Read more.Quote:
Or from zero to a full charge in an impressive 15 minutes.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Or from zero to a full charge in an impressive 15 minutes.
A lot of energy in a short time, devices will be hot, hope battery will survive at least a year.
In all seriousness, if the phones had bigger batteries that would last longer, the need for rapid charging wouldn't be as bad. And I feel like this level of rapid charging is going to affect the battery wear really badly...
I agree but how would all these 'trendy' people get their phones in their pockets, they're already struggling due to the fashion of having tight fitting trousers..... the amount of (primarily) women I've seen with a huge ass mobile sticking out of their rear pocket is stupidly high, and it's not all down to small front pockets, although a smaller phone option likely wouldn't hurt.Quote:
Originally Posted by huggi
Battery life is measured in cycles and most companies only warranty for a year anyhoo....Quote:
Originally Posted by rave_alan
Yes I'm looking at you cough Apple cough
We're back to this argument again, and I always say that when the phone companies look at this the users always say they want a lighter and thinner phone not a bigger battery... and that's from reps of phone companiesQuote:
Originally Posted by huggi
Notice that you only get headline speeds with 2 batteries in series (2s) and that has been available for a long time in other cells. 18650 cells for instance are quite often put in series setups so a balance charger can charge them much quicker
Also worries about reduced life is mitigated a lot by a 2s battery setup as by design the load will be balanced across 2 separate cells to even out thermal load etc.
It seems like Quick Charge 4 was a bit of a mess... I'll have to avoid those chargers in the future. Looking forward to this for things like laptops and cars, even more so than for phones.
I bought the motorola Droid Razor because it was thin and light (I don't think any phone has come close since!) but it wasn't worth it, and I'd always found myself wishing I'd purchased the Maxx for the larger battery. Since then, I've always bought the biggest capacity I can, or a phone with swappable batteries.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3dcandyWe're back to this argument again, and I always say that when the phone companies look at this the users always say they want a lighter and thinner phone not a bigger battery... and that's from reps of phone companiesQuote:
Originally Posted by huggi
In order, my priorities are:
#1 Speakers/camera quality
#2 Battery life
...
...
#3 Wireless charging
#4 Screen quality
Honestly, for most people, nothing else matters all that much for day to day use unless you're a gamer.
I think there should be a responsibility here for the companies to say quick charging is a feature for use when you need it, not all the time. I purposefully use a slow, wireless charger overnight and the full charge takes 3-4 hours. I find it extremely useful, when you get back late from work and have 10 minutes to get in and out again, to have quick charge available.
The promotion of it as something to use regularly is probably irresponsible and I'm sure they're painting a rosy picture of the long term effect on the battery. It is a lot of Watts to be throwing at a cell which is somewhat more thermally insulated than you might like.
Saying larger batteries repeatedly is fine, but you will adapt your routine to these batteries. You will still get caught out on occasion.
Battery capacities are increasing slowly. My new phone has around a 50% larger battery than the previous one (although it's a bit bigger but that is the trend, annoyingly).
EDIT - also, 10C cooler than what? Throwing 100W at the battery in a totally uncontrolled manner? 10C cooler than Chernobyl reactor 4 at 01:23AM and 41 seconds on 26/4/1986? 10C cooler than an Eskimo's winky?
Phil - just a quick massive error in all of your post. A wireless charger is awful for battery condition as the coils produce heat and it is well known to ruin batteries, much more than a cable charger. You are doing more damage than you think...Quote:
Originally Posted by philehidiot
No evidence that quick charging is more damaging to a battery. Most of the tech uses a battery rated to a higher voltage than needed so it charges faster, so for example many phones will technically use a 9v cell that supplies 3.3v to the phone. More damage caused by charging under a pillow or charging often and not fully than quick charging
We need to see some long term testing with these rapid charge devices, I would expect extended rapid charging to reduce the life of the battery vs normal charging.
Read up on qualcomm quick charge. It makes almost no difference to battery life due to varying reasons. Like I said the cells are usually a higher voltage and the charger checks many different variables to ensure charging is safe etc. Temp of cells, amount of charge. Wireless charging is usually worse due to how the loops for the chargers are in the device.Quote:
Originally Posted by [GSV]Trig
Quick charge for example will check the battery health before and during charge to ensure it is healthy. Anything wrong and it won't quick charge. Also they will start off quick and reduce speed as the cell heats up and also to preserve battery life and cell health. Also the batteries themselves have to be of a better quality to be approved for QC
Plenty of long term testing out there. QC 3 for example has been around since 2016 and rigorously testedQuote:
Originally Posted by [GSV]Trig
Not a chance. I know it's probably safe and many people many times smarter than me know the science is sound and I'm just being daft - but there's no way I'd ever charge a phone with that lol.
I don't know a phone without the tech these days so you'd have to switch it off...Quote:
Originally Posted by Tunnah