Skip to content

Samsung phones can survive twice as many charges as Pixel and iPhone, according to EU data

Technology
43 30 0
  • That’s strange, considering they all use the same battery suppliers.

    It's got to be a lie

  • This post did not contain any content.

    1,000 charge cycles: OnePlus 13

    Hmm. This one has newer silicone-carbon lithium-ion batteries, which should actually increase charge cycles, so what's happening here?

  • That’s strange, considering they all use the same battery suppliers.

    Samsung encourages battery provisioning in it by the user. So most people using a samsung only charge to eighty percent.

  • 1,000 charge cycles: OnePlus 13

    Hmm. This one has newer silicone-carbon lithium-ion batteries, which should actually increase charge cycles, so what's happening here?

    Isn't one plus one of the brands that has their own fast charging tech, that's extra fast?

    Makes total sense if they traded in longevity for speed.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Wow. This is excellent for Samsung users.

    I believe these are just claims rather than actual tests or measurements right?

  • This post did not contain any content.

    From @fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com on a post over at !android@lemdro.id

    Yeah this is just manufacturers self rating themselves. This is just like VW cars rating themselves as getting 5-10mpg better than their competitors, when really they were just measuring from the balls.

    The up side is if they fail to meet those ratings then are the consumers entitled to some sort of compensation?

    Btw, I love how Piefed shows comments from cross-posts. Every client should do it, helps make the fediverse feel bigger and more diverse.

  • Isn't one plus one of the brands that has their own fast charging tech, that's extra fast?

    Makes total sense if they traded in longevity for speed.

    Xiaomi has faast charge, and it (33watt) has worked both fast and reliable on my 4-5 year old note 9 pro phone. I just changed to a 13tp with 120 watt, let's see how that pans out 🔥😋

  • That’s strange, considering they all use the same battery suppliers.

    Anecdotally it seems to be the case for me. I switched from the A series to the Pixel and I'm pretty disappointed in how quickly my battery life has degraded.

  • Isn't one plus one of the brands that has their own fast charging tech, that's extra fast?

    Makes total sense if they traded in longevity for speed.

    Isn’t one plus one of the brands that has their own fast charging tech, that’s extra fast?

    Yes, but...

    OnePlus offloads heat to the charger, so the phone actually doesn't get hot while charging. This fact alone would IMPROVE charge cycles, even at fast speeds.

    But OnePlus also uses quite a few "tricks" to preserve battery health. Did the test include those features or did they turn them off. And if they turned them off, did they do the same with the Samsung phones (which have similar battery-health preserving options)?

    I've had my OP13 since the day it came out (around 5-6 months) and keep it charged to 80% (built-in feature) and only charge it to 100% when I'll be out for the day and need to use GPS with max screen brightness. Battery health is still 100%.

    I've owned a lot of Samsung phones before that, and the battery health was the only reason I've needed to replace them. So, I'm glad to see that the EU is taking charge cycles into account.

    One piece of the puzzle that the numbers don't mention, is that the smaller battery of the Samsung phones means you'll be charging more often (i.e. more charge cycles) vs. something like a OP13 with a larger battery and excellent battery life (i.e. fewer charge cycles for the same use). Maybe that balances things out, but I'm still shocked that Sammy can get 1000 more charge cycles, which is YEARS more battery health than the other brands.

    edit: clarity

  • Wow. This is excellent for Samsung users.

    I believe these are just claims rather than actual tests or measurements right?

    Apparently not

    the new labels is tested using the same software used by many tech reviewers: SmartViser. This French automation company works with labs and manufacturers to simulate real-world usage. So now, the battery performance you see on the label is based on consistent, lab-tested data, not just marketing claims.

    Source

  • From @fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com on a post over at !android@lemdro.id

    Yeah this is just manufacturers self rating themselves. This is just like VW cars rating themselves as getting 5-10mpg better than their competitors, when really they were just measuring from the balls.

    The up side is if they fail to meet those ratings then are the consumers entitled to some sort of compensation?

    Btw, I love how Piefed shows comments from cross-posts. Every client should do it, helps make the fediverse feel bigger and more diverse.

    This comment says otherwise:

    How is battery life measured under this new EU regulation?

    One interesting detail is that the battery endurance rating in the new labels is tested using the same software used by many tech reviewers: SmartViser. This French automation company works with labs and manufacturers to simulate real-world usage. So now, the battery performance you see on the label is based on consistent, lab-tested data, not just marketing claims.

  • That’s strange, considering they all use the same battery suppliers.

    Could be a difference in how they've set up charging cut off points.

  • Isn’t one plus one of the brands that has their own fast charging tech, that’s extra fast?

    Yes, but...

    OnePlus offloads heat to the charger, so the phone actually doesn't get hot while charging. This fact alone would IMPROVE charge cycles, even at fast speeds.

    But OnePlus also uses quite a few "tricks" to preserve battery health. Did the test include those features or did they turn them off. And if they turned them off, did they do the same with the Samsung phones (which have similar battery-health preserving options)?

    I've had my OP13 since the day it came out (around 5-6 months) and keep it charged to 80% (built-in feature) and only charge it to 100% when I'll be out for the day and need to use GPS with max screen brightness. Battery health is still 100%.

    I've owned a lot of Samsung phones before that, and the battery health was the only reason I've needed to replace them. So, I'm glad to see that the EU is taking charge cycles into account.

    One piece of the puzzle that the numbers don't mention, is that the smaller battery of the Samsung phones means you'll be charging more often (i.e. more charge cycles) vs. something like a OP13 with a larger battery and excellent battery life (i.e. fewer charge cycles for the same use). Maybe that balances things out, but I'm still shocked that Sammy can get 1000 more charge cycles, which is YEARS more battery health than the other brands.

    edit: clarity

    OnePlus offloads heat to the charger

    Some of it. They omit some circuitry that would have generated additional heat in the phone, and have it in the charger instead, but that doesn't magically mean the battery itself wont generate the inevitable heat caused by being charged faster. The battery itself only accepts one voltage, so the only way to charge it faster is amps.

    And my feeling is that they aren't using the gains from this to make the batteries last, as SUPERVOOC is faster than pretty much every other standard. That makes me think they turned in any and all gains in battery health, for speed.

    Most chargers send the additional energy via the cable in the form of extra voltage, because that doesn't require a special cable. Turning that voltage into amps in the phone produces a little bit of extra heat, but that doesn't mean that by eliminating that step, you get none from the battery itself as it charges. You can technically charge with a higher voltage, if you set up a phone such that it has more than one lithium cell. Some phones do this, but this doesn't require the OnePlus approach of using a special charger that provides a higher current, since any fast charger that can do the usual higher voltage method of providing extra power will work.

    Like you say. I'm curious how they test this. Even if one battery gets more cycles, it'll degrade with time, as well. iPhones fast charge, too, but not with the chargers that used to come with the phones. You have to get one specifically for fast charging to get faster-than-normal charging.

    Also, a tip. You may want to use something like AccuBattery to actually measure the state of the battery. Batteries, being chemical devices, have different capacities straight off the production line simply by virtue of not being chemically identically down to every molecule. (My Xperia 1 V unfortunately came with 93% design capacity, still within manufacturing tolerance, but the lowest I've seen on a new battery, it can be a bit of a lottery)

    The built-in battery health monitor will just say "all good" until it isn't. AccuBattery has allowed me to monitor every percentage of degradation over the lives of my last few phones.

  • From @fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com on a post over at !android@lemdro.id

    Yeah this is just manufacturers self rating themselves. This is just like VW cars rating themselves as getting 5-10mpg better than their competitors, when really they were just measuring from the balls.

    The up side is if they fail to meet those ratings then are the consumers entitled to some sort of compensation?

    Btw, I love how Piefed shows comments from cross-posts. Every client should do it, helps make the fediverse feel bigger and more diverse.

    It's also wrong. That comment is misinformation.

    They are lab tested by a 3rd party in the EU, SmartViser.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    So if you charge nightly, basically like 3 years for a pixel? That's not really terrible, especially if using the a-series which is a decent value.

  • So if you charge nightly, basically like 3 years for a pixel? That's not really terrible, especially if using the a-series which is a decent value.

    I'd prefer my phone to last longer than that for the price I paid (oh, wait. It's a Samsung, and it's already lived longer than that, lol)

  • OnePlus offloads heat to the charger

    Some of it. They omit some circuitry that would have generated additional heat in the phone, and have it in the charger instead, but that doesn't magically mean the battery itself wont generate the inevitable heat caused by being charged faster. The battery itself only accepts one voltage, so the only way to charge it faster is amps.

    And my feeling is that they aren't using the gains from this to make the batteries last, as SUPERVOOC is faster than pretty much every other standard. That makes me think they turned in any and all gains in battery health, for speed.

    Most chargers send the additional energy via the cable in the form of extra voltage, because that doesn't require a special cable. Turning that voltage into amps in the phone produces a little bit of extra heat, but that doesn't mean that by eliminating that step, you get none from the battery itself as it charges. You can technically charge with a higher voltage, if you set up a phone such that it has more than one lithium cell. Some phones do this, but this doesn't require the OnePlus approach of using a special charger that provides a higher current, since any fast charger that can do the usual higher voltage method of providing extra power will work.

    Like you say. I'm curious how they test this. Even if one battery gets more cycles, it'll degrade with time, as well. iPhones fast charge, too, but not with the chargers that used to come with the phones. You have to get one specifically for fast charging to get faster-than-normal charging.

    Also, a tip. You may want to use something like AccuBattery to actually measure the state of the battery. Batteries, being chemical devices, have different capacities straight off the production line simply by virtue of not being chemically identically down to every molecule. (My Xperia 1 V unfortunately came with 93% design capacity, still within manufacturing tolerance, but the lowest I've seen on a new battery, it can be a bit of a lottery)

    The built-in battery health monitor will just say "all good" until it isn't. AccuBattery has allowed me to monitor every percentage of degradation over the lives of my last few phones.

    And my feeling is that they aren’t using the gains from this to make the batteries last, as SUPERVOOC is faster than pretty much every other standard. That makes me think they turned in any and all gains in battery health, for speed.

    There is a setting to explicitly benefit from using an official charger and cable, but I don't know if it's on by default (it's disabled on my phone).

    That said, the heat while charging is about the same as the heat from holding the phone in my hand (around 38C), and doesn't get much hotter than that while gaming thanks to pass-through charging.

    My Samsung was definitely hotter, and would overheat if charging while doing anything like GPS navigation. But my last Samsung was a Note 10+, and so things may have very well changed since then.

    You may want to use something like AccuBattery

    Already do, and have for years.

    But AccuBattery doesn't seem to play nice with the OP13, with many users reporting lower battery health from the start (80-90%), and inaccurate capacity (<1000 mAh less than the designed capacity).

    Coupled with the fact that it's only accurate if you are constantly charging from below 15% to 100%, these are ranges that I rarely get my phone into.

    Even though battery longevity is important to me, since I no longer replace my phones "every year", it really would be best if these damn things had user-replaceable batteries that were readily available. 😫

  • So if you charge nightly, basically like 3 years for a pixel? That's not really terrible, especially if using the a-series which is a decent value.

    I'd like my phone to last 5 years minimum.

    That seems to be the new standard for continued software support too.
    If the phone only lasts for half of that, what's the point?

    Replacing the battery on a 9a is a invasive 64-step process(ifixit guide). The kit they sell is surprisingly cheap at $40, but has a list of other tools you need. Its definitely not a project most people will undertake.

  • So if you charge nightly, basically like 3 years for a pixel? That's not really terrible, especially if using the a-series which is a decent value.

    you’re also assuming 0-100% charge every night which most people won’t do. so very likely much more than 3 years.

  • I'd like my phone to last 5 years minimum.

    That seems to be the new standard for continued software support too.
    If the phone only lasts for half of that, what's the point?

    Replacing the battery on a 9a is a invasive 64-step process(ifixit guide). The kit they sell is surprisingly cheap at $40, but has a list of other tools you need. Its definitely not a project most people will undertake.

    the person above is also assuming 0-100% charge every day. most people won’t go through a whole battery charge every day, at least for the first couple years.

  • 144 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    26 Aufrufe
    B
    I know there decent alternatives to SalesForce, but I’m not sure what you’d replace Slack with. Teams is far worse in every conceivable way and I’m not sure if there’s anything else out there that isn’t already speeding down the enshittification highway.
  • Matrix is cooked

    Technology technology
    29
    1
    153 Stimmen
    29 Beiträge
    28 Aufrufe
    jadedblueeyes@programming.devJ
    The Matrix Foundation and Element/New Vector are different orgs, and it's Element with the government contracts
  • 328 Stimmen
    24 Beiträge
    26 Aufrufe
    M
    Good. Anyone who uses shit like this deserves all of the bad things that go along with it. Stupidity will continue to be punished.
  • (azazoaoz)

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 429 Stimmen
    102 Beiträge
    36 Aufrufe
    D
    That is bullshit, the economy is created to force you into the labor market. This is just a symptom of capitalism.
  • Why doesn't Nvidia have more competition?

    Technology technology
    22
    1
    33 Stimmen
    22 Beiträge
    30 Aufrufe
    B
    It’s funny how the article asks the question, but completely fails to answer it. About 15 years ago, Nvidia discovered there was a demand for compute in datacenters that could be met with powerful GPU’s, and they were quick to respond to it, and they had the resources to focus on it strongly, because of their huge success and high profitability in the GPU market. AMD also saw the market, and wanted to pursue it, but just over a decade ago where it began to clearly show the high potential for profitability, AMD was near bankrupt, and was very hard pressed to finance developments on GPU and compute in datacenters. AMD really tried the best they could, and was moderately successful from a technology perspective, but Nvidia already had a head start, and the proprietary development system CUDA was already an established standard that was very hard to penetrate. Intel simply fumbled the ball from start to finish. After a decade of trying to push ARM down from having the mobile crown by far, investing billions or actually the equivalent of ARM’s total revenue. They never managed to catch up to ARM despite they had the better production process at the time. This was the main focus of Intel, and Intel believed that GPU would never be more than a niche product. So when intel tried to compete on compute for datacenters, they tried to do it with X86 chips, One of their most bold efforts was to build a monstrosity of a cluster of Celeron chips, which of course performed laughably bad compared to Nvidia! Because as it turns out, the way forward at least for now, is indeed the massively parralel compute capability of a GPU, which Nvidia has refined for decades, only with (inferior) competition from AMD. But despite the lack of competition, Nvidia did not slow down, in fact with increased profits, they only grew bolder in their efforts. Making it even harder to catch up. Now AMD has had more money to compete for a while, and they do have some decent compute units, but Nvidia remains ahead and the CUDA problem is still there, so for AMD to really compete with Nvidia, they have to be better to attract customers. That’s a very tall order against Nvidia that simply seems to never stop progressing. So the only other option for AMD is to sell a bit cheaper. Which I suppose they have to. AMD and Intel were the obvious competitors, everybody else is coming from even further behind. But if I had to make a bet, it would be on Huawei. Huawei has some crazy good developers, and Trump is basically forcing them to figure it out themselves, because he is blocking Huawei and China in general from using both AMD and Nvidia AI chips. And the chips will probably be made by Chinese SMIC, because they are also prevented from using advanced production in the west, most notably TSMC. China will prevail, because it’s become a national project, of both prestige and necessity, and they have a massive talent mass and resources, so nothing can stop it now. IMO USA would clearly have been better off allowing China to use American chips. Now China will soon compete directly on both production and design too.
  • AI cheating surge pushes schools into chaos

    Technology technology
    25
    45 Stimmen
    25 Beiträge
    38 Aufrufe
    C
    Sorry for the late reply, I had to sit and think on this one for a little bit. I think there are would be a few things going on when it comes to designing a course to teach critical thinking, nuances, and originality; and they each have their own requirements. For critical thinking: The main goal is to provide students with a toolbelt for solving various problems. Then instilling the habit of always asking "does this match the expected outcome? What was I expecting?". So usually courses will be setup so students learn about a tool, practice using the tool, then have a culminating assignment on using all the tools. Ideally, the problems students face at the end require multiple tools to solve. Nuance mainly naturally comes with exposure to the material from a professional - The way a mechanical engineer may describe building a desk will probably differ greatly compared to a fantasy author. You can also explain definitions and industry standards; but thats really dry. So I try to teach nuances via definitions by mixing in the weird nuances as much as possible with jokes. Then for originality; I've realized I dont actually look for an original idea; but something creative. In a classroom setting, you're usually learning new things about a subject so a student's knowledge of that space is usually very limited. Thus, an idea that they've never heard about may be original to them, but common for an industry expert. For teaching originality creativity, I usually provide time to be creative & think, and provide open ended questions as prompts to explore ideas. My courses that require originality usually have it as a part of the culminating assignment at the end where they can apply their knowledge. I'll also add in time where students can come to me with preliminary ideas and I can provide feedback on whether or not it passes the creative threshold. Not all ideas are original, but I sometimes give a bit of slack if its creative enough. The amount of course overhauling to get around AI really depends on the material being taught. For example, in programming - you teach critical thinking by always testing your code, even with parameters that don't make sense. For example: Try to add 123 + "skibbidy", and see what the program does.
  • 116 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    S
    Common Noyb W