100W kinda needs 3 ports to be useful, otherwise a single port really needs only 45-65W.
Quote from: Weeeee on September 06, 2024, 06:18:06100W kinda needs 3 ports to be useful, otherwise a single port really needs only 45-65W.
It is actually quite difficult to implement more than one port if you want them to support any type of fast charging. Basically, you have to duplicate many components for the second port. And most of the time those chargers that have 3 ports actually have two chargers inside with few common components. That increased the price and size.
And with proliferation of phones that can charge at high wattage this charger is quite useful.
Quote from: anan on September 06, 2024, 09:55:22Quote from: Weeeee on September 06, 2024, 06:18:06100W kinda needs 3 ports to be useful, otherwise a single port really needs only 45-65W.
It is actually quite difficult to implement more than one port if you want them to support any type of fast charging. Basically, you have to duplicate many components for the second port. And most of the time those chargers that have 3 ports actually have two chargers inside with few common components. That increased the price and size.
And with proliferation of phones that can charge at high wattage this charger is quite useful.
I think the point Weeee was making is that if you are only going to include one USb-C port, a smaller 65W charger makes more sense than a 100W port.
I don't know of many (any) phones that charge faster than 65W, which is another argument for limiting the max current.
This is a nice technical achievement, but really only useful for folks who travel with a high end laptop, need to to charge at the maximum speed, and don't bring anything else with them. I personally don't know anyone like that.