Comments Locked

45 Comments

Back to Article

  • jjj - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    LOL the quality of the press...

    You completely misrepresent this and paint it as an actual product as opposed to research. This is research and there are such breakthroughs every week if not every day. Vast majority will never make it into an actual product.

    You also only cover this because it's Samsung and not because it's more relevant that any of the 100 others battery papers published in the last 5 minutes.

    This is not journalism.
  • coburn_c - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    It was covered because Samsung put out a press release.
  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    And because Samsung is in a unique position as a vertically integrated device manufacturer, meaning they have the option of putting this into commercial use of their own products, if they desire.
  • Samus - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    I agree. It wouldn't be out of the question for them to launch this technology in a niche release, like a mid-range phone, perhaps even a submodel of an existing phone, that could have, say, a week of power. Think Galaxy S Active, etc.

    I don't see them taking a risk with new battery technology in a mainstream device after the Note 8. I also don't see them launching this in devices where it's needed most, wearables, where realestate is at a premium so any improvement in energy density is highly desirable, again because of the risk factor.
  • juhatus - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    The first products they mass produce and use these new battery technologies are those chargeable 10-20$ usb-power batteries that can charge tablets/phone's on the go. They can make a batch of millions with very little image risk if something goes wrong. Hey its noname 10$ usb-brick, not a 800$ phone.
  • coburn_c - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    I feel I need to clarify:

    Pipeline stories are regurgitated press releases. This is not an article. Most of the press these days is regurgitated press releases. This is not Anandtech's fault.

    Five times faster charging with only 22% degradation after 500 charges is excellent. Most current cells lose 20% after 500 charges without fast charging.
  • ddrіver - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    This is just AT using copy/paste on what PR departments from different companies send out.
  • Morawka - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    Unlike everyone else Samsung has the willingness and need to implement this, have working prototypes inside of phones, and have peer reviewed research plus a patent pending application. I wouldn't be surprised if this technology is in next year's S9
  • CaedenV - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    Not saying you are wrong, but Samsung is in the somewhat unique position of owning its own research and manufacturing arms. That certainly does not guarantee that it will get deployed in the real world... but it certainly makes for far fewer barriers between research and production. Also, Sammy has a pretty good reputation of not really announcing things unless it intends to use it, unless something better comes along to replace it before implementation.

    That said; I really wonder how much of those improvements are purely from this one improvement, or if these improvements are for a mythical battery that has this as well as many other 'expected improvements'.
    Still, battery tech is improving rapidly, and with lots of competition. The nice thing about the CPU wars of the '90s and '00s was that there were only 3-4 major players (Intel, AMD, IBM, and lets not forget VIA's chips of 'biblical renown'), and so chip makers felt safe building large fabs to produce lots of chips on a regular basis. With battery tech there are several players, and everyone is playing these cat and mouse games where nobody really wants to gear up a particularly large fab for fear of needing to re-tool too quickly (or be out done by someone who builds a fab 3 months later). It really makes the space interesting to watch, but also delays mass-market products and adoption.
  • Stuza - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    "The nice thing about the CPU wars of the '90s and '00s was that there were only 3-4 major players (Intel, AMD, IBM, and lets not forget VIA's chips of 'biblical renown'), "

    You forgot one of the major players, Motorola, powering Mac's, Atari ST's and Amiga's. :)
  • Frenetic Pony - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    It meets all the requirements of an actual product. Increased power density, increased energy density, enough cycle lifetime for smart devices if not cars. And it's being announced by a major battery manufacturer so they already have the capacity to make it.

    All you have done is smugly state "I am smarter than thou" without much of any justification or evidence for your claim. I'm sure even now you're feeling satisfied with yourself, telling off those internet people.
  • melgross - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    No, it doesn’t. An actual product, is, well you know, an actual product. Something that’s in a package, that we can buy, or is in another product. This is neither. It’s early, and I point out that it is early, research.

    The idea that this is anything other than a lab experiment at this time is wrong. Even the idea that these graphine balls can be inexpensively produced is nothing more than what they hope will be true if, and only if, they can get them manufactured reliably, which isn’t a sure thing.

    Keep in mind that over the past few years, we’ve read of a number of new, advanced batteries, only to have them die in the lab, because they couldn’t be produced. While I hope it’s not true for this too, it very well could be.
  • ImSpartacus - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    I'm more concerned with the "buy a GS8 on amazon!" link at the end of the article.

    Is this article sponsored or something?
  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    "I'm more concerned with the "buy a GS8 on amazon!" link at the end of the article.

    Is this article sponsored or something? "

    No. Those are standard context-related shopping widgets that go into every article.
  • sonichedgehog360@yahoo.com - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    Just use Adblock Plus. ;)
  • Lord of the Bored - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    Or ublock, if you prefer your adblocker not also shake down advertisers for money so they can get through the adblocker.
  • CheapSushi - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    The comment section really needs a downvote feature, especially since this crud is the first thing people see and it adds absolutely nothing.
  • sonichedgehog360@yahoo.com - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    +1
  • peevee - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    +2
  • ZolaIII - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    For once that I agree with you (at least most part).
  • iwod - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    If you read the actual paper in Nature rather then the press release, the tech is pretty much done and finished. Unlike other paper which were only used for hype and funding, Samsung doesn't need any of that.

    The paper also suggest while it could be used in small production, having it widely used in Cars or even Smartphone is an entirely different challenge. The production scale for these two type of product is massive.
  • galfert - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    Yes, but do they explode?
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    They have the capacity to explode with a "27.6% higher volumetric energy" than before.
  • saratoga4 - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    > Furthermore, the cell also retains 78.6% of its capacity after 500 cycles at between 5°C and 60°C.

    That isn't very good for a modern battery. 27% higher capacity isn't that much if it means that the cell is much less durable than a regular battery.

    Sounds like they still have a lot more work to do.
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    I think that sentence implied that current batteries have worse retention of capacity after 500 cycles at between 5°C and 60°C, but the article doesn't elicit what those figures are for current non-graphene ball batteries. In other words, the 78.6% is supposedly an upgrade.

    And I guess with my cell phone being two years old or so by now seems about right. It seems to last about half the duration that it used to as far as I can tell, but I never did any empirical testing, and changing/upgrading of OSes has likely worsened its efficiency overall, too.
  • melgross - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    I’m highly NOT impressed with the cycle life of these batteries. Apple already has their iPhone batteries rated at 500 cycles at 80%, and their watch and iPad batteries are far better, at 1,000 cycles.

    https://www.apple.com/batteries/service-and-recycl...
  • sonichedgehog360@yahoo.com - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    Agreed. I noticed this figure and thought to myself, but my Surface Pro 2 was doing much in terms of retaining capacity after 1000 charge cycles!
  • 0iron - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    But I don't recall any manufacture recommend to charge device up to 60°C, 40°C could be. It could be why Apple supplied slow charger with its iPhone, to reduce battery's wear rate.
  • melgross - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    It’s known that so called “fast chargers” shorten battery life, but you’ve only got your phone for two years, and, so what? But batteries can fail more quickly with some quick chargers. So far, Apple is allowing just 7.5 Watts with wireless. I don’t think it’s a quick charge thing, because I can charge my 7+ more quickly than that with my bigger Apple chargers.

    The quality of the battery plays a major part in that. Have a cheap battery, and it will die early. I didn’t read that they were saying that the charge could be to 60 c, but that it could get hot with use. Either way, there is no manufacturer that would allow their batteries get that hot. The device would be too hot to hold. Other components, particularly the screen, and double particularly OLED screens would get damaged.
  • 0iron - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    "It’s known that so called “fast chargers” shorten battery life"

    It's believed but yet to find it's scientifically proven. 2 years life cycle maybe average. My usage minimum is 3 years then become secondary phone. It could be given to other family member after that. So, 5+ years of usage.
  • Ian Cutress - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    Fast charging creates longer reach crystal growth between anode and cathode, causing shorter distance separation and shorts. When you can't intercalate your ions in the most dense way due to speed, it leaves solid-state holes (or even clogs them) which leads to lower capacity.
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    Yes, that spec is just average. Howerver, it's obtained at very high charging rates and probably while allowing elevated temperatures. If you back off these requirements (as your comparison points do), the number of charge cycles will likely increase. I think they've chosen these specs to show that they can attain a cycle time useful for real world usage while still providing significant benefits in other parameters.
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    BTW: Fig. 5e from the paper shows a comparison with a regular cell at high charging currents ("5C") and 60°C. The cell is completely broken after ~20 cycles.
  • melgross - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    This is the same problem we’ve been seeing, for years, with the lithium II cells promised several years ago, but never produced. They show tremendous capacity in demo’s, but they deteriorate rapidly upon charging. They just have a handful of charges before they drop to useless levels.
  • Speedfriend - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    These are aimed at electric vehicles where recharge speed is more important than whether the battery degrades 10% or 20% over 500 full recharge cycle, which for most users would be over 10 years of driving.
  • 1prophet - Wednesday, November 29, 2017 - link

    “My top advice really for anyone who says they’ve got some breakthrough battery technology is please send us a sample cell, okay. Don’t send us PowerPoint, okay, just send us one cell that works with all appropriate caveats, that would be great. That sorts out the nonsense and the claims that aren’t actually true.” Elon Musk
  • Ian Cutress - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    Good words. There's some awesome battery tech out there. One example is a sulphur battery, with better energy density and recyclability than Li-Ion. The downside? It needs to operate at 300ºC. Or how about that Aluminium battery that is a lot safer and potentially cheaper? Sorry, only 1/3 of the energy density.
  • Hurr Durr - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    Quite ironic, considering his own promise trail.
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    "This enables faster charging (as graphene features 140 times faster electron mobility than silicon)"

    Anton, this way added by you, wasn't it? I suspect this is completely wrong due to several reasons:

    - ions have far lower mobility than electrons inside conductors, so these should rather limit the current
    - I don't think Si is used at all in Li-Ion batteries
    - graphene has widely varying mobility, depending on the fermi level, surface chemistry and defects
    - the conductivity is mobility times number of charge carriers. The latter is small in graphene, because as a 2D material there's just not much of it. So it's conductivity is not as high as the (potentially) high mobility suggests. What limits the batteries is internal resistivity, i.e. 1/conductivity of the worst path
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    BTW: it would have been nice to include the figure captions, as it's not obvious what we're seeing especially in the 2nd figure.
  • Guspaz - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    I no longer care about any advancement in energy storage technology until it's in shipping products. News about some big breakthrough that will enable much better storage is a dime a dozen.
  • peevee - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link

    I suspect simple very fine coal/graphite dust would behave similarly.
  • oranos - Friday, December 1, 2017 - link

    Samsung always trying to innovate everywhere
  • oranos - Friday, December 1, 2017 - link

    Once they improve the growth algorithms and achieve maximum efficiency, this will be at the peak of physical limitations for further improvement. the ultimate in li-ion technology for quite some time.
  • Samsung Battery - Saturday, December 9, 2017 - link

    We provide help in finding and replacing Samsung battery, if you are looking for same feel free to visit.

    https://laptopbattery.ae/samsung.html

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now