You think it's a big step-up from 25W to 45W charging? - You might be wrong!

[HenrySalayne]

Summary

Samsung claims 45W fast charging for the S22+ and the S22 Ultra. As it turns out the difference between the 25W charger and the 45W charger are negligible at best.

Quotes

Quote

We can see the Galaxy S22+ reached a 62% charge after 30-minutes with the 25W Samsung brick and a mere 64% when using the 45W one. What about the S22 Ultra you ask? That one reached a 61% charge after 30 minutes on the 25W charger and 60% with the 45W brick. Our third-party 65W PD charger managed to fill up the Ultra’s battery to 65% during the same time, but those results are all within the margin of error.

 

 

 

My thoughts

Once again Samsung claims "45W super fast charging" and their phones don't live up to this promise. Even worse, neither the S22+ nor the S22 Ultra come with a charger. Costumers believing these claims might spend $50 ($30 more than the 25W charger) for a power brick they don't need. There is almost no difference to the previous generation of Galaxy devices. It's more than questionable to advertise this as a "key feature".

 

This is the full list of key features (no joke):

 

 

Sources

https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s22_series_45w_charging_doesnt_really_make_a_difference-news-53223.php

https://www.sammobile.com/news/we-put-galaxy-s22-ultra-45w-charging-to-the-test/

 

Edit 24th February:

Toms Guide found slight improvements with the 45W charger but it's still far away from 45W.

Quote

The Galaxy S22 Ultra does indeed charge faster with a 45W charger. After 15 minutes, the S22 Ultra had 36% battery capacity. That's better than the 29% we got using a Samsung 25W charger but it's not a huge difference.

After 30 minutes, the Galaxy S22 Ultra reached 67% battery with a 45W charger. That's 9% higher than the 58% percent we saw from a 25W charger, so the gap did widen as time went on. Unfortunately, the S22 Ultra fell short of the 50% mark at 20 minutes, as it hit 46% during that time with the 45W charger. 

https://www.tomsguide.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s22-ultra-45w-charging-tested-heres-how-fast-it-is

[OhioYJ]

They really don't mention in these articles the actual specifications of the chargers (that I saw on either article). What voltages are these using now? Many fast chargers are using more than 5 volts these days. I'm guessing the limiting factor really ends up being battery temperature. Either way I'll stick to my slow chargers.

[starsmine]

Yea, they really need to dig deeper at this point. LIke show a graph of instantaneous wattage over time, as well as correlate that data with temp and battery condition. Like perhaps 30min is to long a time, these are better for 5 to 10 minute charging? Perhaps its a firmware bug. Because a company as big as Samsung is big enough that it really would not want bad press/provable false advertisement claims against it. 

The video does get into it at least. 

 

I hope to see tests like these in cold environments to since I suspect temperature throttling is happening.

[Sauron]

9 minutes ago, OhioYJ said:

They really don't mention in these articles the actual specifications of the chargers (that I saw on either article).

they do:

47 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

the 25W Samsung brick and a mere 64% when using the 45W one

it's the "original samsung 45w power adapter and cable" as mentioned in the small text.

[OhioYJ]

45 minutes ago, Sauron said:

they do:

it's the "original samsung 45w power adapter and cable" as mentioned in the small text.

 

You mean 25 and 45 watts? That's not what I was referring to. For example, I have a Samsung charger that charges starts at 9v for the fast charge, then rolls back to 5v. From what I'm seeing some of the newer somes use higher voltages yet. 

 

Since these voltage and current rates change while the devices are charging I'm not really sure just the wattage of the chargers tells the whole story? Although the 45 watt charger would probably take a larger lead if battery temperature could be controlled and battery life wasn't a concern.

[MultiGamerClub]

Samsung charging time sucks? Who knew.

[Quackers101]

*limited the battery so it doesn't heat up too much*

 

*explodes in hand from 100w charging*

[Dracarris]

Great, more and heavier fast charging to ruin batteries even faster. All because manufacturers can't be bothered to invest enough RnD into phones that actually last > 1day on a single charge.

[wanderingfool2]

I think in this case their testing methodology should really be stated.  They've left too many major variables out of the equation that could drastically affect the charging time.

 

e.g. Which order did they test things in (and how long they let the phone rest).

If you go from 20% charge down to 0% (using a battery draining app), then start your test immediately you will notice a difference than if you let your phone rest for 10-15 minutes...since I find phones head up and thus the battery is at a higher temp if you use intensive programs.

 

A perfect example of how the testing methodologies are flawed; GSMArena and Sammobile have 2 drastically different results.  GSM after 30 minutes had a 1-2% difference.  Sammobile had a 7% delta between 25 and 45.

 

The biggest thing for me though would be the numbers around the 10 min mark.  It's the amount of time I could see people realizing they didn't charge their phone and need a quick charge.  If lets say the delta was 5%, then yea it could make quite the drastic difference (for myself it would mean the difference of an extra 10 min - 20 min of usage for my phone)

[Sauron]

50 minutes ago, OhioYJ said:

You mean 25 and 45 watts? That's not what I was referring to. For example, I have a Samsung charger that charges starts at 9v for the fast charge, then rolls back to 5v. From what I'm seeing some of the newer somes use higher voltages yet. 

Ok but... this is the charger Samsung sells, are you saying they sell chargers that don't work correctly on their phones?

[Tech Enthusiast]

That looks more like they forgot to actually enable fast charging.

 

Apart from that, as many have stated, way too many variebles left blank in order to actually take it seriously.

[Gamer Schnitzel]

I bought this charger, so is this pointless? Should I be returning this for a 25W charger?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0998Y231K/

[Thaldor]

14 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Ok but... this is the charger Samsung sells, are you saying they sell chargers that don't work correctly on their phones?

No, more or less every fast charger works that way, testing methodology is just stupid because I hope within 30 minutes the charging speed should be lowered to mitigate the chances for the battery to blow up from the heat.

 

At least everything I have with some kind of fast charging works exactly the same: the initial charging from 0% is the maximum charging power which drops depending on the charge level and the temperature of the battery. Phones seem to have 50-60% limit for the extra fast part after which they drop down to slow charging speeds if charged from 0% while something like my Philips beardtrimmer goes from 0-10% in 5 minutes and 10-100% in hours ("one shave with 5 minutes charging"), even my not fast charging digital Li-ion charger charges empty batteries with 750mA while ramping it down to 150mA or even lower when the cells start to be full.

[HenrySalayne]

11 minutes ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

Apart from that, as many have stated, way too many variebles left blank in order to actually take it seriously.

24 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

I think in this case their testing methodology should really be stated.  They've left too many major variables out of the equation that could drastically affect the charging time.

These are two independent test with independent devices and it's quite clear that the charging speed has not improved compared to the previous generation. Even charging the same device you will never get the same result. The charge state of the battery is just an approximation. The same device might say "100%" for a battery with 96% on one day and a battery with 102% on the next day.

 

Testing showed that under the same conditions the 45W charger on the S22 Ultra made no difference to a 25W charger on the S21 Ultra. If the "full potential" is only unlocked at full moon while the device is pointed to the magnetic south pole and 5 candles are placed around it, it's not a feature and it's certainly not a key feature.
This is just marketing bu****it by Samsung backed up by nothing. If 45W charging is actually a key feature of your product, it must be available in the most common scenarios and not only in weird edge cases.

 

19 minutes ago, Gamer Schnitzel said:

I bought this charger, so is this pointless? Should I be returning this for a 25W charger?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0998Y231K/

It depends. if Samsung can change charging behaviour with a firmware upgrade, you might get the full potential out of the charger; if not, you're not losing anything but the additional money you spent on it.

 

 

[Doobeedoo]

It's so weird and lame at the same time. Funny how most selling brands Apple and Samsung have the slowest charging speeds. Come on now. Do better.

[pythonmegapixel]

Maybe Samsung should improve their software optimisation so that the battery lasts longer, and ship their phones with large batteries. Then they could implement a software feature which keeps track of when you usually stop using the phone each evening, and sends a notification slightly before which reminds you to plug it in.  Then we wouldn't need all this "fast charging" stuff.

[HenrySalayne]

3 minutes ago, Thaldor said:

No, more or less every fast charger works that way, testing methodology is just stupid because I hope within 30 minutes the charging speed should be lowered to mitigate the chances for the battery to blow up from the heat.

 

At least everything I have with some kind of fast charging works exactly the same: the initial charging from 0% is the maximum charging power which drops depending on the charge level and the temperature of the battery. Phones seem to have 50-60% limit for the extra fast part after which they drop down to slow charging speeds if charged from 0% while something like my Philips beardtrimmer goes from 0-10% in 5 minutes and 10-100% in hours ("one shave with 5 minutes charging"), even my not fast charging digital Li-ion charger charges empty batteries with 750mA while ramping it down to 150mA or even lower when the cells start to be full.

This is not "fast charging" this is just "charging". Most devices start with constant current and then switch to constant voltage for the last third of the charge (CCCV charging).

Nevertheless, If you could use the advertised 45W compared to the 25W, the 45W charger would gain an advantage and it should not be slower later on. The difference between the 25W charger and the 45W charger is just too small in this test, suggesting that the full 45W potential has never been used for any noticeable amount of time.

[wanderingfool2]

14 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

These are two independent test with independent devices and it's quite clear that the charging speed has not improved compared to the previous generation. Even charging the same device you will never get the same result. The charge state of the battery is just an approximation. The same device might say "100%" for a battery with 96% on one day and a battery with 102% on the next day.

You kind of missed the point.  The two tests from the different websites have two quite different results (above the range of error).  You literally have a website claiming a 1% delta over a 30 minute period and another claiming 7% delta.  I get that there are variations in charging, but the drastic different in the numbers indicates that the testing methodology is different enough.

 

Things like 45W charging as well make bigger differences as well in the first few minutes while charging.  A key example of that is Sammobile had 6% delta at the 20min mark, but only a 7% delta at the 10 min mark.  So at that stage it likely was already being thermal limited.  I actually do find it funny they use a time to full charge test as well...because from like 90% - 100% (at least) the charging speed gets drastically reduced anyways (so a higher wattage charger wouldn't make a difference anyways...they are effectively just adding time to the run, which makes any numbers smaller).  A more practical example would have been measuring the time it took from 10% - 50% or something like that...that is a lot more practical and telling of what a higher wattage charger could do.

 

18 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

If 45W charging is actually a key feature of your product, it must be available in the most common scenarios and not only in weird edge cases.

You want a common scenario?  Charging your phone for 10 minutes before having to leave.  If the Sammobile numbers are anything to go by, I'm going to guess that the delta on a 10 min top up would be quite a difference.

 

 

[starsmine]

Im also lost as to why sammobile kept unlocking the phone to check the percentage... when its right there on the locked screen. If he made a report on methodology perhaps there is a valid reason to do that, but to me it just seems.... off. Are the percentages shown on the lock screen inaccurate for some reason that needs to be mitigated? When stuff like that is not explained, it leaves me wondering. At the very least he it was standardized as in he did it with all the phones... but its just a weird variable. It may be a nothing burger, but why draw attention to it like that. Im sure it had no measurable effect on the results, just bizarre. 

[HenrySalayne]

47 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

You kind of missed the point.  The two tests from the different websites have two quite different results (above the range of error).  You literally have a website claiming a 1% delta over a 30 minute period and another claiming 7% delta.  I get that there are variations in charging, but the drastic different in the numbers indicates that the testing methodology is different enough.

 

Things like 45W charging as well make bigger differences as well in the first few minutes while charging.  A key example of that is Sammobile had 6% delta at the 20min mark, but only a 7% delta at the 10 min mark.  So at that stage it likely was already being thermal limited.  I actually do find it funny they use a time to full charge test as well...because from like 90% - 100% (at least) the charging speed gets drastically reduced anyways (so a higher wattage charger wouldn't make a difference anyways...they are effectively just adding time to the run, which makes any numbers smaller).  A more practical example would have been measuring the time it took from 10% - 50% or something like that...that is a lot more practical and telling of what a higher wattage charger could do.

You are somewhat right. But in the end we are not talking about small differences, not at all. The charge level indicated by the device is unreliable (it's just an educated guess, so we should not focus too much on the reported battery level).

45W should take only 55% of the time compared to 25W. And below 50% this difference must be clearly visible. It's not. And the reasons for this don't matter. It's just not a feature of this device.

[Tech Enthusiast]

32 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

You are somewhat right. But in the end we are not talking about small differences, not at all. The charge level indicated by the device is unreliable (it's just an educated guess, so we should not focus too much on the reported battery level).

45W should take only 55% of the time compared to 25W. And below 50% this difference must be clearly visible. It's not. And the reasons for this don't matter. It's just not a feature of this device.

That is like saying a 200hp car should be twice as fast as a 100hp car,... in a town with a speed limit of 30.

 

Heat is a thing. Actually the Nr 1 thing for charging nowadays.

If you abuse the phone to empty its battery, and it is already burning... even a 10w charger will likely give the same results.

That is why testing needs to be explained. Just showing these results can mean nothing, or everything, or something in between. We just don't know.

 

All we know is: There is at least one possible condition under which a 45w charger is not charging faster, in a 30min test, than a 25w charger.

Far from giving a full picture.

 

I kind of expect two things here:

1. The battery was on fire before the 45w test and could not charge as fast due to a save lock.

2. A 10-15min charge would show dramatically different values.

Bonus expectation: Put the phone on a brick of ice while charging and it would fly up much faster on the 45w charger.

 

All things a good and fair comparison should test and point out. Only a full picture is a real help for the consumer, not a cherry picked and unknown one off use-case.

[wanderingfool2]

3 minutes ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

2. A 10-15min charge would show dramatically different values.

This, given that there was a 6% change, at the 20 min mark, and only 1% change from 20-30 min...it's important for them to run a test going at like a 10 min charge.  I'd guess that the number will actually be closer to the 4% (just a guess though).

 

43 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

45W should take only 55% of the time compared to 25W. And below 50% this difference must be clearly visible. It's not. And the reasons for this don't matter. It's just not a feature of this device.

Heat plays a significant role in this though.  If I was just using my phone intensively and it was really hot no matter which charger I use it will be slower (even a 10 watt).

 

There was a clearly visible difference in one of the tests as well (6%, which equates to about 15% extra charging rate).  So it comes back to my original point.  The tests that were being done needs to be very clear in how they did their testing procedures, because if one site gets 1% and another gets 6% difference that is a considerable change [and likely says that one of them didn't do their testing methodology in a good way...or maybe both].

 

The benefit that also comes from the higher wattage though is that 5-10 minute charge to quickly get a charge.  Again, my guess is that in this use case (one that is quite common I would guess) you will be getting a decent amount more charge with the 45W vs 25W (all things considered)

[HenrySalayne]

59 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Heat plays a significant role in this though.  If I was just using my phone intensively and it was really hot no matter which charger I use it will be slower (even a 10 watt).

1 hour ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

Bonus expectation: Put the phone on a brick of ice while charging and it would fly up much faster on the 45w charger.

Just so I can follow your argument:

You both suggest that in several independent tests with different devices the battery was already cooking and that's why all of these tests don't show any significant improvement? Sounds like a far shot to be honest. GSMArena did at least three runs all showing the same picture.

Additionally, if putting it on a block of ice is a necessity to get the promised 45W charging, it is not a key feature. Imagine AMD is advertising 7 GHz processors and all the average user has to do is cool them with liquid helium. I'm not saying the S22+ and the S22 Ultra need to be able to use the full 45W all the time but it should be significantly longer than a split second.

BTW, if we take a little bit of thermodynamics 101 into account, the 45W charger should still be faster with a smoking hot battery. If the phone would be in any form capable of dissipating the heat for a 45W charge, it would cool down with the 25W charger and only slightly impair the 45W charging process. There is just no other conclusion but "really weird test on a hot plate" or "it's not a feature but a marketing gimmick".

 

As long as there is no test showing the opposite, evidence points in a clear direction.

And just a quick throwback to the Note 10 Plus and the same 45W charging promise:

 

 

[Tech Enthusiast]

12 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

You both suggest that in several independent tests with different devices the battery was already cooking and that's why all of these tests don't show any significant improvement? Sounds like a far shot to be honest. GSMArena did at least three runs all showing the same picture.

I am suggesting the tests have been done in SOME way, and for SOME reason they don't tell us how. That is a red flag, always.

Have they cooled down the phones between the runs?

Have they cooled down the phones after discharging them?

What else have they done /not done that they don't tell us?

 

Phones are not built to endure constant pressure; they are built to handle everyday common usage and a little more.

No one would power drain their phone and recharge it three times. People drain their phone over the day and usually recharge it overnight / in the evening and if they forget it, they need a quick and helpful charge in the morning. 45w will do that last bit MUCH better, and for the other use cases even a 5w charger would top it off before it gets use again.

 

But the bottom line is:

We simply can't take anything definitive from these results because we don't know how they were achieved. 

To get useful information out of a result, you NEED to know the context.

 

To make it as plain and simple as possible:

If testing were done with a full cooldown period, this result would show a broken marketing promise and / or a faulty product design.

If testing were done WITHOUT a full cooldown period, this result would show a meaningless situation that at best would require further testing and at worst means nothing for the consumer at all.

 

The only sure takeaway here is to avoid these "testing" sources in the future, since they don't do a decent job at showing the full picture and context for results, which makes most results meaningless or even worse: misleading. Even if the result was valid and real, ... since we just don't know. And there certainly is enough false and / or misleading information around that gets treated like a fact.

[wanderingfool2]

13 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

You both suggest that in several independent tests with different devices the battery was already cooking and that's why all of these tests don't show any significant improvement? Sounds like a far shot to be honest. GSMArena did at least three runs all showing the same picture.

I'm saying that there isn't really adequate information given in the article.  They don't mention running 3 test, they only mention doing a test using 3 different chargers.

What I am also suggesting is that we don't know how they ran the tests and depending how they run things it could drastically different.

Again, as I've mentioned, the sammobile one showed a 6% difference after 20 minutes.  So it's why I'm saying it's important to know how the testing methodology was.