Samsung S24 Ultra smokes iPhone 16 Pro Max in battery life test

[Redaktion]

In a recent battery life test that mimicked real-life usage conducted by a prominent YouTube channel, the iPhone 16 Pro Max was outperformed by Samsung's S24 Ultra by quite a prominent margin. However, the new iPhone 16 variants did manage to outperform their predecessors, thereby proving Apple's battery life improvement claims.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-S24-Ultra-smokes-iPhone-16-Pro-Max-in-battery-life-test.891558.0.html

[mdongwe]

Like, really?
This contradicts your own and gsmarena reviews, S24U doesn't even "smoke" 15 Pro Max.
These clickbaits smh I am so done

[liviu993]

Like, really?
This contradicts your own and gsmarena reviews, S24U doesn't even "smoke" 15 Pro Max.
These clickbaits smh I am so done

Like really ? did you even watch the video ? every battery test has it's own metodology, in some of them iphone is better, in other ones the Samsung is. This test is more closer to real life usage, not like other tests with a lot of video encoding and performance benchmarks, in those tests iphone wins, but almost nobody use a phone like that.

[Mr Majestyk]

All these tests are idiotic, we need a normalised score that takes battery size into account. This is how we quote efficiency of EV's, by giving km/kWh. Of course if you have a bigger battery it will go further, but dividing runtime by battery-size will actually allow us to compare directly the efficiency of the phones. If something runs 20% longer but has 2x the battery size that doesn't make it a better phone. So give is the normalised runtime scores. That will also allow us to check Apple's claims A18 ir more efficient. But I don't beleive it becuase they were hiding battery size from the public..

[paviko]

All these tests are idiotic, we need a normalised score that takes battery size into account. This is how we quote efficiency of EV's, by giving km/kWh.

Not quite. If you want to compare Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 to A18 Pro then yes. But we are comparing phones not SOC/CPU. You can't buy iPhone with 5000 mAh battery. Do you buy phone only because it has Apple SOC?
The same mistake is with notebooks. We can't compare easily cpu because every noteboook has different components. Take MSI Prestige 16 with Cole Ultra 1gen, it's better than Macbook in battery life... But everyone bash Intel/Amd as weak and Apple/Qualccom as superior...

[Martin82]

All these tests are idiotic, we need a normalised score that takes battery size into account. This is how we quote efficiency of EV's, by giving km/kWh. Of course if you have a bigger battery it will go further, but dividing runtime by battery-size will actually allow us to compare directly the efficiency of the phones. If something runs 20% longer but has 2x the battery size that doesn't make it a better phone. So give is the normalised runtime scores. That will also allow us to check Apple's claims A18 ir more efficient. But I don't beleive it becuase they were hiding battery size from the public..

What kind of logic is that? It's not like you can get an iPhone with a bigger battery if you are not satisfied with the result and it's not like efficiency will matter in this case. Only actual runtimes matter.

As for tests, still nobody tests the most important and natural thing: 4G/5G usage. WiFi tests are idiotic. It's a MOBILE phone, you're supposed to use it on the go, not at home.

[chooch1420]

As for tests, still nobody tests the most important and natural thing: 4G/5G usage. WiFi tests are idiotic. It's a MOBILE phone, you're supposed to use it on the go, not at home.

I don't disagree, but I think it'd be difficult to get consistent results. As more people use a tower, the more varied the results can be. I'd imagine weather can also effect things more than it would with wi-fi that's a few feet away.

[Joe]

1 hour is smoked?  Considering the Apple probably smoked it in performance, I'll take the loss of an hour.