x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Alleged Galaxy S6 battery pack snapped, confirming 2600 mAh capacity

Alleged Galaxy S6 battery pack snapped, confirming 2600 mAh capacity

Posted: , by Daniel P.

Tags :

We heard the other day that the upcoming Samsung Galaxy S6 flagship will sport a 2600 mAh sealed battery inside, and now a snapshot inside a Chinese battery factory seemingly confirms this rumor. As you can see from the pictures below, which we dug out from the vast confines of the Weibo blogosphere, the battery packs are indeed marked with a 2600 mAh capacity, and their model number denoted as EB-BG925ABE. 

Given that the Galaxy S6 Edge codename is speculated to be SM-925X, and, say, replacement batteries for the Galaxy S5 (SM-900) go on Amazon with models like EB-BG900BBC, there is a big possibility that these pieces you see below are Galaxy S6 or S6 Edge packs. Now, it's not entirely clear if those are replacement batteries, or the actual juicers that are ready to go into the retail handset (the guy who posted these just says "Galaxy S6 battery" as a comment), but, given their production date of 2/11, these are pretty fresh off the conveyor belts, so this might be the real deal. 

Before you scoff at the 2600 mAh capacity, which is lower than on the S5, bear in mind that the Galaxy S6 will have a very frugal 14nm chipset. Moreover, we already have a handset out with the S6's rumored 5.1" Quad HD Super AMOLED display - the Galaxy S5 LTE-A - and its battery life tests showed that the panel is very power-sipping, too, performing on par with its 1080p sibling. 

Thus, the Galaxy S6, together with the other software and hardware optimizations that Samsung placed within, should last at least as long, if not longer, than the Galaxy S5 on a charge, despite the 2600 mAh battery capacity. Moreover, there is speculation on a new type of polymer technology that Samsung is utilizing for the juicer, plus rapid wireless charging capabilities in the S6, so we wouldn't worry too much about the handset's endurance just yet.

source: Weibo

58 Comments
  • Options
    Close






posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:11

1. rd_nest (Posts: 1606; Member since: 06 Jun 2010)


Why have spare battery when the phone is supposed to be 'unibody' ?

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:54 24

9. RoboticEngi (Posts: 804; Member since: 03 Dec 2014)


Look at the pictures, the batteries have connenctors. As in none replaceable.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 03:04 3

12. ilovephablets (Posts: 45; Member since: 08 Dec 2014)


Seems like ill wait for tge note 5, setiously samsung 2600 mAh and no removable battery

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 10:19

31. j2001m (Posts: 2979; Member since: 28 Apr 2014)


Fm if you all need meter phones and all give Samsung an hard time a outs it looks that what you get, but there will be a plasic ver with water res

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 17:22

50. BiN4RY (Posts: 83; Member since: 22 Jun 2012)


Considering the fact that Note 4 just came out in recent months, you're going to have a lot of fun waiting.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 03:20 1

16. phljcnth (Posts: 485; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)


Wait, is this different from the polymer battery once purported along with the metal frame of Galaxy S6?

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:17 16

2. Desmortibus (Posts: 66; Member since: 04 Apr 2014)


Instead of aiming at "just as good as the Galaxy S5" or "slightly better" , they should have made the choice of a much bigger battery (who in the world really want thinner and thinner -bendable-phones ?...). With a 3.400 mah, for instance, coupled with the efficiency of the 14nm chip, Samsung could have claimed a genuine three days battery life that everyone dreams of and put Apple to shame.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:41 5

6. SuperNova (banned) (Posts: 649; Member since: 15 Jan 2015)


Samsung has borken my heart... :(

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 03:13 3

15. vincelongman (Posts: 4576; Member since: 10 Feb 2013)


Yea I'm disappointed with this

Their 14nm process is 35% lower power consumption than their 20nm
2600mAh*1.35 = 3510mAh eqv

But what if it was say 2mm thicker...
3000mAh*1.35 = 4050mAh eqv
It could of had better battery than DROID Turbo!

BTW my 35% increase may not be realistic since some of that 35% will be used for higher performance
But then again the S6 probably has a more efficient AMOLED panel, 5.0.2 or 5.1 Lollipop, radios, kernel,... as well
So can't actually predicate

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 10:27 1

32. j2001m (Posts: 2979; Member since: 28 Apr 2014)


The 35% is the number of there cpu called 5433, it's going to have way more than the cra 810 28nm I.e. It's going. To last longer than the s5 that 100% big time even with a smaller battery and with no new battery tech, but there are reports like above about new tech that give you longer life battery for les power and so on, that and Samsung as tech that makes all part of the phone use less power, this was added in the s5 so I ne thinking this will have got better, that and also the new software setup and no lagging of the cpu will easy cut back on power

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 20:45

54. kevin91202 (Posts: 586; Member since: 08 Jun 2014)


"Their 14nm process is 35% lower power consumption than their 20nm
2600mAh*1.35 = 3510mAh eqv" -vincelongman

Your math is wrong. If the 14nm is 35% lower than the 20nm, then an equivalent battery for the 20nm would be 4000mAh.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 09:36

30. tokuzumi (Posts: 992; Member since: 27 Aug 2009)


I'm inclined to agree with this. As a side effect of screens getting practical joke huge, they have made phones thinner, as a compromise. Only problem is the phone becomes harder to hold, since there are no "hips" to grab onto. Thin phones are a marketing bullet point. They do not make the device better in any way. I held a Droid Turbo the other day. That phone is unapologetically thick. I like it.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 13:53

44. TechieXP1969 (Posts: 10737; Member since: 25 Sep 2013)


Galaxy phone typically don't bend.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 13:57

45. TechieXP1969 (Posts: 10737; Member since: 25 Sep 2013)


I think you are complaining just to be. You have no idea what you are talking about.

The Note 4 has only a slightly larger battery over the Note 3. The Note 3 has a 3200mah while the 4 has 3220. Yet the Note 4 lasts 2 hours longer.
Pleas estop complaining about something so petty, especially when you have no idea what you're talking about.

And consider the Note 4 has 4 times the specs of the iPhone 6+ which doesn't even last as long as the Note 3 and S5.

This phone is not slightly better than the S5. This isn't Apple bro.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 18:21

52. aahmed215 (Posts: 166; Member since: 18 Jun 2012)


What the hell do you need 3 days of battery life for? Just charge your phone every night.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:27 5

3. QuadFace (Posts: 143; Member since: 19 Aug 2013)


I believe Samsung knows what they are doing, they must have some way of optimising the battery to last longer than the GS5.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 13:58

46. TechieXP1969 (Posts: 10737; Member since: 25 Sep 2013)


Look at the Note 4 vs the Note 3. Tells you all you need to know.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:31 8

4. Tizen007 (Posts: 575; Member since: 07 Jan 2014)


Remember people : Higher numbers doesn't necessarily mean higher performance. It all comes down to technology.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 11:04 2

38. wildfiregt (Posts: 167; Member since: 10 Jun 2013)


Why not both ?

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:34 4

5. hafini_27 (Posts: 888; Member since: 31 Oct 2013)


I believe Samsung has ways to optimize the battery of the S6

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:42 10

7. vuyonc (Posts: 1024; Member since: 24 Feb 2014)


Noooooo curse the thinness craze. 3000 mAh battery at least. The GS6 should be SIGNIFICANTLY better not CONSIDERABLY better than the GS5.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:54 4

10. Tritinum (Posts: 471; Member since: 06 May 2014)


new 14nm chip consumes 30% less battery than the previous one.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 04:38 2

21. vuyonc (Posts: 1024; Member since: 24 Feb 2014)


You're reaffirming my point. The display and chipset will be more efficient obviously but the battery should be bigger not smaller. Do you want a smaller battery just because other hardware is more efficient? No. No matter what happens, the battery should always get bigger ;)

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 10:30

33. j2001m (Posts: 2979; Member since: 28 Apr 2014)


As per my post above, it's way more then that on the cpu, I.e. Way above 30% over the s5 as they was on about there 5433 cpu at 20nm and not the crap lag fest of the 801 28nm used in the s5

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 13:59 1

47. TechieXP1969 (Posts: 10737; Member since: 25 Sep 2013)


The Note 4 only has a battery slightly bigger than the Note 3, yet it last 2 hours longer. Stop being so petty.

The size of the battery isn't gonna give you an idea how long it will last because each device is different.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:54 3

8. mixedfish (Posts: 1215; Member since: 17 Nov 2013)


I think this confirms either the S6 or Edge has no removable battery.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 02:59 1

11. jan25 (Posts: 470; Member since: 26 Feb 2012)


so the day has come when HTC's flagship will come with a bigger battery than Samsung. you don't judge battery life by just the battery capacity, so i will reserve my judgment for later.

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 10:31

34. j2001m (Posts: 2979; Member since: 28 Apr 2014)


The sd 810 is a battery hog so they going to need it big time

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 03:09 1

13. HSN87 (Posts: 109; Member since: 09 Jan 2015)


Non Removable Battery???? R u serious?? :-/

posted on 19 Feb 2015, 03:10 2

14. TechNerd (Posts: 66; Member since: 03 May 2014)


I would'nt go as far as saying the new 14nm soc will be frugal as it's still flagship hardware optimised for performance. However it will be big step forward from 28nm.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories