From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Efficiency:
iPhone 17 Pro Max vs. Galaxy S26 Ultra (using EU 2023/1670 Standards)

Marketing departments can no longer hide behind amorphous (yet brilliant) efficiency claims because the EU requires standardized reproducible data.

a. Longevity (The "Kill Time"): With Samsung's battery rated for 1,200
cycles vs. Apple's 1,000, Samsung wins the long game on durability.

Even with similar power draw, the more resilient chemistry wins
the "years of use" metric over the crappy Apple battery components.

b. Efficiency can be considered to be work done per unit of energy.
i. iPhone 17 Pro Max: 53 hours / 4.8 Ah = 11.04 hrs/Ah
ii. Galaxy S26 Ultra: 55 hours / 4.855 Ah = 11.33 hrs/Ah

The margin is razor-thin (~2.6%) in favor of the Samsung device.
Despite Apple's (admittedly brilliant) claims, it's not more efficient.

Even Apple's historic crappy capacity isn't what hurts the iPhone here.
a. Capacity: Samsung 4,855 mAh / Apple 4,800 mAh (slight Samsung win)
b. Endurance: Samsung 55 Hours / Apple 53 Hours (slight Samsung win)
c. Cycle Life: Samsung 1,200 Cycles / Apple 1,000 Cycles (Samsung win)
d. Kill Time: Samsung ~7.53 Years / Apple ~6.05 Years (big Samsung win)

Even though the iPhone "efficiency" claims are shown to be nothing more
than (admittedly brilliant) marketing propaganda, to be fair to Apple,
for all we know the iPhone may have a higher "Idle Efficiency" (perhaps due
to presumed aggressive background management for all that we know).

However... Apple doesn't get to claim an efficiency based on placing a
phone in a drawer with nothing running and then claims it lasts longer.

The EU standardized test simulates active use-scrolling, calling and video where raw hardware efficiency matters most.

Like almost all my posts, I provide information that is found only in the
most accurate specifications on the net, where I ask others to check my
numbers because even I was surprised the iPhone lost on all counts.

a. On Efficiency:
It is a statistical tie or slight Samsung win.
The "Apple is twice as efficient" trope is officially dead.

b. On Longevity:
Samsung wins decisively due to better battery resilience.

This information exposes another component of the astoundingly huge hidden
cost of ownership of Apple products, where, if both phones cost the same,
the Samsung offers a significantly lower "Cost Per Year" by lasting nearly
18 months longer (in addition to far longer security promises & drastically lower repair costs).
--
I shill for no OEM. I treat every OEM with the science of engineering.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Update:

The Samsung lasts 1-1/2 years *longer* than the "efficient" iPhone
(proving, yet again, that this bogus "efficiency" proffers no value).

The discussion regarding the EU Ecodesign Regulation (EU 2023/1670)
provides the first standardized 'Kill Time' metric we have ever had.

Note: Kill-time is a term chosen to make the point, much like an LD50
is for drug companies, that it's a calculated value to a detrimental state.

I'll ignore the insults and focus on the facts because it's important
to parse the (admittedly brilliant) marketing propaganda surrounding this bogus amorphous "efficiency" that has never once resulted in actual value.

To that end of forcing the OEM's hand at actually defining that
(admittedly brilliant but bogus) "efficiency" claim, we have to all
thank God for the UK & for the EU forcing OEMs to common benchmarks!

Even I'm learning more about it every day, where I belatedly realized I
had misquoted the numbers from the EPREL/EU certified test profile, which
is a rigid, simulated "day" that every phone must run to get its label.

It turns out that it's much worse than I had previously calculated in
that the Galaxy S26 Ultra delivers ~24.5% more total standardized battery
life to 80% capacity than the iPhone 17 Pro Max.

That's roughly 542 extra days, or about 1.5 years of calculated use.
So much for that bogus amorphous (yet admittedly brilliant) "efficiency". .

Among other things, under these UK/EU European rules, manufacturers must declare the cycles a battery withstands before dropping to 80% health.

They could have picked any percentage.
They picked 80%.
So that's what we will use.

1. The specifications (EU certified)
A. Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max
a. Capacity: 4800 mAh
b. EU Endurance (Single Charge): 53 hours
c. EU Cycle Rating (to 80%): 1,000 cycles
d. Daily Cycles (24h/53h): 0.45283 cycles/day

B. Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra
a. Capacity: 4855 mAh
b. EU Endurance (Single Charge): 55 hours
c. EU Cycle Rating (to 80%): 1,200 cycles
d. Daily Cycles (24h/55h): 0.43636 cycles/day

2. 'Kill Time' = Total Life Cycles / Daily Cycles
A. Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max:
1,000 / ~0.453 = 2,208.33 days (approx 6.05 years)
B. Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra:
1,200 / ~0.436 = 2,750 days (approx 7.53 years)

3. Analysis of the data
A. Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max
Total Life: 2,208 days (approx 6.05 years)
Efficiency Calculation: 53 hours ������8 Ah = 11.04 hours per Ah
Efficiency: 11.04 hours per Ah

B. Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra
Total Life: 2,750 days (approx 7.53 years)
Efficiency Calculation: 55 hours ������855 Ah = 11.33 hours per Ah
Efficiency: 11.33 hours per Ah
Margin: 542 Days (approx 1.49 years)
Lifespan Advantage: +24.5%

4. Summary of the facts:
a. Efficiency:
Samsung wins. It gets 55 hours out of 4.855Ah,
while Apple gets 53 hours out of 4.8Ah.
b. Capacity:
Samsung wins, though Apple has finally started closing the
historic battery-capacity gap (but only recently).
c. Durability:
Samsung wins. The 1,200 cycle rating on Samsung's 2026 chemistry
provides the Kill-Time victory despite the claimed iPhone efficiency.

REFERENCES:
a. EU Regulation 2023/1670 (Ecodesign requirements)
<https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1670/oj>
b. EU Regulation 2023/1669 (Energy Labeling)
<https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1669/oj>
c. EPREL (European Product Registry for Energy Labeling)
<https://eprel.ec.europa.eu/screen/product/smartphonestablets20231669>
d. Bitkom Compliance (June 2025 Implementation Details)
<https://bitkom-compliance-solutions.com/en/news/new-eu-requirements-ecodesign-and-energy-labelling-smartphones-and-tablets-june-2025>
--
One out of about ten million people know what we know about smartphones. `
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Prior I used simplified "efficiency" calculations.
Below are more accurate corrections (results still end up similar).

To address the "efficiency" point more rigorously using the EU data,
we need to move beyond Amp-hours (current) to Watt-hours (energy).

Engineering efficiency is best expressed as the "Average Power Draw"
required to sustain the EU standardized "Day" profile.

1. Technical Efficiency Analysis (Energy vs. Power)
Standard Li-ion Nominal Voltage: 3.85V

A. Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max
a. Total Energy (Wh): 4.8 Ah * 3.85V = 18.48 Wh
b. EU Endurance: 53 Hours
c. Avg. Power Draw: 18.48 Wh / 53h = 348.68 mW

B. Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra
a. Total Energy (Wh): 4.855 Ah * 3.85V = 18.69 Wh
b. EU Endurance: 55 Hours
c. Avg. Power Draw: 18.69 Wh / 55h = 339.82 mW

2. Efficiency Conclusion:
a. Samsung Power Draw: 339.82 mW
b. Apple Power Draw: 348.68 mW
c. Delta: Samsung is ~2.54% more energy efficient per hour.

3. Summary of Engineering Facts:
a. Work Density:
Samsung's hardware/software stack requires less power (mW)
to execute the exact same EU-mandated task suite.
b. Total Energy Throughput (Lifetime):
iPhone: 1,000 cycles * 18.48 Wh = 18,480 Wh total life energy.
Galaxy: 1,200 cycles * 18.69 Wh = 22,428 Wh total life energy.

The Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra provides 3,948 Wh more total
utility over its lifespan than the iPhone. That is roughly
equivalent to 213 extra "full" iPhone charges.

Efficiency isn't just a marketing buzzword; it's physics.
The EU data shows Samsung is doing more work with less power .

Since this information is not found anywhere on the Internet (as far as I'm aware), please check the calculations for any omissions or errors I made.

The goal is to make our assessments based on facts, not on propaganda.
--
Note: There are slight differences in battery capacity depending on if it's
the marketing spec, the phone spec, or the EU spec for a given device.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2