TL;DW: Fast charging over 2 years only degraded the battery an extra 0.5%, even on extremely fast charging Android phones using 120W.
And with that, hopefully we can put this argument to rest.
However the Battery Saver mode on Androids that only charges the battery up to 80% DOES extend battery life. Substantial evidence shows that a high State of Charge accelerates degradation through: solid electrolyte interphase growth, loss of lithium inventory, and loss of active materials. (See: mdpi.com)
Here’s a fun fact: phone manufacturers know this. So what they call “100%” is not actually 100%. Your phone will not charge your battery to full. Battery charging is already designed around this.
Source?
FYI: During this test it saved about 5% of SoH.
“And with that, hopefully we can put this argument to rest.”
That’s not how the internet works, but nice try though ;-)
I disagree!
TL;DW: No
I hadn’t watched the video yet, but my phone’s going the opposite way. It run slow charge overnight when it feels like it’s going to be enough for it to be fully charged the next morning.
We really should let electronics and tight software take care of these little things.
I’ve got some devices I’ve been fast charging for 8 years; it seems to be more of a problem as the device ages; but that’s offset by having it ready to use again quickly.
Ok, before i watch the video, no damage is not what great scott found from his testings… ( https://youtu.be/iMn2yVoEqPs ).
so i have no idea what to believe anymore, but my (based) experience is that it does damage it. Ill have to watch later.
Yea, but that wasn’t a great rest. I love Great Scott, but a lot of comments fairly call out his conclusion.
Most (all?)phones don’t charge at full speed to 100% charge, they fast charge when the battery is almoast empty, and charge slower the more full it gets.
Right, so basically he removed the software aspect in his tests which removes systems to protect the battery. I assume without them, it is damaging, like what great scott found.
Ye, he should have continued his experiments then!
Non-magnetically-aligned wireless chargers are far worse than fast charging.
[citation needed]
This is the type of scientific method that can put all this nonsense to rest. I really appreciate their work proving that the difference between fast/slow/30-80% is insignificant to the majority of people.
Thanks!
Battery lore has been cargo-cult woo since the NiMH days… most of it feels like manufacturers saying “oh, I’m sorry you didn’t get our advertised life, you must have done something wrong.”
That’s a great TL:DW;
Now I want an iPhone that can charge in 20 minutes. :)
Wish granted, the battery is now small enough to slow charge to full in 20 minutes.
Tap for spoiler
The iPhone air is great, isn’t it?
I’ve been a “Pro” user for as long as they’d had that distinction vs. lower end and the “it’s a small tablet” size.
As humorous as this sounds, this is not at all how battery chemistries works.
Some chemistries just charge faster than others.
for the common types of Lion or Lipo batteries, they max out pushing 2C which is around 30 minutes.
For something like LTO, where you lose capacity/density, you can get that up to like 4C (very rough numbers here as this all depends on the temperature of the battery while charging, age and other factors).
So like… this could have been accurate if this was referring to switching to LTO, but afaik, no one makes LTO batteries in this form-factor (not that it can’t be done though).
So put in a big-ass battery and artificially block it at 20% for “full”? 😁
He he Xiaomi 120 watt charge. 19 minutes from zero to full. Well I only have tried from like 12% to 80+ because that was more than enough and I wont let it go to zero-zero. I don’t use it regularly, not because I fear for my battery but it does get the phone warm and warm/cool cycles are bad for electronics.
The day the battery degrades I’ll just have it swapped for a new one, I think we’re far enough into the battery revolution to no longer really care about all this any more.
That’s pretty awesome
I think this accurate or close to it for phones but my laptop battery a Dell has degraded very quickly through 50 plus or more cycles of battery like 15 percent. It went from 59wh down to 50wh and it ebbs and flows. Runs Linux mint and installed power top and some other low power mods to help dumb things down to conserve. I feel like arm processors vs x86 are wildly different.
Just what I wanted to know. Thanks!!
I love when YT amateurs act as if they are able to produce proper studies that are relevant in any fucking way
If you have a problem with it, tell us why.
I personally prefer a proper peer reviewed study over amateur YT slop
I have no skin in the game but I have worked professionally as both an academic scientist and a data scientist in the private sector and I can tell you that peer review is great but a lot of legitimate research is done outside the bounds of academic journals. It is entirely possible for amateurs to do real science.
If the effect size is large enough, you dont actually need to be that rigorous about it. No one needed to do a study on whether there was a direct correlation between adverse medical outcomes and gunshot wounds to the head.
I personally know don’t trust the little (probably superficial) insights I have into the topic enough to be able to gauge this; neither do I have the energy to put into discerning slop creators doing it for clickbait with some backyard engineering or genuinely correct amateurs.
I like to outsource that to proper channels, I understand that it’s probably not 100% fair every single time, but as I said, I have neither time nor energy to judge it properly myself
Person: offers you an apple
You: “Personally, I prefer organic, homemade apple pie! Not APPLE SLOP!”
Sorry, but it’s more like a crab apple.
It looks like an apple, it’s presented like an apple, it’s advertised like an apple because that is what makes the YouTuber money. But scientific methods and standards exist for a reason. It’s very easy to produce bad data and especially easy to extract bad conclusions from data if you have an incentive to do so (such as a fan base who might engage with the video less if the conclusions were against their expectations)
There’s a chance that this guy’s conclusions reflect what a proper study might have found, but it’s just too hard to tell if it’s a crab apple or not it’s essentially probably a little better than chance.
Exactly, when it comes to highly complex chemical and electrical engineering and physics (as is the case with Smartphones and their lithium-ion batteries), I will take it as an inditcator if it comes from well-established testers with professional equipment like GN (Gamers Nexus) or other established technical journals when talking outside of the video world, but will not accept it as a general and genuine technical (!) insight until it has gone through the due process of scientific publishing and peer review…
Even then I prefer meta-studies, since they reduce biases and general inaccuracies.
