From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android


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.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

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?

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

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.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

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
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 21.09.26 10:39, Martin Sch||||n 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!"
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2026-09-21 11:47, J||rg Lorenz wrote:

On 21.09.26 10:39, Martin Sch||||n 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.
ESEfc-Efc+, EUEfc-Efc|;
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

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.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Martin Sch||||n <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.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Den 2026-09-21 skrev Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>:

Martin Sch||||n <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
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2