Xiaomi's 100W charger can juice a battery from zero to 100% in 17 minutes

[midian182]

Forward-looking: We’re still waiting for regular smartphones with battery lives that stretch into days, but the next best thing is faster charging. Those who want to juice their batteries as quickly as possible might want to check out Xiaomi’s upcoming 100W charger, which boosts a phone from zero to 100 percent in just 17 minutes.

XDA-Developers spotted a video of the charger posted to the Weibo account of Lu Weibing, General Manager of Xiaomi’s Redmi sub-brand. The time-lapse clip shows a device with a 4,000mAh battery using the Super Charge Turbo tech going up against an Oppo phone (3,700mAh) and the company’s SuperVOOC technology.

Oppo’s 50W SuperVOOC is currently the quickest charger on the market, but even it can’t compete with Xiaomi's product, which takes seven minutes to hit 50 percent charge and another ten minutes to reach full capacity. In the same amount of time, the Oppo charger juiced the battery to 65 percent.

Most fast chargers take between an hour and two hours to fill a phone’s battery, and SuperVOOC can do the job in just over 30 minutes.

Xiaomi's charger isn’t just a concept. Lu says it will soon go into mass production, and we’re likely to see it bundled with a future Xiaomi or Redmi smartphone. There’s no explanation of exactly how the technology works, though, and there are questions over heat issues and the number of recharge cycles the battery will have.

Those who prefer a phone that lasts longer might want to check out Energizer’s P18K. It features an 18,000mAh battery, but its bulky size seems to be putting people off buying one.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/79363-xiaomi-100w-charger-can-juice-battery-zero-100.html

 

[Vulcanproject]

Holy smokin batteries. The battery won't have much of a lifespan if you do that very often.

 

[OutlawCecil]

I agree, I'd like to see the lifespan of the battery after doing this multiple times. Oppo (OnePlus) found a way to make it sustainable without destroying the battery.

 

[redhat]

Thanks but same as medicine industry, sufficient solution would destroy the profit of many rich companies

 

[treetops]

They have had competitive phones for years.... I don't know why people count them out.

 

[Badvok]

Why do phone companies and reporters keep using thousands of millis? Wouldn't it be much nicer to just use 'Ah'?

 

[bas416]

5 times

 

[Namtrooper]

I was about to mention won't charging batteries this hard have an adverse affect on the lifespan of the battery. Seems everyone beat me to it.

 

[Kibaruk]

I agree, I'd like to see the lifespan of the battery after doing this multiple times. Oppo (OnePlus) found a way to make it sustainable without destroying the battery.

I understand the concept of battery cycles, but why something like this could potentially destroy a battery? Is it because of the heat generated?

My guess is that the new charger would also require compatible technology in the phone in order to make the fast charging possible, how could this offset whatever could potentially destroy the battery?

Thanks but same as medicine industry, sufficient solution would destroy the profit of many rich companies

This makes absolutely no on-topic sense.

 

[soulsassassin]

I agree, I'd like to see the lifespan of the battery after doing this multiple times. Oppo (OnePlus) found a way to make it sustainable without destroying the battery.

I understand the concept of battery cycles, but why something like this could potentially destroy a battery? Is it because of the heat generated?

My guess is that the new charger would also require compatible technology in the phone in order to make the fast charging possible, how could this offset whatever could potentially destroy the battery?

Thanks but same as medicine industry, sufficient solution would destroy the profit of many rich companies

This makes absolutely no on-topic sense.

sometimes people just complain for the sake of complaining

 

[redhat]

I agree, I'd like to see the lifespan of the battery after doing this multiple times. Oppo (OnePlus) found a way to make it sustainable without destroying the battery.

I understand the concept of battery cycles, but why something like this could potentially destroy a battery? Is it because of the heat generated?

My guess is that the new charger would also require compatible technology in the phone in order to make the fast charging possible, how could this offset whatever could potentially destroy the battery?

Thanks but same as medicine industry, sufficient solution would destroy the profit of many rich companies

This makes absolutely no on-topic sense.

It makes, putting a lot of effort into making faster charging techs is a waste of time unless they deal with problem itself (battery capacity) which I represent it with simillar problem (cure vs treatment)

 

[p51d007]

On one hand, people seem to toss their phones and buy new ones every couple years, so the impact to the battery life might be not "that" bad, but, I DO NOT like fast chargers. I prefer the slow charge, to have less impact on the performance life of the battery. By fast charging, you are placing more current, into the cells of the battery, which can heat the chemical reaction over time and reduce the performance. Plus, even with the current limiters, and thermal fuses to prevent an overcharge, with as much energy packed into such a small space, the isolation sheets between the anode & cathode must be PERFECT. Any flaws might compromise that isolation, given that amount of current flowing into a cell, and the next thing you know POOF!
My last two phones had quick chargers, but I never bothered taking them out of the box. I just plugged the usb cable into the computer and slow charged them.
Hey, it's your preference, but, considering how many damaged screens, cracked, dented cases I see on sites, youtube & what not, I don't know if I'd want to chance it, shoving that much current into a battery that has been bent, by people shoving them into their pockets.

 

[ChrisH1]

I really liked 'the old days' where the battery was a clip-in, and if you wanted a thin phone you got a little battery, and if you wanted a week's worth you got a brick.

 

[captaincranky]

Why do phone companies and reporters keep using thousands of millis? Wouldn't it be much nicer to just use 'Ah'?

Why aren't monitor ratios maintained to the lowest common denominator?

I think it's because people are too lazy, or simply unable, to do the mental mathematical manipulation to visualize the comparison between screens without basing it on the 16:9 standard. Hence Cinemascope at 2.35:1:00, becomes "21:9", while 1.6:1.0 becomes "16:10", while the LCD would actually be 8:5.

Besides, 4000 is a so much bigger number than 4.

 

[hahahanoobs]

Not sure why some of y'all visit tech sites if all you do is question it....

 

[captaincranky]

Not sure why some of y'all visit tech sites if all you do is question it....

To find out which tech needs to be questioned, obviously.

Me personally though, I'm here for the laughs, plus I'm enjoying watching people's heads fill up with zeros and ones, until they can't hold anything else. Once you figure out that "device", is a marketer's euphemism for, "whatchamacallit", you'll realize how absurd it all is.

In my neck of the woods, the term, "device", would suffer further disambiguation and be called, "a jawn". Sic, "Hey ******* let me hold your cell jawn, so I can catch up with *******, and git us a bag of crack".

Once upon a time, in the later paleolithic era when I was born, we used to buy things for which we already had a need. Nowadays, people buy "devices" because they absorb the propaganda associated with them, and try to figure out a use for the "damned things", once they get them home.

 

[dogofwars]

Why do phone companies and reporters keep using thousands of millis? Wouldn't it be much nicer to just use 'Ah'?

Why aren't monitor ratios maintained to the lowest common denominator?

I think it's because people are too lazy, or simply unable, to do the mental mathematical manipulation to visualize the comparison between screens without basing it on the 16:9 standard. Hence Cinemascope at 2.35:1:00, becomes "21:9", while 1.6:1.0 becomes "16:10", while the LCD would actually be 8:5.

Besides, 4000 is a so much bigger number than 4.

Exactly it is marketing first because "more" is more.

 

[amghwk]

What we need actually, is phones with AT LEAST 5000mAh.

Phones nowadays, boasting the latest and the fastest hardware, but severely lacking in battery reserve.

I miss the days of Nokia 3310. The charger was rarely used every week.