is on the desktop, the more battery you'll use, but how much is questionable. I have Your world, solar system on mine and don't notice any large drain, but then I don't tend to have the desktop displayed all that long.
    Well I was more so asking if the drain is noticeable enough compared to a static background. I know it will consume more battery, but is it worth that amount of consumption was more of my question
    01-30-2017 03:01 PM
  6. gmermel's Avatar
    Go back to static and see if there is any difference yourself. Important to figure it out because that will determine if your battery is impaired or not.
    01-30-2017 03:07 PM
  7. anon(470989)'s Avatar
    You pretty much did answer yourself in your own post haha. But when you did clarify, you asked:
    but is it worth that amount of consumption was more of my question
    I would say "worth" is only something you can answer. Does the live wallpaper give you that much enjoyment to lose a percentage or two (whatever it is)? If it does, its worth it. If not, then it doesn't.
    popkurn611 likes this.
    01-30-2017 04:29 PM
  8. B. Diddy's Avatar
    It can also depend on the live wallpaper. Some are definitely more battery-intensive than others, for various reasons including complex animations, frequent data refresh (like for those that show dynamic data like weather), and possibly adservers.
    01-30-2017 04:37 PM
  9. WClark57's Avatar
    Well I was more so asking if the drain is noticeable enough compared to a static background. I know it will consume more battery, but is it worth that amount of consumption was more of my question
    I think I answered both the question I read and the one you intended to ask as best I could. Its worth is subjective, but if you consider my answer, I believe you can better assess its battery cost. The rest of worth is whether the value to you is worth the usually paltry cost of ownership.
    01-30-2017 05:43 PM
  10. N4Newbie's Avatar
    Let's not forget, there are "live" wallpapers and then there are "live, data intensive, battery sucking" wallpapers.

    In other words, it all depends on what your live wallpaper is doing and when it is doing it.
    B. Diddy likes this.
    01-31-2017 08:30 AM
  11. B. Diddy's Avatar
    Let's not forget, there are "live" wallpapers and then there are "live, data intensive, battery sucking" wallpapers.
    Agreed. They need two separate categories in the Play Store: LWP, and LDIBSWP.
    N4Newbie, Morty2264 and TucsonDave like this.
    01-31-2017 09:56 AM
  12. fragologist's Avatar
    I've been using the Google Earth live wallpaper and my battery life is still great.
    Morty2264 likes this.
    01-31-2017 12:03 PM
  13. Morty2264's Avatar
    I love live wallpapers! My G3 had a nice couple that I liked using. I did notice a drain - but I agree with the users stating that you should test this out to see how your specific battery is operating. My G3's battery was, in my opinion, corrupt or just not working up to par; so a lot of things would cause a drain on the device that would not make a dent in other devices' battery consumption, for example.

    Good luck!
    01-31-2017 01:50 PM
  14. Matty's Avatar
    I know any live wallpaper will use more battery than say a non live wallpaper, but has anyone noticed that the live wallpapers suck more battery life? I remember my pixel battery being amazing and now not so amazing. The only thing I can think of is I had changed to the live wallpaper and that is using more battery than before.

    Anyone ran any tests?
    As Tim1954 said, the short answer is yes.

    Live wallpapers definitely have the potential kill your battery quicker. There are 2 potential ways. The first is live wallpapers depend on your phone’s CPU and GPU for rendering purposes and that will consume battery. The live wallpapers also need to loop to create the effect of it constantly moving. It's similar to Windows Vista Ultimate where you could have a video playing as the background.

    So this will definitely use extra processing power. The second is, the live wallpaper may have a lot of bright white colours on it which means your display and battery need to work a little harder to display them. In my experience, I’ve never seen any reputed live wallpaper like 'Chrooma' or 'Minima' consuming more than 3% of battery.
    B. Diddy likes this.
    02-01-2017 02:03 AM
  15. popkurn611's Avatar
    As Tim1954 said, the short answer is yes.

    Live wallpapers definitely have the potential kill your battery quicker. There are 2 potential ways. The first is live wallpapers depend on your phone’s CPU and GPU for rendering purposes and that will consume battery. The live wallpapers also need to loop to create the effect of it constantly moving. It's similar to Windows Vista Ultimate where you could have a video playing as the background.

    So this will definitely use extra processing power. The second is, the live wallpaper may have a lot of bright white colours on it which means your display and battery need to work a little harder to display them. In my experience, I’ve never seen any reputed live wallpaper like 'Chrooma' or 'Minima' consuming more than 3% of battery.
    Thanks for this! I am going to stick to regular static wallpapers as I want to get the most efficient battery life.

    I actually just noticed that you can pick a category on the wallpapers and select daily wallpaper which changes it everyday. Nice little touch and keeps me excited!
    02-01-2017 06:10 AM
  16. Dylen Wolff's Avatar
    Come on it is an obvious YES.
    Rather than using a static wallpaper live wall papers would be more memory and CPU consuming, thus it'll obviously use up more battery.
    The impact on the battery however depends on the wallpaper itself. If it is nicely optimized then there should be problem.
    J Dubbs likes this.
    01-07-2019 07:22 PM

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 03:28 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 03:26 PM
  3. How to get rid of the "My apps" malware
    By LuiTheKang in forum Android Apps
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 04:15 AM
  4. Phone shutting off with plenty of battery left?
    By AC Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 01:39 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 01:23 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD