Skip to content

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

Technology
49 34 0
  • 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.

  • 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.

    When you do the initial setup it asks if you'd like to optimize for battery health and most people say yes. Most recently it wouldn't even tell you that it was only charging to 80%.It would still charge to a hundred but that would actually be eighty percent. Around a year ago they changed it so now it says eighty percent when you're at full charge if you have the battery health turned on.

    If you turn on the battery over provisioning you would see the same battery life at about a year and a half and then after that the provision battery will last longer. After the exploding phone they also provisioned five percent of all batteries.

  • 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.

    Awesome! Good to know its based off some kind of standardized testing. This is good for everyone!

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

    I'm one of the outliers in that I do 80 to ~10 before the day is over, then I'll charge and keep going, or I keep it topped up on the wireless charger throughout the day. But overall I'm charging at least a full cycle daily. I use my phone heavily. 1.5y in and I started using the 80% cutoff for lifespan, but I haven't noticed a decline, it's preventative and not reactive.

    Family member has my previous phone, 2.5y old, and has not complained to me about the battery. When it was in my possession it was the same use case/scenario. Their use case is lighter duty, but they leave the screen on for like 10 minutes after idle, never turning it off manually. Pain.

    My previous previous phone was given to a sibling, 3.5y old, again when it was mine it got the same heavy use. They use a battery bank some days, but they can be an even heavier user than I am sometimes - discord voice and video chatting, games, even doing one while also on a desktop. 100 to 20 or less most days, I often see it in the evening in battery saving mode around 10% when they are reaching for the bank. But that's still with a few hours SoT and heavy use with socializing and games and stuff.

    All 3 are pixel pros, 8/7/6. shrug

  • 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.

    Is piefed an instance?

  • Is piefed an instance?

    Piefed is both an instance (piefed.social) and back-end server software that allows anyone to run their own instance (list of various Piefed instances). It works on the same ActivityPub protocol as Lemmy and Kbin/Mbin so they all interoperate with each other.

    One of the cool things I like about Piefed is it seems to join the comments of various instances in cross-posts. On Lemmy, you can see its crossposted, but you have to manually check them out to see any comments on others. One cool feature I like over Lemmy. There's a few others, but I'd encourage you to check it out. You don't have to commit if you don't like it.

  • 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.

    It's all up to where you live and how you use the phone.

    One day heavy usage is the goal. I charge my S24 to 80% but only lightly call, and moderate chatting. I can make it from 6am to 8pm and still have well over 25% when I get home. Little to no gaming or social networks though.

    It helps that I live and work in an urban area with good antenna coverage. So the phone doesn't use too much power talking to the network. People who live out in suburbs and rural areas have worse phone battery life because the phone has to struggle talking with antennas further away. Battery life is complex and it goes beyond what personal anecdotes can show.

  • 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

    the actual legislation is not that specific as far as i can tell:

    Article 5

    Measurement methods

    The information to be provided pursuant to Articles 3 and 4 shall be obtained by reliable, accurate and reproducible measurement and calculation methods, which take into account the recognised state-of-the-art measurement and calculation methods, as set out in Annex IV.

    Article 6

    Verification procedure for market surveillance purposes

    Member States shall apply the verification procedure laid down in Annex IX when performing the market surveillance checks referred to in Article 8(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1369.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I'm at 943 cycles on my Pixel 6 Pro and it's still going strong. I slow charge it every night and try to avoid fully draining the battery to slow down the deterioration, which seems to have worked pretty well. Thankfully a battery replacement is only $50 so it won't cost much when I do have to replace it.

  • I'm at 943 cycles on my Pixel 6 Pro and it's still going strong. I slow charge it every night and try to avoid fully draining the battery to slow down the deterioration, which seems to have worked pretty well. Thankfully a battery replacement is only $50 so it won't cost much when I do have to replace it.

    I had the same phone, and the only reason I replaced it was because the USB C port was finicky. It must have been damaged at some point and when plugged in, the cable had to be just right. Wireless charging works great, but I wanted the stability of being able to plug in and know it would discharge over night when I didn't have a wireless charger. Otherwise, I had no issues with the battery, and I got the phone when it was pretty new to the market. I swapped it out just a few months back, and it's going to be my test phone for grapheneOS and may end up being a communal remote.

  • 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.

    the actual legislation is not that specific as far as i can tell:

    Article 5

    Measurement methods

    The information to be provided pursuant to Articles 3 and 4 shall be obtained by reliable, accurate and reproducible measurement and calculation methods, which take into account the recognised state-of-the-art measurement and calculation methods, as set out in Annex IV.

    Article 6

    Verification procedure for market surveillance purposes

    Member States shall apply the verification procedure laid down in Annex IX when performing the market surveillance checks referred to in Article 8(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1369.

  • Where can you see charge cycles?

  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 27 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    A
    it's only meant for temporary situations, 10 total days per year. I guess the idea is you'd use loaner PCs to access this while getting repairs done or before you've gotten a new PC. but yeah i kinda doubt there's a huge market for this kind of service.
  • the illusion of human thinking

    Technology technology
    2
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    H
    Can we get more than just a picture of an Abstract?
  • Building a slow web

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    175 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    30 Aufrufe
    I
    Realistically, you don't need security, NAT alone is enough since the packets have nowhere to go without port forwarding. But IF you really want to build front end security here is my plan. ISP bridge -> WAN port of openwrt capable router with DSA supported switch (that is almost all of them) Set all ports of the switch to VLAN mirroring mode bridge WAN and LAN sides Fail2Ban IP block list in the bridge LAN PORT 1 toward -> OpenWRT running inside Proxmox LXC (NAT lives here) -> top of rack switch LAN PORT 2 toward -> Snort IDS LAN PORT 3 toward -> combined honeypot and traffic analyzer Port 2&3 detect malicious internet hosts and add them to the block list (and then multiple other openwrt LXCs running many many VPN ports as alternative gateways, I switch LAN host's internet address by changing their default gateway) I run no internal VLAN, all one LAN because convenience is more important than security in my case.
  • 153 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    J
    Agreed - the end of the article does state compiling untrusted repos is effectively the same as running an untrusted executable, and you should treat it with the same caution (especially if its malware or gaming cheat adjacent)
  • 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.
  • 36 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    C
    Definitely don't want to be painting my face every day
  • 68 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    17 Aufrufe
    heythisisnttheymca@lemmy.worldH
    Worked with the US federal government for much of my professional career, mostly in an adversarial role. "reliable federal data sources" do not exist