By June this year, smartphones sold in the European Union will have to undergo standardized tests, which will provide durability and battery score to help users to make better purchasing decisions. His critics in testing processes are and one most vocal and most important ever stands out as apples.
Results for Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max show that it is rated to avoid 180 falls compared to the Galaxy S25 Ultra and Pixel 10 Pro XL for the Galaxy S25 Ultra and Pixel 10 Pro XL. There are statistics in our database to help compare the phone.
Additionally, the iPhone got only one class C repair qualification score – similar to Galaxy but behind the pixel with a class B. If you want to know more about the energy label, go to our terminology page.
EPREL Label: iPhone 17 Pro Max • Galaxy S25 Ultra • Pixel 10 Pro XL
Anyway, 180 Falls is actually an improvement – the iPhone 16 Pro Max was rated only for 90 falls, which earns it a class C score. You can see the comparison of two models closely.
On the plus side, Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max tested the Energy Efficiency Test with Class A score and received a 53 -hour high -ended rating. The Galaxy S25 Ultra is also rated Class B and 44: 54H, Pixel 10 Pro XL is also Class B and a charge is up to 48: 39H. However, the Galaxy battery is rated for 2,000 charge cycles, while the iPhone and Pixel Battery have been rated for 1,000 cycles. Compared to 16 Pro Max, it is improved in energy efficiency (class B) and endurance (48 hours) compared to the older models.
The first generation Apple iPhone Air has a direct competitor – the Galaxy S25 Age. Despite having a small battery (3,149mAh vs. 3,900mAh), the air originally lasts as long as the edge (40: 00h vs 40: 05h) and received a class A rating for efficiency. The air battery is again rated for 1,000 charge bicycles, while the edge battery is expected to run twice.
EPREL Label: iPhone Air • Galaxy S25 Edge • iPhone 16 Pro Max
For physical endurance, Air Pro Max is Max with Class B (180 Falls) free fall rating and class C repair score. Edge gets better Class A (270 Falls) ratings but the same class C repair score.
As mentioned in the initial paragraph, the Apple is not happy with the test process and there are some valid complaints. For one, it states that the drop and tumble test definitions are unclear and it is difficult to repeat. In addition, they are made on the size of a small sample (5 units), while the Apple wants to use very large sample size (at least 30 units). Apple has a 44-stage report on this matter (warning: PDF) if you want to know more.
