Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
QC5 is supposed to be 70% more efficient by using split batteries with parallel charging that will heat the battery even less than QC4.... So no, it won't kill battery lifespan, on the contrary.... It will only work with upcoming devices, not older ones. Also, you are not obliged to use it, you can always use slow charging (as for instance I do at night...)
 
"In addition to offering much faster charging, Quick Charge 5 is up to 70 percent more efficient and up to 10 degrees Celsius cooler compared to Quick Charge 4 and 4+. Qualcomm says there are 12 separate voltage, current, and temperature protections included."

I'm pretty suspicious of Qualcomm's claims. Almost never is faster charging cooler. Not unless the chips are GaN based and they are talking about the charging equipment being lower temp - I find it very hard to believe the battery can charge a lot faster and be considerably cooler, that's not how the physics works - I have an MSc in this sort of stuff.

I've yet to see faster charging not resulting in lower battery longevity - in everything from Tesla's and Porsche's to smartphones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 480951 and bernuli
"In addition to offering much faster charging, Quick Charge 5 is up to 70 percent more efficient and up to 10 degrees Celsius cooler compared to Quick Charge 4 and 4+. Qualcomm says there are 12 separate voltage, current, and temperature protections included."

I'm pretty suspicious of Qualcomm's claims. Almost never is faster charging cooler. Not unless the chips are GaN based and they are talking about the charging equipment being lower temp - I find it very hard to believe the battery can charge a lot faster and be considerably cooler, that's not how the physics works - I have an MSc in this sort of stuff.
see my comment above.... it will be done using new batteries...
 
I know a thing or two about lithium ion battery chargers having designed chips for that application. This is undoubtedly going to sacrifice battery lifetime in a significant way, so use this charging technology very sparingly! Take what you'll pay for such a charger and the few times you'd actually want to use it, and then think of it in terms of the price you'll be paying per device charge (and that's not even factoring in how much closer you'll be to paying for a replacement battery when that time comes). This argument holds for any fast charging lithium ion technology.

Lots of people here commenting on something they know ***** about.

Yours stands out, hats off.
 
Apple, please no. Unless Samsung is the first to market with solid state batteries (which would be huge) I don’t want this.
 
When Qualcomm released Quick Charge 3.0 they claimed "Quick Charge 3.0 is up to 4–6 °C cooler, 16% faster and 38% more efficient than Quick Charge 2.0". It was still hot AF.

When Qualcomm released Quick Charge 4.0 they claimed "Quick Charge 4 with Dual Charge++ is up to 5 °C cooler, 20% faster and 30% more efficient than Quick Charge 3.0 with Dual Charge+". It was still hot AF.

Forgive me for not buying the marketing for Quick Charge 5.0.

1ssfw9fj12911.png
 
It literally says in the article it’s reducing the temperature by 10° C compared to other technologies.

I miss the days when Apple led the market with innovation.

I think it's hypocritically hysterical that there's loads of mockery citing exploding android phones that skip right past this part of the article.

Also skipping that this standard has already existed and is not responsible for exploding phones...

And if we *really* want to poke fun: keep in mind that it was apple recently who "tried" to develop this little known thing called AirPower, repeatedly failed, and then scrapped it after it already went public that it was an upcoming product.

Meanwhile, Apple was the company that for many, many years kept delivering 5w power chargers, only *very recently* started including stronger chargers in the higher tier models, only to be rumored to be axing that entirely.

Despite this, one can go on Amazon and purchase mutli-port PD chargers with USB-C and USB-A ports for charging multiple devices quickly, and inexpensively, while being well built. The new one is they're all developing reliable 100W PD chargers that are significantly cheaper than Apple's bricks.

tl;dr y'all are laughing in the wrong direction.
 
Jesus, pumping more than 100W into a phone is insane. I don't know what that does to battery health.
 
Need to move to fuel cell technology then there is no charging time at all, slide in a new fuel module and your good to go for 24-48 hours.
 
Forgive me for not buying the marketing for Quick Charge 5.0.

That's pretty funny :) Qualcomm could only be partially to blame though. They may have a specification that does produce the results they profess but the recommended implementation may not be followed by Android phone manufacturers for a myriad of product reasons. This is where Qualcomm could be at fault: don't over market a technology that no one is going to implement to meet its full potential.
 
That’s going to be one hot phone!
Bye-bye battery longevity. I am sure Qualcomm is trading battery longevity for significantly quicker charging. I don't think that if you consistently use this quick charge (like every day for 2 years) that it will have the same battery life as an iPhone that uses Apple's Quick Charge adapter or even a third party quick charger that charges at 7W max.
 
I think it's hypocritically hysterical that there's loads of mockery citing exploding android phones that skip right past this part of the article.

Also skipping that this standard has already existed and is not responsible for exploding phones...

And if we *really* want to poke fun: keep in mind that it was apple recently who "tried" to develop this little known thing called AirPower, repeatedly failed, and then scrapped it after it already went public that it was an upcoming product.

Meanwhile, Apple was the company that for many, many years kept delivering 5w power chargers, only *very recently* started including stronger chargers in the higher tier models, only to be rumored to be axing that entirely.

Despite this, one can go on Amazon and purchase mutli-port PD chargers with USB-C and USB-A ports for charging multiple devices quickly, and inexpensively, while being well built. The new one is they're all developing reliable 100W PD chargers that are significantly cheaper than Apple's bricks.

tl;dr y'all are laughing in the wrong direction.
If Apple announced this, people would be praising and drooling.
 
Bye-bye battery longevity.

Certainly a 100W charger won't be a standard offering out of the box. That means those who want or need fast charging can consciously decide to make the longevity trade-off. Having the option when you need it is awesome, even if 95% of the time you are charging at, say, 10W.
 
It literally says in the article it’s reducing the temperature by 10° C compared to other technologies.

I read that as saying the charger is cooler, not the battery. The charger doesn’t know the battery temperature.

This might be ok in an emergency, generally, faster charging cuts battery life.
 
I’m glad Apple is using industry standard USB-C + PD, not proprietary Qualcomm crap.

Same. This will be THE reason why I update my iPhone next. I just updated my Anker external batteries to this. USB C all the way now.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.