My question is about fast charging. What it's the maximum accepted by the device? XIaomi charger is 33W on it's quickest mode. According to the device chipset (Snapdragon 778G 5G) it supports QC 4.0+.
It supports more wattage than 33W? And QC 4.0+ chargers with USB type C cable on both sides?
Nobody?
Since the advertised charging rate is 33W there is no reason to believe that a higher speed is possible.
Related
So..........anyone know if it's Qualcomm Quick Charge 3.0 or something else? I found one report that claims it's QC3, but not sure of their source. Not sure if anyone saw any "hands on" videos where they were able to ask Google about it.
Mahalo
Don't know for sure, but I was curious and searched for info on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 that the Pixels use. The 821 does support quickcharge 3.0 so chances are the Pixels will use it.
https://www.qualcomm.com/products/snapdragon/processors/821
EDIT: Well reading this https://plus.google.com/+BensonLeung/posts/GnjQBqAovnD it looks like Qualcomm quickcharge is not used, but instead they use the USB-C fast charging standard. " I would really prefer if they had mentioned Power Delivery, instead of "Type-C quick charging" which could be misconstrued as Qualcomm's proprietary tech. The Pixels do not use proprietary technology to charge. They use standard USB Type-C and USB Power Delivery."
Tried to post last night, but couldn't. As mentioned above, it uses USB-PD, and not qc 3.0. Many argue USB-PD > QC 3.0.
When I use a Qualcomm QC3 charger with my Pixel C, it rapid charges. QC3 supports a 5v3a 15w charge, which is the Pixel C's USB PD requirement. As QC3 scales its voltage and amperage, it's likely QC3 chargers will support USB PD at 18w too.
(I havent gotten it working the other way around, for example, the USB PD charger rapid charging my HTC 10 that uses quick charge.)
the mi max 3 supports QC3.0 charging, but does it support the PD charging standard that google have been pushing for as the open standard? would be interested to know if there was any benefit in faster charge times.
While the Redmi Note 8 supports 18W fast charging and Qualcomm QC 3.0 can it support the Mi 27W Charging ?
i think it don't support 27w ,but even it does you don't wanna lose your battery
If you want to get rid of it just send it to me ^............^
dee.dude.ig said:
While the Redmi Note 8 supports 18W fast charging and Qualcomm QC 3.0 can it support the Mi 27W Charging ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only support until 18W
Does anyone know if the charger poco f3 comes with supports quick charge 3+ that the phone also supports?
Not sure I follow your question.
The stock charger support quick charge 3.0+, the chipset support quick charge 5, but the phone charging is limited to 33w.
Nemix77 said:
Not sure I follow your question.
The stock charger support quick charge 3.0+, the chipset support quick charge 5, but the phone charging is limited to 33w.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The phone comes as 33w quick charge 3+. My question was whether the 33w charger in the phone box charges with the quick charge 3+ protocol. I cant say it more simply than that.
When checked via CIT hardware test, it shows PD protocol.
Nemix77 said:
When checked via CIT hardware test, it shows PD protocol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whats PD?
Pd is power delivery
I think the charger attached is using everything poco f3 is capable. Very fast charging speed.
From what I heard from another thread the Poco F3 has a usb 2 port with extra pinout for 33W PD communication with the charger
Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but I just found it through a search. From what I read, the QC system pays a royalty to Qualcomm because it is their proprietary technology, while PD is royalty free. The F3 has QC instead of PD. QC is much more efficient and produces less heat when charging a battery from what I read.
In the long run, try to use the QC charger that comes with the F3 to prolong the battery life (i.e. less heat generation while charging - heat's the real battery killer)
Hope this helps someone . . .
qu4k3r said:
Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but I just found it through a search. From what I read, the QC system pays a royalty to Qualcomm because it is their proprietary technology, while PD is royalty free. The F3 has QC instead of PD. QC is much more efficient and produces less heat when charging a battery from what I read.
In the long run, try to use the QC charger that comes with the F3 to prolong the battery life (i.e. less heat generation while charging - heat's the real battery killer)
Hope this helps someone . . .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I only QC charge my Poco F3 and confirm that is cooler than PD.
I bought my S22+ 3 months ago and wasn't bothered at all that it comes without a charger since I have a 65W Lenovo charger at home for my laptop and a Xiaomi Mi Powerbank 3 Pro 45W, both PD compliant. I was very dissapointed to find out that both of them trigger only "Fast Charging" which takes 2 hours for a full charge. As far as I know, Samsung uses term "Super Fast" for both 25 and 45W so those devices are charging with less than 20W. My first thoughts were that greedy Samsung uses some proprietary protocol to force you to buy their utterly expensive chargers. But I was surprised yesterday when I connected my phone to another Lenovo 65W charger at my workplace to find out that it triggered "Super Fast Charging" and charged my phone with the speed of 120 %/h according to AccuBattery.
So now I'm confused and decided to find out what are the requirements from a charger to trigger it's Super Fast Charging. All my three chargers are PD compliant and none of those support the PPS, only PD. Here are the voltages and currents on the output. Only the green one triggers SFC, and Samsung's of course (I was too lazy to put the green color).
5V9V12V15V20VLENOVO 65W charger3A3A/3A3.25ALENOVO 65W charger2A2A/3A3.25AMi Powebank 3 Pro 45W3A3A3A3A2ASamsung 45W charger3A3A/3A2.25ASamsung 25W charger3A2.77A///
Looking at the Lenovo ones, things make some sense. The bottom one has only 2A at the 9V output so it could be that Samsung is using 9V which provides 27W (enough to trigger SFC) on the top one, and only 18W at the bottom one. But when we look at the powerbank, it also has 3A which should provide 27W and trigger SFC although it doesn't. The difference between a working Lenovo charger and a powebank is on the 20V rail. But still, powebank provides 40W on the 20V rail, more than enough to trigger SFC. Looking at the original Samsung 25W charger, it has only 5V and 9V rail and my PoweBank meets all those requirements, yet it doesn't trigger SFC.
Then I stumbled upon this article where it says that Samsung uses 10-11 V voltage to prevent extensive heats. It also says that, if the charger doesn't support PPS and doesn't provide this voltage, it will negotiate the next close one. This makes perfect sense with the working Lenovo charger - it probably negotiates 9V with 3A which gives 27W. The other Lenovo will again work on 9V but only 2A. But the Powebank doesn't fit into the story. In it's case, it can negotiate either 9V or 12V which are close, and for both of them it can provide 3A which would be 27W or 36W. But why it's not working!? Also Sammy's original 45W charger provides only 3A on 9V so it needs either the 15 or the 20V rail to reach 45W.
What the hell Sammy?