Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #156049 > unrolled thread

Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-20 13:11 +0000
    Re: Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-09-20 15:32 +0100
      Re: Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-20 21:31 +0000
        Re: Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve Martin Schöön <martin.schoon@gmail.com> - 2026-09-21 08:39 +0000
          Re: Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2026-09-21 11:47 +0200
            Re: Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-21 12:27 +0200
              Re: Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-09-21 22:00 +0400
          Re: Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-09-21 21:15 +0000
            Re: Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve Martin Schöön <martin.schoon@gmail.com> - 2026-09-22 07:44 +0000

#156049 — Mobile Battery Endurance and Efficiency Continuing to Improve

I've updated my analysis of the EU Mobile Battery Efficiency data with the
gory details all here. 
https://rpubs.com/ithinkiam/1460398

It includes the iphone 18 Pro/Pro Max, but not the Duo yet. 

Drilling down specifically to the big two brands we can see that since the
inception of the EU ratings battery lifetime and efficiency has improved
significantly. 

For Apple the Pro Max continues to be the one to get for the longest
battery life: the 18 Pro Max has a huge - by Apple standards - 5391 mAh
battery. The first Apple phone with >5,000 mAH. 
The average improvement in endurance is 44% between the 15 & 18 series
although there are only two 18 models and spans four generations. 
https://i.postimg.cc/4d9ttvF3/Apple-Endurance.png

For efficiency the 18 Pro is still significantly better than the others
which are much of a muchness. The average efficiency gain is 19% between
the 15 & 18 models. 
https://i.postimg.cc/Hn1MtJfd/Apple-Efficiency.png

With Samsung, there's a 25% gain in endurance between the S25 and S26
ranges. The Plus and Ultra are top overall today and the FE is very
marginally bottom. 
https://i.postimg.cc/4yRc1KrZ/Samsung-Endurance.png

For efficiency, the gain is 23% between the S25?and S26 models. The smaller
base model wins out marginally over the Plus/Ultra with again the FE
trailing. Could this be the Samsung Exynos processor (in the FE) not being
as effective as the Qualcomm Snapdragon?
https://i.postimg.cc/brfnRGKq/Samsung-Efficiency.png

I can have a look at the Pixels as well if there's interest.

It's great to see such big improvements in battery life which is good for
consumers. Whether the EU ratings have made a difference is an open
question, but have this objective data to play with is definitely a bonus. 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#156050

Chris wrote:

> I've updated my analysis of the EU Mobile Battery Efficiency data 
It's suspicious how few have 900 cycles, likely some side-effect of 
everyone "rounding up" to make sure they hit the >800 cycle target?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#156064

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
> 
>> I've updated my analysis of the EU Mobile Battery Efficiency data 
> It's suspicious how few have 900 cycles, likely some side-effect of 
> everyone "rounding up" to make sure they hit the >800 cycle target?

It's manufacturer provided information. Not sure how reliable it is. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#156076

Den 2026-09-20 skrev Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> Chris wrote:
>> 
>>> I've updated my analysis of the EU Mobile Battery Efficiency data 
>> It's suspicious how few have 900 cycles, likely some side-effect of 
>> everyone "rounding up" to make sure they hit the >800 cycle target?
>
> It's manufacturer provided information. Not sure how reliable it is. 
>
About as accurate as car manufacturer are at reporting mileage...
:-)

/Martin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#156082

On 21.09.26 10:39, Martin Schöön wrote:
> Den 2026-09-20 skrev Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>:
>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>> Chris wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've updated my analysis of the EU Mobile Battery Efficiency data
>>> It's suspicious how few have 900 cycles, likely some side-effect of
>>> everyone "rounding up" to make sure they hit the >800 cycle target?
>>
>> It's manufacturer provided information. Not sure how reliable it is.
>>
> About as accurate as car manufacturer are at reporting mileage...
> :-)
> 
> /Martin

They are superaccurate!
But under conditions you will never be able to reproduce.

-- 
"Ave! Morituri te salutant!"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#156086

On 2026-09-21 11:47, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> On 21.09.26 10:39, Martin Schöön wrote:
>> Den 2026-09-20 skrev Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>:
>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>>> Chris wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've updated my analysis of the EU Mobile Battery Efficiency data
>>>> It's suspicious how few have 900 cycles, likely some side-effect of
>>>> everyone "rounding up" to make sure they hit the >800 cycle target?
>>>
>>> It's manufacturer provided information. Not sure how reliable it is.
>>>
>> About as accurate as car manufacturer are at reporting mileage...
>> :-)
>>
>> /Martin
> 
> They are superaccurate!
> But under conditions you will never be able to reproduce.

That's true.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#156089

On 2026-09-21 13:27:29 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
>>> About as accurate as car manufacturer are at reporting mileage...
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> /Martin
>> 
>> They are superaccurate!
>> But under conditions you will never be able to reproduce.
> 
> That's true.

Actually they were able to repeat the circumstances that Volkswagen ran 
their certification tests, as long as they didn't move the steering wheel.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#156099

Martin Schöön <martin.schoon@gmail.com> wrote:
> Den 2026-09-20 skrev Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>:
>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>> Chris wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I've updated my analysis of the EU Mobile Battery Efficiency data 
>>> It's suspicious how few have 900 cycles, likely some side-effect of 
>>> everyone "rounding up" to make sure they hit the >800 cycle target?
>> 
>> It's manufacturer provided information. Not sure how reliable it is. 
>> 
> About as accurate as car manufacturer are at reporting mileage...
> :-)

We can check with crowd-sourced data. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#156109

Den 2026-09-21 skrev Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>:
> Martin Schöön <martin.schoon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Den 2026-09-20 skrev Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>:
>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>> 
>>> It's manufacturer provided information. Not sure how reliable it is. 
>>> 
>> About as accurate as car manufacturer are at reporting mileage...
>> :-)
>
> We can check with crowd-sourced data. 
>
Indeed. For cars we have (not the only one):
http://www.spritmonitor.de/

/Martin

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web