Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
IT Technology

Why Watts Should Replace mAh as Essential Spec for Mobile Devices (theverge.com) 182

Tech manufacturers continue misleading consumers with impressive-sounding but less useful specs like milliamp-hours and megahertz, while hiding the one measurement that matters most: watts. The Verge argues that the watt provides the clearest picture of a device's true capabilities by showing how much power courses through chips and how quickly batteries drain. With elementary math, consumers could easily calculate battery life by dividing watt-hours by power consumption. The Verge: The Steam Deck gaming handheld is my go-to example of how handy watts can be. With a 15-watt maximum processor wattage and up to 9 watts of overhead for other components, a strenuous game drains its 49Wh battery in roughly two hours flat. My eight-year-old can do that math: 15 plus 9 is 24, and 24 times 2 is 48. You can fit two hour-long 24-watt sessions into 48Wh, and because you have 49Wh, you're almost sure to get it.

With the least strenuous games, I'll sometimes see my Steam Deck draining the battery at a speed of just 6 watts -- which means I can get eight hours of gameplay because 6 watts times 8 hours is 48Wh, with 1Wh remaining in the 49Wh battery.
Unlike megahertz, wattage also indicates sustained performance capability, revealing whether a processor can maintain high speeds or will throttle due to thermal constraints. Watts is also already familiar to consumers through light bulbs and power bills, but manufacturers persist with less transparent metrics that make direct comparisons difficult.

Why Watts Should Replace mAh as Essential Spec for Mobile Devices

Comments Filter:
  • I've seen this with RVs. However, people get used to stuff like a 12 volt battery bank with 1200 Ah is something that can power an air conditioner for 8-12 hours, depending on the BTUs of the A/C [1]. Switching that to 14400 watt-hours or 14kWh makes sense, but people don't really like that change.

    [1]: BTUs, tons (1 ton being 12,000 BTU), etc... IMHO, it would be nice to just do that with watts. Same with horsepower. However, I'd be tarred and feathered saying that someone's 300 hp engine is 223 kW.

    • geez BTU's is even more out of date.
  • Watts (volts x amps) is great for knowing how much POWER the battery can output (peak watts, constant watts - the size of the gasoline pipeline), but USELESS to know how big of a battery (how much gasoline/fule the tank holds) it is. mAh at the very least lets us calculate the battery capacity by multiplying the battery's voltage spec to get ENERGY (how much gasoline it holds). Ideally we'd know all of the above--ENERGY (in watt-hours, kilowatt-hous), CURRENT capacity (peak and safe max average amperage c

    • TFS specifically mentions watt-hours, and we know that's what the author means, so you're just being pedantic. If there's anything to criticize here, it's that when only a mAh spec is given, you can usually assume the device is running on a 3.7v nominal LiPo cell and do the math yourself. More often than not, when you're dealing with a device powered by multiple cells in series, a watt-hour rating will be provided and/or the nominal voltage of the pack will be specified.

      The big notable exception that stan

    • by Tx ( 96709 )

      The headline may be misleading, but the summary I think is pretty clear, the author is calling for battery capacity to be specified in Watt-Hours, and for power draw in Watts to be a key spec given for devices - the example's right there - he's not calling for battery capacity to be specified in Watts.

    • by ukoda ( 537183 )
      I suspect they actually mean Watt hours, not Watts, which is far more useful than mAh as you don't know what the voltage they have chosen to use is and if there is any system losses that should be applied.

      So while you are technically right, and it is worth point out Watts are not a measure energy storage, maybe you are being a bit pedantic in the way you make your point?
    • I see SOMEONE read ONLY the FUCKING title.

      CAPITALS!

      • I read only the title anc concluded that the writer was a complete idiot. Now you tell me it's just the title and the title writer is a f***ing bloody idiot? Sorry for assuming that a website wouldn't hire morons to write their headlines
  • Somehow they thing that giving them watts will magically allow them to estimate battery life completely ignoring non-linear power drain of batteries but are too dumb to do a basic multiplication to get the watts they so truly want.

    They trivilise a complex matter while thinking a unit change will fundamentally improve things.

    • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      For the longest time the entire game of The Verge was to pretend they were journalists with expertise, that they were a multi-dimensional version of the specialty rag when they were, in fact, frauds that pushed manufacturer speeds and feeds for profit. Now the veil is off, The Verge proudly displays its ignorance and incompetence. The Verge now wants the public to see who it truly is, a dumb-as-fuck reflection of society as a whole.

    • by piojo ( 995934 )

      Somehow they thing that giving them watts will magically allow them to estimate battery life completely ignoring non-linear power drain of batteries but are too dumb to do a basic multiplication to get the watts they so truly want.

      First of all, even my flashlight has a boost-buck converter that makes power draw constant. Your cell phone certainly has a switching converter. Moreover, you can't convert amp hours to watt hours with basic math. Or any math. There's not enough information. The easy way is to integrate the measure of voltage over time under constant current discharge. I suspect you know this, but in your eagerness to make Verge sound dumb, you misrepresented the physics.

    • by flink ( 18449 )

      It's not always obvious nor advertised the voltage they are using to quote you mAh, so calculating the total energy storage capacity isn't always straightforward.

  • Is not the place to demand sensible units.
    • by Powercntrl ( 458442 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2025 @05:03AM (#65275723) Homepage

      As someone who lives in Florida, I can tell you precisely what is wrong with Celsius: A set point of 23C will run the air conditioning until it is too cold, and 24C will let it get too hot before it kicks on. Whereas a thermostat with a 1 degree swing set at 74F is just heavenly.

      I guess folks who are just used to being miserably uncomfortable in their homes all the time don't get it. Certainly, the same thing could be accomplished by adding a decimal of precision to the Celsius mode, but it seems like the thermostat manufacturers haven't caught on.

      • That's not really a problem with units, but with thermostat makers user interface, sadly. My Carrier infinity system thermostats supposedly measure 1/100th of a degree internally (not sure if F or C), in each of the 10 zones, but the screen and hard buttons don't display a decimal point, or allow one to be set, unfortunately. I left my system on F, because I like finer control as you do, though not specifically 23/24C. But even after living 29 years in the USA, it continues to bug me to see temperatures in

        • That's not really a problem with units, but with thermostat makers user interface, sadly.

          Comparing whole values between the two, the closest the Celsius scale can get is only within 2.2 degrees of accuracy on the Fahrenheit scale.

          Yes. That IS a problem of unit conversion. One scale is far more gross than the other. Especially if vendors don’t bother with decimal options.

          • Yes. That IS a problem of unit conversion. One scale is far more gross than the other. Especially if vendors donâ(TM)t bother with decimal options.

            No, it really isn't. It's the user interface of specific thermostats. I don't recall which countries I was in at the time, but I've definitely seen thermostats in hotel rooms where the up and down buttons change the set point by 0.5 degrees Celsius and the display showed the set point with either a .0 or .5 at the end.

            It's a UI decision whether a display shows integers only, one decimal place restricted to only .0 or .5, or one decimal place that can take on all values from .0 to .9. I agree integers only i

            • ..I agree integers only is more aesthetically pleasing, but who really cares about the aesthetics of a thermostat's LCD.

              No one cares. Just as no one cares to be forced to find human comfort within fractions of whole numbers somewhere between 23C and 24C. This is how the more reasonable scale of Fahrenheit was justified.

              If a system displays whole numbers in Celsius, then it’s reasonable to assume that system is probably limited to that accuracy until proven otherwise. Are there different accuracy requirements between Celsius and Fahrenheit vendors who sell whole-value only appliances? Yes. Because of the scale dif

              • If a system displays whole numbers in Celsius, then itâ(TM)s reasonable to assume that system is probably limited to that accuracy until proven otherwise.

                But the system doesn't display whole numbers, that was my point. I have seen with my own eyes and adjusted the temperature with my own finger on thermostats in several hotel rooms where the system displayed and performed in half degrees Celsius.

                I'm not disputing that there may also be thermostats that only have a resolution of whole degrees Celsius, but I know for a fact that ones exist that function in half degrees Celsius.

                That makes it a user interface issue because thermostat designers make the decision

                • by niks42 ( 768188 )
                  My Hive thermostat goes up in halves of a C ... which is good for a very similar problem. To heat the house to 22C is too much, 21C is too cold. Goldilocks and I like it just so, at 21.5C. We are so metricated now that I would struggle to tell you what that is in Fahrenheit without asking Siri.
            • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

              "I've definitely seen thermostats in hotel rooms where the up and down buttons change the set point by 0.5 degrees Celsius and the display showed the set point with either a .0 or .5 at the end."

              Correct. This is the world's dumbest partisan argument. Even SuperKendall isn't this bad.

          • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

            "Especially if vendors don’t bother with decimal options."

            No, ENTIRELY because vendors don't bother with decimal options (if that is even true). Built into this absurd working-backwards discussion is the implication that these two units of temperature were DEVISED for the purpose of setting a thermostat, one obviously designed better than the other. No one even needs to say how stupid you are for even taking up your side of the argument.

            And "decimal options" aren't required either, only fractional o

        • by flink ( 18449 )

          For me, I just find that Fahrenheit maps to a nice 0-100 scale for human comfort. 70 in terms of grades is a C, or average grade, and is an "average" comfortable room temperature. Anything below 0 or over 100 is going to require some special preparation to be outdoors comfortably for extended periods. Other types of weather fit nicely into 10 degree increments. 50-60 is sweatshirt weather, 90-100 is great for swimming, etc.

      • by munehiro ( 63206 )

        I don't think any human can appreciate the difference of one deg celsius at that range. You are talking bollocks.

        Besides, my thermostat at home allows for 0.5 degrees. It's a google nest.

        • I don't think any human can appreciate the difference of one deg celsius at that range.

          You have never worked in an office. A single degree F delta is noticed by people who have very strong opinions on appropriate temperature.

          • Yes, they notice it immediately either from the dial that sets it, or from the temperature sensor on the AC.

            And it doesn't matter that a properly calibrated thermometer will show a completely different temperature at that very moment.

        • Besides, my thermostat at home allows for 0.5 degrees. It's a google nest.

          I have a few very cheap thermometers from aliexpress. They display 10ths of degree celsius, and two of them show almost exactly the same temperature in the same location.

        • I don't think any human can appreciate the difference of one deg celsius at that range. You are talking bollocks.

          Besides, my thermostat at home allows for 0.5 degrees. It's a google nest.

          Nearly all thermostats that offer centigrade temperatures allow half-degree increments, and that is precisely because your first statement -- that humans can't appreciate or notice a 1C delta -- is completely wrong. Which is why Centigrade isn't great for human temperature use. Fahrenheit is weird, but its granularity is a very good fit for what temperature deltas humans can feel and care about. Its 10-degree increments are also quite meaningful in human terms, and its 0-100 temperatures are a good approxi

      • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        If only someone would invent a number between 23 and 24 for the delicate among us.

  • Wh, not W (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hackertourist ( 2202674 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2025 @04:15AM (#65275657)

    The capacity of a battery can usefully be specified in Wh. Power draw is in W, multiply by the time that power is drawn to get the capacity you used.

    Wh is superior to Ah: if you only know the Ah, you have to find out the voltage of the battery to find out what capacity it has. Power draw for devices is generally specified in W, not A.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      The useful battery capacity that the owner can get is complicated by the fact that these days batteries are rarely used directly, but rather their output voltage is adjusted via a step up or down converter, often more than once. You can see that with USB power banks, where the actual performance you will get depends on what voltage your phone wants, how much current it pulls, the starting and ending SoC etc.

      A single number will never give you a good indication of performance, or even allow for fair comparis

      • The useful battery capacity that the owner can get is complicated by the fact that these days batteries are rarely used directly, but rather their output voltage is adjusted via a step up or down converter

        Which is exactly why capacity should be specified in units of energy: Wh or Joules.

        Do you even physics, bro?

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          But those don't take into account the inefficiency of the voltage conversion. From a consumer point of view they want to know what to buy, not what the capacity of the internal battery is.

          It's even worse when they try to compare it to their phone. Knowing the energy in the phone battery and in the mobile battery doesn't tell them how many actual charges of the phone they can get.

          • But those don't take into account the inefficiency of the voltage conversion.

            So adjust it for a nominal efficiency rating.

            What do you propose instead?

            • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              The usual solution to this is a set of standardized tests, say for common USB PD voltages at the maximum current available.

              • The usual solution to this is a set of standardized tests, say for common USB PD voltages at the maximum current available.

                That's not an answer to the question, because it talks about measurement, whereas the discussion is about how to specify capacity for the user.

    • ..of choice. it never made any sense to include one half of the equation. it's been a marketing choice always to pump up values instead of state actual specs for decades. When it actually matters you'll see capacities stated in watt hours for like V-Mount Batteries, camera batteries, electric vehicles. This standard should trickle down to all electrical storage mediums.
  • by niks42 ( 768188 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2025 @04:21AM (#65275659)
    I'd rather like it if instead of telling me my battery is 85KWh, I could have a 300 MegaJoule battery.

    Battery manufacturers could have competitions about who will be the first to get a gigajoule into an SUV, and we could quote battery density in Joules per cubic meter .. oh, the beauty of SI units and the metric system.
    • I'd rather like it if instead of telling me my battery is 85KWh, I could have a 300 MegaJoule battery. Battery manufacturers could have competitions about who will be the first to get a gigajoule into an SUV, and we could quote battery density in Joules per cubic meter .. oh, the beauty of SI units and the metric system.

      I was really hoping we would somehow avoid highlighting the asinine stupidity that is car marketing, but let me remind you of JUST how moronic we still are today. There are exactly zero horses under any hood of any car. 99% of the driving population has never ridden a horse, or even been near one. And yet we still measure them all by this insanely outdated standard as if consumers can actually grasp it.

      And watching the damn EV pimps do it with electric motors? That’s not just stupid. It’s d

      • by niks42 ( 768188 )
        Even horses can't always achieve a horsepower output. You can easily lose your mind in horsepower, especially when you find out there is a difference between US Horsepower (746 watts) and Metric Horsepower (735 watts). (WHY??) And then ask an engine manufacture how they measure the horsepower output of an engine .. measuring torque, multiplying it by RPM and dividing the answer by a magic number .. and of course US and Europe measure torque in slightly different ways which is why there is a Metric Horsepowe
        • Even horses can't always achieve a horsepower output. You can easily lose your mind in horsepower, especially when you find out there is a difference between US Horsepower (746 watts) and Metric Horsepower (735 watts). (WHY??) And then ask an engine manufacture how they measure the horsepower output of an engine .. measuring torque, multiplying it by RPM and dividing the answer by a magic number .. and of course US and Europe measure torque in slightly different ways which is why there is a Metric Horsepower measurement ...

          The kind of insanity that makes a man want to jump on a horse to ride down to the bar for a drink or seven..only to come out hours later to find his horse was taken to an automotive impound lot. Due to local emissions standards.

      • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

        "And yet we still measure them all by this insanely outdated standard as if consumers can actually grasp it."

        And by "we", you mean the morons that agree with you. Large parts of the world do not use horsepower as a unit.

        "And watching the damn EV pimps do it with electric motors? That’s not just stupid. It’s downright embarrassing."

        Says the guy who is totally oblivious to just how "downright embarrassing" his own posts are.

  • The entire summary essentially proved that watt consumption depends considerably on the specific game and how it stresses the hardware, giving a most extreme example of a game draining the hardware in two hours.

    I’d love for the one who wrote that to sell me how they’re going to market that. Battery will last anywhere from 2 to 27 hours, depending on usage? Good luck, because we can’t guesstimate any better than that?

    Yeah a kid can do the simple math. Now tell that kid to go market and s

  • Consumers will not measure the power of their electronics by the maximum current draw on a battery.

    A standard for measuring average runtime from full charge is what really matters, mAh only matters when comparing two devices where the only difference between them is battery capacity.

    • I will. I have a powerbank with a built-in inverter and a solar panel, so you can just plug in a device as you would plug it into a wall socket. I bought it to be able to charge my razor during summer camping trips, but it feels good to run other devices on it as well. The powerbank can deliver 100 Watt maximum, and surprisingly many devices do not state how much power they draw, leaving me totally in the dark as to whether I can use them or not.
      • Right, no argument there - just like you need to know what kind of power supply your PC build will need based on what you're plugging in to it.

        However, for the typical consumer they want to know the case is shinny, it's going to be faster than they're used to, and it's going to last longer than they're used to. They don't understand Watts, amps, or amp-hours or anything else that has to do with moving electrons.

        For everyone else, the more meaningful standard numbers we have in the spec sheet, the better.

  • by necro81 ( 917438 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2025 @08:07AM (#65275945) Journal
    The popular press, and even technical media, will still conflate units of energy (Wh, for instance) with units of power (W).

    Morpheus: "The human generates more bio-electricity than 120-volt battery and over 25,000 BTUs of body heat. Combined with a form of fusion, the machines have found all the energy they would ever need."

    "This new power plant will generate 400 megawatts every month, enough to satisfy the energy demands of 27 medium-sized distilleries."

    You could also use hogshead per fortnight - the distinction will be lost on most people, because most people are utterly ignorant 1) on basic arithmetic, and 2) what the hell energy and power mean.
  • With elementary math, consumers could easily calculate battery life by dividing watt-hours by power consumption.

    No, that's not true at all. That's not how computers work, and that's not how batteries work. Battery capacity is not like a spring, where force in and force out are equal. The amount of power that it takes to charge a battery differs depending on how you do it, and the amount of power that you get out also depends on how you draw it.

    In general, the slower you discharge a chemical storage battery, the more power you can get out. (The same is mostly true of charging them, but there is more nuance.) The compu

  • Watt = Joule/second (Score:4, Interesting)

    by chas.williams ( 6256556 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2025 @09:03AM (#65276081)
    That is energy per unit time and not equivalent to Ah, which is already cursed unit since it is meaningless without more information. Start rating things in joules.
  • Technology Connections has a great video [youtu.be] explaining this
  • by dlarge6510 ( 10394451 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2025 @10:22AM (#65276271)

    Describing batteries etc in watts is something a school kid would know as ridiculous.

    What next? Measuring a coke cans capacity not in mililitres but in mililitres per second? Because thats exactly what they are suggesting here.

  • Who let the marketing people join Slashdot!?!

    FFS! Get out! Do not show your faces here again!

  • Won't someone think of USB-C? Watts is consistent no matter what voltage your USB-C charger negotiates at. Amps would be meaningless without constantly converting. I have a 50Wh battery and I'm charging at 10W. It will take 5 hours to charge.

  • This is essentially the same argument about converting consumer units in the US to metric. The reason it won't happen is that it doesn't matter. For a non-scientific consumer, the semantics of the unit don't matter. What matters is that the units are consistent over time. That way, the consumer adjusts their own thinking to assign semantics to the numbers for that unit.

    Consumers generally won't appreciate the difference between mAh and W. They both some set of widget units. What matters is that 3000 m

  • With elementary math, consumers could easily calculate battery life by dividing watt-hours by power consumption.

    You lost a lot of Americans at, "elementary math". (sigh)

Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code. -- Dave Olson

Working...