iPhone 17 Pro Max's USB-C Charging Speeds Tested With Apple Chargers

[escargot3]

TL;DW:

View attachment 2556236

had no idea "good" MagSafe was that competitive with a plug, but I'm still annoyed that there's no good USB-C docks on the market anymore.

Its not. This test is measuring only what is being drawn from the charging brick. Not what is actually making it to the phone. Because wireless chargers waste so much energy, and so much of the wattage is lost in the energy transfer to waste heat etc, only a small portion of those 32W is actually making it to the battery. That’s why wireless charging is so slow.

 

[escargot3]

While you’re at it check the data transfer speeds from the USB port, not just the specifications but actual real-time data.

I think Apple specified that it supports USB 3.2 2X2 10 GB speeds but which Apple computer supports USB-C 3.2 2×2? My M2 studio max does not support that speed.

Every computer with USB C Apple has ever made supports that 10 gb speed lol

 

[Eric_WVGG]

Its not. This test is measuring only what is being drawn from the charging brick.

ohhhhh interesting… well yeah, magsafe charging docks are dumb. USB-C plz

 

[jimscard]

"40W Dynamic Power Adapter with 60W Max"

I'm confused; is Apple trying to do their own thing again rather than follow the USB-C PD specifications?

Nope

 

[gtg465x]

TL;DW:

View attachment 2556236

had no idea "good" MagSafe was that competitive with a plug, but I'm still annoyed that there's no good USB-C docks on the market anymore.

Keep in mind, that 32.83 watts for MagSafe is what's being drawn from the wall, not what's making it to the phone. Some of that is lost to heat and other inherent inefficiencies of wireless, so only about 25 watts is getting to the phone. Still, the latest MagSafe / Qi 2 25W spec is pretty impressive, and matches wired iPhone charging speeds from just a couple years ago... 13/14/15 Pro were limited to 27 watt wired charging, and 12 Pro could only do 20 watts wired!

 

[gtg465x]

Would not call it a joke. Maybe overpriced. The marketing is also a bit deceptive. Most users would probably be better off buying a slightly larger charger that can sustain 60 W for longer periods of time.

I would argue the marketing isn't deceptive at all. As far as I'm aware, most other brands advertise the peak speed of their charger, even if it can only maintain that speed for a minute. If most other companies were selling this charger, they would just call it a 60W charger based on the peak speed. Apple is being more transparent by advertising it as a 40W charger that can achieve 60W peak.

 

[MilaM]

I would argue the marketing isn't deceptive at all. As far as I'm aware, most other brands advertise the peak speed of their charger, even if it can only maintain that speed for a minute. If most other companies were selling this charger, they would just call it a 60W charger based on the peak speed. Apple is being more transparent by advertising it as a 40W charger that can achieve 60W peak.

It's pretty unique marketing language I have not encountered before. I probably know more about USB-C chargers than the average person and frankly could not understand at first what 'dynamic' is supposed to mean in this context. If they just plainly said that it can output 60 W for approx. 30 minutes and 40 W afterwards it would have been much clearer. So yeah, I think it's a little bit deceptive.

But it's clever marketing for sure. I would not be surprised if other manufacturer start to copy it soon.