We analyzed 407 verified user reviews for the Motorola Moto G04s to understand how it performs in the real world. Our method is direct. We read through feedback from actual owners to see what they say about the most important parts of the phone.
We call these ‘aspects.’ For this model, we tracked user sentiment for its performance, camera, battery, screen, software, design, and overall value for money. By tallying the positive, neutral, and negative comments, we generate a final percentage score that shows what people truly think.
💰 Value for Money: Basic Done, Upgrade Regret
The Motorola Moto G04s presents a complicated picture when it comes to value for money. While its low price point is a powerful draw for budget-conscious buyers, a deeper look at user sentiment reveals significant reservations about what you’re actually getting for your cash.
Overall Affordability
On the positive side, the phone delivers on the fundamental promise of affordability. With an 80% positive score for overall satisfaction relative to cost, many users feel they received a fair deal.
This sentiment is especially strong among those seeking a no-frills device for basic tasks. As one user simply puts it:
This phone is great, has everything she needs and didn’t cost a fortune.
Another echoes this, highlighting it’s “ideal for the not tech savvy users who want a decent communication device.” For these buyers, the phone successfully occupies the “cheap and cheerful” niche, providing essential functions without breaking the bank.
A Disappointing Upgrade
However, the story sours significantly when considering the phone as an upgrade. The Upgrade Justification for choosing this model over a previous one receives a meager 51% positive rating, falling a substantial 8 points below the category average.
This data point reflects a palpable sense of disappointment among users who expected more. One owner captured this feeling perfectly:
I purchased this phone to replace my smashed 2017 HTC. If you have had great phones before, then don’t buy this one. It’s a really basic simple model – save your money and buy a better model.
This frustration is compounded by missing features, with many users shocked to discover the lack of NFC for contactless payments. As one explained:
So upsetting to find out no NFC on this phone… phone is half useless in this day and age.
Competitive Context
This feeling of a missed opportunity is starkly illuminated when comparing the Moto G04s to its own predecessor and a key rival. The previous model, the Motorola Moto G05, scored a remarkable 72% for upgrade justification, a full 21 points higher than this newer phone, suggesting the G04s is perceived as a step backward in value.
Furthermore, the competing Samsung Galaxy A05 scores 13 points higher (64%) on the same measure, indicating that customers feel Samsung offers a more compelling reason to upgrade at a similar price point. One user’s regret highlights this competitive weakness:
I should have spent a little more and gotten a slightly better phone.
Trade-Off: The Motorola Moto G04s provides acceptable performance for its basic price, but it’s a poor value proposition for users seeking a meaningful upgrade, who will find more compelling features and a greater sense of improvement in competing devices.
📸 Camera: Quality Image, Poor Features
The camera performance on the Motorola Moto G04s tells a story of stark contrast, splitting user opinion between pleasant surprise and outright frustration. While the main score sits below average, the real narrative is found in the tug-of-war between the quality of the photos it takes and the software it provides to take them.
Surprising Image Quality
For many users, the fundamental image and video quality is a surprising highlight. Despite being a budget device, it achieves a 66% positive sentiment score on this factor, punching above expectations. This means that for basic, everyday snapshots, the results are often quite pleasing.
Owners feel it delivers where it counts, with one user noting:
The camera is excellent for anyone who does not require professional quality, but likes quality photos.
Others were even more impressed, stating:
photos are tremendous, even RED flowers, which my regular digital cameras have never, ever managed without colour bleed!!
For those simply looking to capture a moment, the phone delivers clear and vibrant images that feel like a win for the price.
Frustrating Lack of Features
However, this positive experience is severely undermined by a glaring weakness: its camera features and modes. With a positive score of just 31%, this factor falls a staggering 30 points below the category average of 61%.
This isn’t just about missing creative filters; it’s about a lack of basic, expected functionality that creates deep frustration. The problems range from operational slowness, “sometimes it’s slow to take the picture,” to the complete absence of modern essentials. As one user bluntly put it:
The camera is very bad, and it has not many functions… among other things, it cannot scan QR codes,
…a failing that makes a modern smartphone feel dated and impractical.
Competitive Context
This baffling omission of features becomes even more stark in a competitive context. While the Moto G04s produces slightly better-rated images than its direct rival, the Samsung Galaxy A05 (66% vs. 53% positive), it gets demolished on features, where the Samsung boasts a 67% positive score.
Perhaps more troubling is the comparison to its predecessor, the Moto G05, which scored a robust 75% for its features. This massive 44-point drop makes the G04s feel like a significant downgrade, leaving potential buyers with a difficult choice: accept the Moto’s slightly better base photos or opt for a competitor with a vastly more capable and modern camera experience.
Trade-Off: The Motorola Moto G04s offers surprisingly capable photo quality for its class, but this is severely undermined by a frustratingly slow and feature-poor software experience that feels like a significant step backward.
📺 Screen: Big Screen, Big Problems
When it comes to the screen, the Motorola Moto G04s presents a story of stark contradictions. Users are drawn to its most obvious feature—its size—but often find themselves let down by the very experience of interacting with it.
Size and Handling
The most celebrated aspect of the display is undoubtedly its generous size and comfortable handling, earning an impressive 91% positive score, a full 9 points above the category average.
This isn’t just a technical specification; it translates directly into a more immersive and enjoyable user experience. People love how the expansive canvas makes everyday activities better, with one user enthusiastically stating:
The large screen is perfect for watching videos and playing games!
Another echoes this sentiment, noting:
it has a great screen size to watch YouTube videos, and even scroll through any type of social media.
For media consumption and casual browsing, the size is a clear win.
Touchscreen Responsiveness
However, this positive experience is severely undermined by the phone’s most significant failing: its touchscreen responsiveness. This factor scores a dismal 25% in positive sentiment, lagging a stark 18 points behind the category average.
This deficit is a constant source of frustration, turning simple interactions into a chore. Users describe it as being of poor quality, with one owner so fed up after three months they decided to throw in the towel and buy a different phone.
The practical impact is clear, as another user explains that sending texts quickly is complicated due to the lack of screen sensitivity. This lag and unreliability make the large, inviting screen a pain to actually use.
Display Quality and Vibrancy
In the competitive landscape, the screen’s quality and vibrancy sit in a confusing middle ground. With a 68% positive rating for display quality, it handily beats its direct competitor, the Samsung Galaxy A05, which scored a low 43%.
Yet, this score represents a significant step down from the 80% satisfaction of its predecessor, the Moto G05, and falls 15 points short of the 83% category average. This gap explains why some users are still left wanting more. One reviewer felt:
Disappointed in the graphics/wallpapers. The colors are very pale compared to my old Samsung A20 which were bright.
Another lamented that “the image has a yellowish tone… it seems they put in a 5th-rate display,” a feeling that while the screen is functional, it lacks the vividness and quality found elsewhere, even in older or similarly priced models.
Trade-Off: Users get a generously sized screen that enhances media viewing but must accept significant compromises in touchscreen responsiveness and color vibrancy that can frustrate daily use.
✨ Design: Beauty vs. Function
When it comes to the design of the Motorola Moto G04s, users tell a story of stark contrasts. While its aesthetics and surprising durability earn high praise, deep frustrations with missing features and questionable design choices create a complex picture.
Build Quality and Materials
The most celebrated element is the phone’s exceptional build quality, which scores an 82% positive rating, a full 6 points above the category average. For users, this translates into real-world peace of mind and durability that defies its price point.
One owner was left stunned by its resilience after a serious accident:
I was on the third-floor staircase and dropped my phone to the floor below… it landed on its screen side and is still functional and without any cracks! I don’t think there is a more resistant phone!
This sense of surprising toughness is complemented by its looks, with an 89% positive score for aesthetics, inspiring comments like this one:
I fell in love with the colour of this one! It’s a thing of beauty in the greeny/teal colour. Just a gorgeous-looking phone.
Design and Feature Omissions
However, this satisfaction is sharply undercut by significant issues with its design features, which received a shockingly low 16% positive rating—a staggering 24 points below the category average of 40%. The most glaring omission for many is the lack of NFC for contactless payments, a feature many now consider standard.
This leaves users feeling left behind, as one put it:
I can’t pay for any purchase by phone. We live in the 21st century and it’s very old-fashioned.
This major functional gap is compounded by smaller, daily annoyances, like a power button that is difficult to press as it is level with the phone’s surface and a fingerprint sensor that some find uncomfortable.
Market Comparison
This internal conflict is mirrored in its market standing. The Moto G04s’s robust build quality (82% positive) marks a massive improvement over its predecessor, the Moto G05 (56%), explaining why users are so pleasantly surprised by its durability.
Yet, when placed against its direct competitor, the Samsung Galaxy A05, its weaknesses are thrown into sharp relief. While the Moto is tougher than the Samsung (82% vs. 64%), the Galaxy A05 boasts a perfect 100% score for aesthetics and a significantly better 86% for size and handling, compared to the Moto’s 89% and 64% respectively.
This presents a critical decision for buyers: opt for the Moto’s proven toughness or the Samsung’s superior look and feel, especially when the Moto omits a key feature like NFC.
Trade-Off: Buyers are getting a surprisingly durable and resilient phone for the price, but they must accept the sacrifice of modern conveniences like contactless payments and thoughtful button placement.
🐌 Performance: Basic But Laggy
When it comes to the performance of the Motorola Moto G04s, user experiences paint a starkly divided picture between basic functionality and profound frustration. While the phone technically manages day-to-day operations, its significant struggles with speed and multitasking create a challenging user experience.
For those with minimal demands, the phone’s processing power and speed, which garners a 46% positive sentiment, is just enough to get by. As one user noted, it is:
Useful for everyday use, for people who don’t play games and use the phone in a much more moderate way.
For these individuals, the core functions work, and the phone serves its most basic purpose without major incident.
Challenging User Experience
However, this thin veneer of usability quickly peels away for anyone who expects modern smartphone responsiveness. The phone’s multitasking capability is its true Achilles’ heel, with a positive sentiment score of just 40%—less than half the category average of 83%.
This isn’t just a number; it translates into daily, tangible frustration. Users report that the device is:
so slow—and has been from the start—that it can drive you mad.
The lag impacts even the simplest of actions, with one owner explaining:
Even simple things become a chore; for example, when you want to set an alarm, you have to wait an average of 10 seconds just for the keyboard to appear.
Another user was blunter:
If you open two applications together, it’s a total disaster. It crashes and throws you out.
A Glaring Performance Deficit
The performance deficit becomes even more glaring when placed in context. Its direct competitor, the Samsung Galaxy A05, is rated 15 points higher for processing power (61% vs. 46%).
More damningly, the phone represents a significant step down from its predecessor, the Motorola Moto G05, which boasts a massive 87% positive rating for the same factor. This sharp decline in performance leaves users feeling short-changed and disappointed, with one buyer concluding:
Would be a great phone if it wasn’t paired with such a terrible CPU.
For those expecting even a modest level of performance, the reality is a device that constantly tests their patience.
Dealbreaker: The phone’s pervasive slowness and inability to handle even light multitasking make it a frustrating choice for anyone but the most basic, single-task-oriented user.
🤖 Software & OS: Smooth UI, Unstable Core
When it comes to the Software & Operating System on the Motorola Moto G04s, users describe a sharply divided experience. While they celebrate the phone’s intuitive interface, their praise is often tempered by significant frustrations with underlying instability.
User Experience and UI Smoothness
The highlight of the software is undoubtedly its user experience and UI smoothness, which earns an impressive 84% positive score, a full 10 points above the category average. Users frequently describe the interface as clean, logical, and refreshingly free of the unwanted applications that litter other devices. This translates into a feeling of effortless control and satisfaction.
One user, a long-time Motorola fan, noted:
as always the clean and bloatware-free operating system is far superior to other brands.
Another was so pleased with the out-of-the-box experience that they said:
I was so impressed with the ease and functionality that I decided I would buy my wife one also.
For many, the phone just works the way it should, with one person simply stating:
the whole system is seamless.
Software Stability Issues
However, this smooth facade is cracked by major software stability issues. This factor scores a dismal 18% in positive sentiment, lagging 9 points behind the category average of 27%. Users report a litany of problems that disrupt the daily experience, turning a smooth interface into a source of frustration.
The issues range from annoying glitches to critical failures, with users reporting the phone:
keeps freezing, shutting down, and is very slow when it is working.
Some problems are so severe they require drastic measures; one user shared their exasperation:
I had to factory reset it more than four times to solve it… these things should not happen.
Another owner bluntly stated that after just a few months, the device began to:
freeze an incredible amount.
Competitive Context
This mixed performance becomes clearer when placed in context. Compared to its predecessor, the Moto G05, this new model is a significant step forward in usability, jumping from a 69% to 84% positive score for UI smoothness. Yet, it’s a step backward in reliability, with its stability score of 18% falling well short of the G05’s 27%.
Against its direct competitor, the Samsung Galaxy A05, the Moto G04s offers a noticeably smoother user experience (84% vs. 77%). More dramatically, despite its own stability flaws, the Moto G04s is substantially more reliable than the Galaxy A05, which has a catastrophically low 4% positive rating for software stability, making the Motorola the lesser of two evils for buyers prioritizing a bug-free experience.
Trade-Off: Users gain a beautifully clean and intuitive Android interface at the significant cost of enduring frustrating and frequent software instability.
🔋 Battery: Lasts Forever, Charges Never
When it comes to the Motorola Moto G04s and its battery, users tell a story of two extremes. The phone’s endurance is a celebrated highlight, driven by an exceptional battery life score of 81%, comfortably surpassing the 74% category average. This isn’t just a number on a spreadsheet; for users, it translates into a tangible sense of freedom and reliability.
Many report easily getting through multiple days on a single charge. As one owner described, “Battery power easily means I can go two days before charging,” while another was thrilled that the “Battery is lasting two to three days even when used a lot on a recent holiday.” This long-lasting power provides peace of mind, eliminating the daily anxiety of finding a charger.
Frustrating Charging Experience
However, this impressive stamina is severely undermined by the frustrating experience of actually replenishing the battery. The phone’s charging capabilities are a significant source of user dissatisfaction, especially concerning its charging methods, which scored an abysmal 9% in positive sentiment—a startling 23 points below the category average. This is compounded by a sluggish charging speed, scoring only 33% positive against a category average of 69%.
Users are not just disappointed; they feel actively inconvenienced. The frustration begins right out of the box, with many noting the phone “Doesn’t come with the plug for the charger just the cable,” while others found themselves in a bind: “I had to order a USB-C to USB 2.0 cable so I could charge the phone.” For some, the problem goes beyond missing accessories to outright failure, with one user reporting that after nine months, the phone “won’t charge up at all,” making the excellent battery life moot.
Context and Competition
The context of its predecessor, the Moto G05, makes these charging woes even more pronounced. While the Moto G04s offers a slight improvement in raw battery life over the G05 (81% vs. 74%), it represents a significant regression in user convenience. The predecessor had a far more acceptable 43% positive score for charging methods and a 57% for charging speed.
This step backward means that loyal Motorola users expecting an upgrade are instead met with a slower, more difficult charging process. Compared to its direct competitor, the Samsung Galaxy A05, the trade-off is stark. The G04s may last longer (81% positive battery life vs. the A05’s 69%), but it gets demolished in the race to recharge, with the Samsung boasting a 71% positive rating for charging speed. This leaves potential buyers with a clear, if difficult, choice: a phone that lasts longer between charges, or one that gets you back in the game much faster when it runs low.
Trade-Off: Users get the freedom of exceptional multi-day battery life at the cost of a slow, frustrating, and sometimes unreliable charging experience that feels like a step backward from previous models.
Bottom Line
- ✅ Exceptional multi-day battery life: A celebrated highlight with an 81% positive score, users report easily going two-to-three days between charges.
- ⚠️ Crippling performance and instability: The phone’s biggest failure is its speed, with users citing frequent freezes, crashes, and a dismal 18% positive score for software stability.
- 🔻 A frustrating upgrade experience: Users feel it’s a step back, with the omission of modern features like NFC contributing to a shockingly low 16% score for design features.
- 📉 A huge regression from its predecessor: Its performance score of 46% represents a massive 41-point drop from the previous Moto G05 model (87%).
- 🏁 Outmatched by rivals: It is significantly outpaced by the competing Samsung Galaxy A05, which scores 15 points higher for performance (61% vs. 46%).
- 💡 Bottom Line: Only suitable for the most basic, single-task users who prioritize battery life above all else and can tolerate severe performance issues and missing modern features.