Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Battery review: Excellent consumption manager 您所在的位置:网站首页 电池容量苹果12pro Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Battery review: Excellent consumption manager

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Battery review: Excellent consumption manager

2024-07-06 23:58| 来源: 网络整理| 查看: 265

Apple brought out its iPhone 12 Pro Max in October 2020. Landing in our Ultra-Premium segment (above $800), the iPhone brings with it a large 6.7-inch OLED display that supports HDR10 content, and a triple-camera setup (along with a lidar sensor). Unlike most other phones in our database thus far, however, it does not come with a charger.

We recently tested the Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max’s battery performance and will relate our most important findings in this review.

Key specifications:

Battery capacity: 3687 mAh 20W charger not included Wireless charging 6.7-inch, 1284 x 2778, 60 Hz OLED display Apple A14 Bionic (5 nm) chipset, 5G Tested ROM / RAM combination: 128 GB + 6 GB

About DXOMARK Battery tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone battery reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests over a week-long period both indoors and outdoors. This article highlights the most important results of our testing. (See our introductory and how we test articles for more details about our smartphone Battery protocol.)

Test summary

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max 121 battery 124 Autonomy Home/Office 121

221

Honor X7b Best: Honor X7b (221) On the go 122

195

Samsung Galaxy M51 Best: Samsung Galaxy M51 (195) Calibrated 129

198

Samsung Galaxy M51 Best: Samsung Galaxy M51 (198) 109 Charging Full charge 106

224

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W) Best: Realme GT Neo 5 (240W) (224) Quick boost 113

212

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W) Best: Realme GT Neo 5 (240W) (212) 140 Efficiency Charge up 83

205

Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro Best: Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro (205) Discharge 181

194

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Best: Apple iPhone 14 Pro (194)

Key performances

These key points are derived from the lab measurements during testing and do not figure into the overall score. The lab measurements, however, are used for the overall score.

Charging Time 2 days 1h Battery life Charging Time 0h57 80% Charging time Charging Time 2h27 Full charging time Quick Boost 3h14 autonomy after 5-minute charge Please be aware that beyond this point, we have not modified the initial test results. While data and products remain fully comparable, you might encounter mentions and references to the previous scores. BATTERY Position in Global Ranking 82nd 1. Oppo Find X7 Ultra 160 2. Honor Magic6 Pro 157 3. Honor X9b 156 3. Honor Magic6 Lite (5800 mAh) 156 5. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G 152 6. Honor X7b 151 6. Oppo Find X6 Pro 151 8. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh) 150 9. Honor X7a 147 9. Oppo Reno12 Pro 147 9. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W) 147 12. Oppo Reno6 5G 146 13. Oppo Reno12 144 13. Realme GT Neo 2 5G 144 15. Honor X9a 143 16. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra 142 17. Honor Magic5 Pro 141 17. Oppo Reno8 5G 141 19. Asus ROG Phone 6 140 19. Sony Xperia 10 V 140 21. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G 139 22. Huawei P60 Pro 138 22. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro 138 22. Oppo A77 5G 138 22. Sony Xperia 10 IV 138 26. Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE 137 27. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max 136 27. OnePlus Nord CE 5G 136 27. Samsung Galaxy M51 136 27. Vivo Y72 5G 136 27. Vivo X80 Lite 5G 136 27. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G 136 27. Xiaomi 11T 136 34. Asus ROG Phone 7 135 34. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G 135 34. Oppo Find X5 Lite 135 37. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max 134 37. Samsung Galaxy S23+ 134 37. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G 134 37. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 134 41. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max 133 41. Oppo A74 133 41. Vivo Y76 5G 133 41. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) 133 41. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G 133 41. Xiaomi 14 133 41. Xiaomi 13 Ultra 133 48. Honor X8 5G 132 48. Oppo A78 5G 132 48. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G 132 48. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S 132 52. Apple iPhone 15 Plus 131 52. POCO F5 Pro 131 52. Samsung Galaxy A72 131 52. Wiko Power U30 131 56. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) 130 56. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra 130 58. Realme GT Neo 3 129 58. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G 129 58. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G 129 58. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G 129 58. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro 129 63. Apple iPhone 14 Plus 128 63. OnePlus Nord 2 5G 128 63. Xiaomi 13 128 66. Honor 90 Lite 127 66. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro 127 66. Oppo A94 5G 127 66. Samsung Galaxy A15 5G 127 70. Honor 70 126 70. OnePlus 10T 5G 126 70. Oppo Find X3 Neo 126 70. Xiaomi 13 Pro 126 70. Xiaomi 11T Pro 126 75. OnePlus 11 125 75. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G 125 77. Nothing Phone (2) 124 78. Huawei P50 Pro 123 78. TCL 40R 5G 123 78. Xiaomi 12T Pro 123 81. OnePlus 9 122 82. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max 121 82. Oppo A74 5G 121 82. Samsung Galaxy A55 5G 121 85. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G 120 85. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G 120 85. Xiaomi 13T Pro 120 88. Apple iPhone 14 Pro 119 88. Nothing Phone(1) 119 88. Oppo A54 5G 119 88. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 119 92. Apple iPhone 13 Pro 118 92. Motorola Edge 20 Pro 118 92. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro 118 92. Xiaomi 12T 118 92. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G 118 97. Realme GT 2 Pro 117 97. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G 117 97. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 117 100. Honor X7 116 100. Honor 90 116 100. Oppo Find X5 Pro 116 100. Vivo Y20s 116 104. Apple iPhone 13 115 104. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G 115 104. Realme GT 5G 115 107. Apple iPhone 15 Pro 114 107. Huawei P40 Lite 114 107. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 114 107. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G 114 107. Xiaomi 13T 114 112. Apple iPhone 15 113 112. Nokia G42 5G 113 112. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G 113 112. Sony Xperia 5 IV 113 116. Apple iPhone 14 112 116. Motorola Moto G62 5G 112 116. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G 112 116. OnePlus 8T 112 120. Google Pixel 8 Pro 111 120. Motorola Moto G9 Power 111 120. Oppo Find X5 111 120. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon) 111 120. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G 111 125. Wiko Power U20 110 126. Oppo Find X3 Lite 109 126. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5 109 126. Samsung Galaxy S24+ (Exynos) 109 126. Samsung Galaxy S23 109 130. Honor Magic Vs 108 130. Oppo Find N2 Flip 108 130. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon) 108 130. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra 108 134. Samsung Galaxy S24 (Exynos) 107 134. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G 107 136. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G 106 137. Black Shark 5 Pro 105 137. Oppo Find X3 Pro 105 139. OnePlus 9 Pro 104 140. Google Pixel 8 103 140. Huawei Mate 50 Pro 103 140. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) 103 143. Asus Zenfone 8 Flip 102 143. Asus Zenfone 8 102 143. Google Pixel 7 Pro 102 143. Motorola moto g34 5G 102 147. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE 101 147. Samsung Galaxy A35 5G 101 149. OnePlus 10 Pro 100 149. POCO F4 GT 100 149. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos) 100 149. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022 100 149. Xiaomi 12 100 154. Apple iPhone 13 mini 99 154. Realme C21 99 154. Realme C11 99 154. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4 99 154. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon) 99 159. Google Pixel 7 98 159. Motorola Edge 30 Pro 98 159. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos) 98 162. Google Pixel 6 97 163. Google Pixel 7a 96 163. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G 96 163. Vivo X51 5G 96 166. Honor Magic4 Pro 95 166. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4 95 166. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos) 95 166. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G 95 166. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G 95 171. Google Pixel 6a 94 171. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G 94 173. Apple iPhone 12 mini 93 173. Google Pixel 5 93 173. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos) 93 176. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G 92 177. Motorola moto g54 5G 90 177. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon) 90 179. Google Pixel Fold 88 179. Xiaomi Redmi 9 88 181. Sony Xperia 1 IV 87 181. TCL 406 87 183. Apple iPhone SE (2022) 84 184. Fairphone 5 83 185. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon) 82 185. Xiaomi Mi 11 82 187. Google Pixel 6 Pro 81 188. Xiaomi 12 Pro 76 189. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos) 75 BATTERY Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking 19th 1. Oppo Find X7 Ultra 160 2. Honor Magic6 Pro 157 3. Oppo Find X6 Pro 151 4. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra 142 5. Honor Magic5 Pro 141 6. Asus ROG Phone 6 140 7. Huawei P60 Pro 138 8. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max 136 9. Asus ROG Phone 7 135 10. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max 134 10. Samsung Galaxy S23+ 134 12. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max 133 12. Xiaomi 13 Ultra 133 14. Apple iPhone 15 Plus 131 15. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra 130 16. Apple iPhone 14 Plus 128 17. Xiaomi 13 Pro 126 18. Huawei P50 Pro 123 19. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max 121 20. Apple iPhone 14 Pro 119 21. Apple iPhone 13 Pro 118 22. Oppo Find X5 Pro 116 23. Apple iPhone 15 Pro 114 23. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 114 25. Sony Xperia 5 IV 113 26. Google Pixel 8 Pro 111 26. Oppo Find X5 111 26. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon) 111 29. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5 109 29. Samsung Galaxy S24+ (Exynos) 109 31. Honor Magic Vs 108 31. Oppo Find N2 Flip 108 31. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra 108 34. Oppo Find X3 Pro 105 35. OnePlus 9 Pro 104 36. Huawei Mate 50 Pro 103 36. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) 103 38. Google Pixel 7 Pro 102 39. OnePlus 10 Pro 100 40. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4 99 40. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon) 99 42. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos) 98 43. Honor Magic4 Pro 95 43. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4 95 43. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos) 95 46. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos) 93 47. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G 92 48. Google Pixel Fold 88 49. Sony Xperia 1 IV 87 50. Google Pixel 6 Pro 81 51. Xiaomi 12 Pro 76 Pros Provides 2 days of autonomy in moderate usage (49 hours) Considerably lower power consumption (discharge) than the competition Cons Low total charging efficiency Very slow charging after 80% to reach full battery capacity

With an overall Battery score of 78, the Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max puts in a respectable performance that lands it in the top four in our database so far. While it has an average score for Charging, and an above-average score for Autonomy, it is the current score leader for Efficiency thus far (but as ever, numbers alone don’t quite tell the whole story).

We compared the Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max’s performance in several key categories with two other ultra-premium devices, the Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon) and the Oppo Find X3 Pro; battery capacity, charger, display type and resolution, and processor specifications for all three devices are shown in the table below.

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

Oppo Find X3 Pro

Battery (mAh)

3687

5000

4500

Charger (W)

20W

25W

65W

Display type

OLED

AMOLED 2X

AMOLED

Resolution

1284 x 2778

1440 x 3200

1440 x 3216

Processor

Apple A14 Bionic

Qualcomm Snapdragon 888

Qualcomm Snapdragon 888

Autonomy (67)

How long a battery charge lasts depends not only on battery capacity, but also other aspects of the phone’s hardware and software. The DXOMARK Battery autonomy score is composed of three performance sub-scores: (1) Stationary, (2) On the go, and (3) Calibrated use cases. Each sub-score comprises the results of a comprehensive range of tests for measuring autonomy in all kinds of real-life scenarios.

Light Usage 71h Light Usage Active: 2h30/day Moderate Usage 49h Moderate Usage Active: 4h/day Intense Usage 30h Intense Usage Active: 7h/day

At 67, the Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max’s Autonomy score puts it into the upper half of devices tested so far (regardless of segment), and is better than the Autonomy scores for all other ultra-premium smartphones to date. Let’s now dive into some specifics.

Stationary

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

70

104

Vivo Y72 5G Best: Vivo Y72 5G (104)

A robot housed in a Faraday cage performs a set of touch-based user actions during what we call our “typical usage scenario” (TUS) — making calls, video streaming, etc. — 4 hours of active use over the course of a 16-hour period, plus 8 hours of “sleep.” The robot repeats this set of actions every day until the device runs out of power. 

The Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max achieved an above-average score of 70 in our stationary TUS testing, again leading all other ultra-premium devices in our database to date, and providing more than two days — 61+ hours — of autonomy, some 4.5 hours more than the Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon) and almost exactly more than 15 hours than the Oppo Find X3 Pro used in our comparison here.

Typical Usage Scenario discharge curves On the go

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

64

96

Samsung Galaxy M51 Best: Samsung Galaxy M51 (96)

Using a smartphone on the go takes a toll on autonomy because of extra “hidden” demands, such as the continuous signaling associated with cellphone network selection, for example. DXOMARK Battery experts take the phone outside and perform a precisely defined set of activities while following the same three-hour travel itinerary for each device.

The iPhone 12 Pro Max’s on the go score of 64 is only average — a few points behind the Samsung, but ahead of the Oppo Find X3 Pro by 15 points. The Apple device is better for camera use on the go than both competitors, but it trails the Samsung just a little in all other activities (phone calls, GPS, social apps).

Autonomy for on the go use cases (full charge) Calibrated

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

68

100

Samsung Galaxy M51 Best: Samsung Galaxy M51 (100)

For this series of tests, the smartphone returns to the Faraday cage and our robots repeatedly perform actions linked to one specific use case (such as gaming, video streaming, etc.) at a time. Starting from an 80% charge, all devices are tested until they have expended at least 5% of their battery power.

Among the three ultra-premium devices in this comparison, the Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max took top honors over the Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon) by a few points, and by nearly 20 points over the Oppo Find X3 Pro, showing better performance than both in 4G music and video streaming. That said, it was behind the Samsung device for 3G calling and video playback.

Autonomy for calibrated use cases (full charge) Charging (74)

The DXOMARK Battery charging score is composed of two sub-scores, Full charge and Quick boost. Full charge tests assess the reliability of the battery power gauge; measure how long it takes to charge a battery from 0% to 80% capacity and from 80 to 100%; and measure how long and how much power the battery takes to go from an indicated 100% to an actual full charge. With the phone at different charge levels (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%), Quick boost tests measure the amount of charge the battery receives after being plugged in for 5 minutes. 

Wired Wired 49% in 30 min 0h57 0 - 80% 2h27 Full charge Wireless Wireless 23% in 30 min 2h16 0 - 80% 3h30 Full charge

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max has relatively good charging time (considering the power of its charger) until it reaches 80%; after that, it charges very slowly when compared to the Samsung and especially when compared to the Oppo, for a total charging time of 2 hours 27 minutes versus 1 hour 28 minutes for the Samsung and just under 37 minutes for the Oppo.

WiredWired WirelessWireless Power consumption and battery level during full charge Power consumption and battery level during wireless full charge Full charge

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

74

121

Black Shark 5 Pro Best: Black Shark 5 Pro (121)

Although it cannot compete at all with the Find X3 Pro’s astonishing sub-score of 104 (achieved via its 65W charger), the Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max isn’t too far behind the Snapdragon version of the Samsung S21 Ultra in our full charge testing. The Apple device takes much longer than the competition to go from 80% to 100%  — nearly a full hour versus about 20 minutes for the Samsung (and only about 6 minutes for the Oppo).

WiredWired WirelessWireless Time to full charge Time to full charge

The Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max’s wireless charging takes 3 hours 1 minute to charge to 100% (per the device UI) and an additional 28 minutes to reach full charge capacity, which is nearly twice as long as the lightning-fast Oppo Find X3 Pro.

Quick boost

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

72

111

Realme GT Neo 3 Best: Realme GT Neo 3 (111)

Although it comes in last among the three devices compared in this review (but only very slightly behind the Samsung), the iPhone 12 Pro Max provides nearly 3.5 hours of autonomy when plugged in at less than 50% power remaining.

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon) Oppo Find X3 Pro Autonomy boost (hh:mm) 20%3:17 3:24 5:49 40%3:16 3:22 6:36 60%3:03 2:54 4:40 80%1:24 2:11 3:25 Percentage boost 20%8.2 %9.2 %18.4 % 40%8.2 %9.1 %20.9 % 60%7.6 %7.8 %14.7 % 80%3.5 %5.9 %10.8 % Energy consumed 20%1768 mWh2279 mWh4020 mWh 40%1764 mWh2262 mWh4563 mWh 60%1645 mWh1950 mWh3223 mWh 80%761 mWh1468 mWh2360 mWh

While the Apple device takes a fairly quick 45 seconds to gain 1% battery power while gaming at low battery, that’s nonetheless a few seconds behind both the Samsung and the Oppo in our testing.

Efficiency (94)

Our Efficiency score comprises two sub-scores, Charge up and Discharge. Charge up is the efficiency of a full charge (how much energy is drained from the wall outlet vs the energy capacity of the battery, as well as the efficiency of the charger and its residual consumption). Discharge is how much current the smartphone drains from the battery when in use (the ratio of battery capacity over autonomy). Better autonomy with a smaller battery means better efficiency.

Charge up

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

54

105

Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro Best: Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro (105)

While its somewhat small 20W adapter by itself is quite efficient, the Apple device’s overall charging system (which includes not just the charge adapter but also internal smartphone circuits) was one of its only true weak points, coming in behind not just its Samsung and Oppo rivals in this review, but also behind the majority of devices in our database thus far.

The iPhone 12 Pro Max takes nearly an hour to go from 80% to 100%.

 

Discharge

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

116

121

Apple iPhone 13 Pro Best: Apple iPhone 13 Pro (121)

The Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max’s 116 points for discharge efficiency towers far above all others in our database thus far, with only one other device showing a triple-digit score (the Wiko Power U30 in our Essential segment, with 102 points). It has lower consumption than all devices in both active hours and in the nighttime, and among its competitors in this review, it shows considerably lower consumption than either the Samsung or the Oppo for music and video streaming.

Conclusion

The Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max is among the top 4 in our Battery database so far, with good scores in Autonomy, average in Charging, and an outstanding score for discharge in our Efficiency attribute. Where it could have done better was in charge up Efficiency, where its score was among the lowest among all devices tested so far (only 66% charging efficiency).



【本文地址】

公司简介

联系我们

今日新闻

    推荐新闻

    专题文章
      CopyRight 2018-2019 实验室设备网 版权所有