Skip to content

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

Technology
48 34 0
  • 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.

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

    How so?
    With heavy usage all my Samsung phones barely made it through a full day. I've never considered throttling the battery for the sake of longevity or been encouraged to by my phones.

  • Most Common PIN Codes

    Technology technology
    50
    1
    181 Stimmen
    50 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    E
    Came here for this comment. Did not disappoint!
  • 816 Stimmen
    199 Beiträge
    200 Aufrufe
    Z
    It's clear you don't really understand the wider context and how historically hard these tasks have been. I've been doing this for a decade and the fact that these foundational models can be pretrained on unrelated things then jump that generalization gap so easily (within reason) is amazing. You just see the end result of corporate uses in the news, but this technology is used in every aspect of science and life in general (source: I do this for many important applications).
  • 332 Stimmen
    35 Beiträge
    38 Aufrufe
    R
    We have batteries. But yeah, attacking the grid might be smart.
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    44 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • 77 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    U
    I don't see Yarvin on here... this needs expansion.
  • Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet

    Technology technology
    19
    146 Stimmen
    19 Beiträge
    27 Aufrufe
    fizz@lemmy.nzF
    This is going to be my goto example of why people need to care about data privacy. This is fucking insane. I'd fire someone for even throwing that out as a suggestion.
  • YouTube tops Disney and Netflix in TV viewing

    Technology technology
    96
    1
    215 Stimmen
    96 Beiträge
    64 Aufrufe
    C
    "Not Interested" is just free data for them to fill out your account's advertising profile.
  • 56 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zoneC
    !upliftingnews@lemmy.world