Watch: iPhone X vs. Galaxy S9 Plus battery charging times compared
The comparison of the Apple's iPhone X's features against main rival Samsung's Galaxy S9 Plus continue with more battery tests, this time examining how long each of the premium smartphones take to recharge.
A recent battery life comparison of the iPhone X and the Galaxy S9 Plus cast Samsung's smartphone as the clear winner, but this was partly due to having a battery that's 29 percent larger than the Apple rival. While that tested how long the smartphone batteries could last while being used, it did not examine the other end of the equation, namely recharging the empty batteries.
For this, we are again using the iPhone X and the Galaxy S9 Plus. The Galaxy S9's battery is similar in capacity to the iPhone X, which would in theory make for closer results, but again this is a comparison of the best smartphones that each company has to offer.
It could be argued that users who care about battery life would take the larger S9 Plus over the S9, just because of the capacity difference.
Apple claims the iPhone 8 and X will charge up to 50-percent capacity within 30 minutes under perfect conditions. The downside is that achieving this requires the purchase of at least a 29-Watt USB-C MacBook power adapter and a USB-C to lightning cable.
Acquiring these can be expensive, with Apple selling the two items for $74. Cheaper third-party accessories will also work, as long as they support USB Power Delivery, also known as USB PD.
Be aware that there is no point in buying the 87-Watt version of the Apple power adapter. Fast Charging is limited to 18 Watts, so it doesn't matter if you use a 29-Watt, 61-Watt, or most expensive 87-Watt power adapter, as they all provide the same results when charging in this way.
Samsung, on the other hand, includes their 15W fast charger right in the box, so there's no need to pay for extra accessories on top of the already pricey smartphone.
To minimize background battery usage, airplane mode was turned on for both devices.
The iPhone X had a strong start, reaching 25 percent capacity after just 15 minutes, while the Galaxy S9 Plus lagged behind at 18 percent. At 30 minutes, the iPhone X hit 50 percent, as promised by Apple, and the S9 Plus was at 35 percent.
Another 15 minutes later, the iPhone X charged to 72 percent, whereas the Samsung was still around 20 percent behind.
After a full hour of charging, the iPhone X had reached 80 percent, climbing by only 8 percent in the previous 15 minutes. The lagging S9 Plus seemed to start catching up, closing the gap to just 9 percent.
At 1 Hour 15 minutes, Samsung's device had almost caught up to the iPhone X's 89 percent, with the Galaxy S9 appearing to charge at a consistent pace.
An hour and a half in, the iPhone X reached 96 percent. Though the Galaxy S9 was right behind, it only gained 7 percent since the last checkpoint, losing its charging consistency.
Another 15 more minutes later, both devices are at 99%. It seems like the iPhone X's charging speed started to increasingly slow down after the 50% mark, whereas the S9 Plus slowed down after the 80 or 85% mark, but not as slow as the iPhone X.
At exactly 1 hour, 45 minutes, and 52 seconds, the S9 Plus showed it had reached its capacity, but the charging indicator LED didn't switch to green until around 4 minutes later.
At the same time as Samsung reached 100 percent, the iPhone showed it was still at 99 percent, and stayed at that level for quite a while. It wasn't until 1 hour and 54 minutes into the experiment that it finally reached 100%.
The slower charging speed of the iPhone X when it gets close to being fully charged happens because of how lithium-ion battery charging works from a software perspective. The charging rate is cut back for heat and safety reasons, and the differences between the iPhone X and the Galaxy S9 appear to be just in the percent display, as both devices have good charging logic to prevent runaway thermal conditions, which can result in battery damage - or worse.
The difference in percentage reporting was also apparent when we tested standby time. The iPhone X claimed it had dropped its battery capacity by just 1 percent over a 16-hour period.
There is certainly a possibility that one phone or the other incorrectly displays the true battery percentage when near a full charge, or drops quicker than any so-called "normal rate" when nearing empty, but there isn't nearly enough evidence to make that claim.
A recent battery life comparison of the iPhone X and the Galaxy S9 Plus cast Samsung's smartphone as the clear winner, but this was partly due to having a battery that's 29 percent larger than the Apple rival. While that tested how long the smartphone batteries could last while being used, it did not examine the other end of the equation, namely recharging the empty batteries.
For this, we are again using the iPhone X and the Galaxy S9 Plus. The Galaxy S9's battery is similar in capacity to the iPhone X, which would in theory make for closer results, but again this is a comparison of the best smartphones that each company has to offer.
It could be argued that users who care about battery life would take the larger S9 Plus over the S9, just because of the capacity difference.
Varying Charges
While the Galaxy S9 Plus has a larger battery than the iPhone X, it's missing some of the key power-related features that makes the iPhone X so attractive to buyers.Apple claims the iPhone 8 and X will charge up to 50-percent capacity within 30 minutes under perfect conditions. The downside is that achieving this requires the purchase of at least a 29-Watt USB-C MacBook power adapter and a USB-C to lightning cable.
Acquiring these can be expensive, with Apple selling the two items for $74. Cheaper third-party accessories will also work, as long as they support USB Power Delivery, also known as USB PD.
Be aware that there is no point in buying the 87-Watt version of the Apple power adapter. Fast Charging is limited to 18 Watts, so it doesn't matter if you use a 29-Watt, 61-Watt, or most expensive 87-Watt power adapter, as they all provide the same results when charging in this way.
Samsung, on the other hand, includes their 15W fast charger right in the box, so there's no need to pay for extra accessories on top of the already pricey smartphone.
Testing
Starting from empty, both phones were plugged in for charging at the same time. Shortly after, both devices were powered on, but the iPhone X didn't turn on until the third try.To minimize background battery usage, airplane mode was turned on for both devices.
The iPhone X had a strong start, reaching 25 percent capacity after just 15 minutes, while the Galaxy S9 Plus lagged behind at 18 percent. At 30 minutes, the iPhone X hit 50 percent, as promised by Apple, and the S9 Plus was at 35 percent.
Another 15 minutes later, the iPhone X charged to 72 percent, whereas the Samsung was still around 20 percent behind.
After a full hour of charging, the iPhone X had reached 80 percent, climbing by only 8 percent in the previous 15 minutes. The lagging S9 Plus seemed to start catching up, closing the gap to just 9 percent.
At 1 Hour 15 minutes, Samsung's device had almost caught up to the iPhone X's 89 percent, with the Galaxy S9 appearing to charge at a consistent pace.
An hour and a half in, the iPhone X reached 96 percent. Though the Galaxy S9 was right behind, it only gained 7 percent since the last checkpoint, losing its charging consistency.
Another 15 more minutes later, both devices are at 99%. It seems like the iPhone X's charging speed started to increasingly slow down after the 50% mark, whereas the S9 Plus slowed down after the 80 or 85% mark, but not as slow as the iPhone X.
At exactly 1 hour, 45 minutes, and 52 seconds, the S9 Plus showed it had reached its capacity, but the charging indicator LED didn't switch to green until around 4 minutes later.
At the same time as Samsung reached 100 percent, the iPhone showed it was still at 99 percent, and stayed at that level for quite a while. It wasn't until 1 hour and 54 minutes into the experiment that it finally reached 100%.
Summary
We are really impressed with the charging ability of the Galaxy S9 Plus, since it charged a battery that is 29% larger than the iPhone X in less time, even though it only supports 15-Watt fast charging.The slower charging speed of the iPhone X when it gets close to being fully charged happens because of how lithium-ion battery charging works from a software perspective. The charging rate is cut back for heat and safety reasons, and the differences between the iPhone X and the Galaxy S9 appear to be just in the percent display, as both devices have good charging logic to prevent runaway thermal conditions, which can result in battery damage - or worse.
The difference in percentage reporting was also apparent when we tested standby time. The iPhone X claimed it had dropped its battery capacity by just 1 percent over a 16-hour period.
There is certainly a possibility that one phone or the other incorrectly displays the true battery percentage when near a full charge, or drops quicker than any so-called "normal rate" when nearing empty, but there isn't nearly enough evidence to make that claim.
Comments
It it also says the S9 fills first. But only in the last 1%? Sounded like the iPhone was way ahead in getting a quick, useful charge. I can’t argue the S9 won at the finish line, but I imagine it more common to want a quick 80% than to care about the last 1%?
On top of the last review that held when the iPhone battery drains faster it’s because the S9 is better but when the S9 drains faster it’s because the iPhone has a dodgy meter, for which I saw no evidence offered other that ‘it won by too much, so it must have cheated’, I don’t hold much respect for these tests.
Further, it is stated both have good systems to prevent overcharging. Where is the evidence for this? Not doubting it, but the fact is cited in relation to the evaluation of the tests. In that case it needs to be substantiated.
Didnt know Samsung is offering 15W chargers with their phones now. That’s cool.
There is no such thing as “true battery percentage”. It’s like asking if someone is 100% full after eating. There’s always room for jello as it were.
The acceptance requirements for the battery vendor is going to be something like have no less than 10.45 WHr of energy, output this range of amps and volts, be charged in this range of amps and volts, at these set of environmental conditions. The lot of batteries will have an x percent of variation of capabilities and characteristics. So, the charging percentage indicator is just reporting an average or mean for the set of batteries Apple is expected to have. Then, 100% is just the set of volts and amps Apple has chosen to declare 100%, as is true of every single device with a rechargeable battery in it, 100% is likely a question of how many significant digits they care to have on a declared 100%, and how they manage the battery at 100%, and not much time should be spent on it.
100% could easily be +/–3%? Same companies have a 100% level less than the actual charge capacity of the battery. Tesla does this for some of their vehicles.
Also, it’s obvious the iPhone X doesn’t charge at 18 Watts. You could do a quick hack of this. The iPhone X has two batteries with energies of 5.52 and 4.93 WHr, for a total of 10.45 WHr. If we assume 50% battery charge indicator is half the total, and it takes 0.5 hours to get there, then, the iPhone likely charges at maximum of (10.45/2)/0.5 = 10.45 W.
It’ll probably be higher if you measured the time it took to get from 20% to 70%. That’ll be the true max charge rate. And you should have flat out stated that all vendors ramp up and down the charge rate for when the battery charge level is near empty or near full, and just basically trickling above 95%. Slowly approaching 100% is a feature, not a bug.
You mention the USB-C chargers that Apple has for the Macs, but you should also mention that the 10/12 W chargers for iPads and your basic 10 W USB-A chargers will charge iPhone 8 and X devices about 90% as fast as those USB-C chargers.
https://5v5.vainglorygame.com
I love this game. It's skill based. There is also a rising professional gaming in Vainglory.
Have fun.
2) You have a USB cable which can plug into pretty much anything which can supply power to the unit, but the device already comes near fully charged as it is.
3) Not coming with a PSU as standard isn't the same as not being able to get a PSU with your purchase, just like the vast number of people that use iPhone cases don't forego them because there isn't one built into the box—which would be better than the PSU since a tiny of bit of rubber and plastic is better for the environment than the harmful materials that go into making a PSU, and a iPhone case wears out while a PSU is likely to still be working independently.
2) what does the charge on the phone battery have to do with anything? I recharge mine 500+ times a year, the pre-charge means nothing.
3) If Apple stops including the charger, you think I’ll get a small break on the price? Yeah right. Also, to use your point against you, these chargers charge everything. Having a dozen of them is great.
You think I’ll get a discount for no power supply? Give me a break.
PS: It doesn’t help your argument to not know what you’re talking about (i.e.: not understanding basic terminology).
So, taking that into account, the iPhone X charged fully in 1h54m, and the Samsung S9+ (which to be fair does have a larger battery) charged in ... 1h50m.
I'm not sure this test was worth the effort expended, but at least we learned that if you are the sort of person who needs a usable amount of charge quickly from flat, the iPhone X is a better choice. For some, that will be valuable info.