Samsung's Galaxy S27 battery upgrade is six years too late and still not enough

Samsung has been using a 5,000mAh cell on its flagship 'Ultra' phones for over half a decade now. The Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra and the 2020 Galaxy S20 Ultra pack the same 5,000mAh battery.

Thankfully, early Galaxy S27 leaks point to Samsung finally upgrading the battery capacity on its upcoming flagship phones. After years of stagnation, that's an upgrade I'm looking forward to. But if the rumored increase is anything to go by, Samsung appears to be taking a very conservative approach.

Related

The Z Fold 8's unexpected success reveals what Android phones have been missing

Samsung just proved that a bold phone design can still pay off

Posts By  Jon Gilbert

Samsung stood still, while rivals pushed forward

Six years later, Samsung is still catching up

Samsung launched the Galaxy S20 Ultra in 2020 with a 5,000mAh cell. It was the company's first flagship phone to pack such a large battery. Six flagship generations later, the Galaxy S26 Ultra still uses a similar 5,000mAh cell.

For comparison, the iPhone 12 Pro Max debuted in the same year as the Galaxy S20 Ultra with a paltry 3,687mAh battery. Six years later, the iPhone 18 Pro Max features a 5,567mAh cell. That's over 50% larger than the 2020 model and about 11% larger than the Galaxy S26 Ultra.

Samsung went from being at the forefront of using high-capacity batteries in its flagship phones to lagging behind Apple, which is known for being conservative with battery sizes in its devices.

The situation looks even worse when you compare the Galaxy S26 Ultra's battery capacity with its Chinese rivals from Xiaomi, Oppo, and Vivo. These companies have used silicon-carbon technology to pack 7,000–8,000mAh batteries into their flagship phones. That's over 50% more capacity than the Galaxy S26 Ultra's battery.

With next year's Galaxy S27 Ultra, Samsung finally seems ready to tackle the battery size issue. Leaks suggest Samsung's next Ultra flagship will pack a 5,534mAh cell, which should be advertised as a 5,700mAh battery. That's 700mAh more than the S26 Ultra.

Even better, the smaller S27 Pro will seemingly get a 5,087mAh battery, possibly advertised as a 5,200mAh cell. For a compact flagship, that's a relatively large battery size, and quite larger than the current Galaxy S26's 4,300mAh.

Since these rumored battery figures come from China's 3C certification listing, they are most likely accurate. By Samsung's standards, this is a significant jump in capacity. Paired with a more efficient Snapdragon chipset, the larger cell should help the Galaxy S27 Ultra deliver better battery life than any previous Galaxy S Ultra phone.

Yet, I can’t help but feel disappointed with Samsung’s efforts. The company took a similar approach with the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra earlier this year and seems content to keep playing it safe.

Samsung switched the battery tech, but kept playing it safe

The Fold 8 Ultra’s silicon-carbon upgrade didn't go far enough

The Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra marked an important change for Samsung. It was the company's first flagship device to use a silicon-carbon battery. That allowed Samsung to fit a 5,000mAh cell inside the Z Fold 8, 600mAh more than the Galaxy Z Fold 7, without making the phone thicker.

On paper, that sounds impressive — a 4.5 mm-thick phone packing a 14% larger battery than its predecessor without being thicker or heavier. But Samsung's improvement pales in comparison to what its Chinese rivals have achieved. The Oppo Find N6 ships with a 6,000mAh battery, while the Vivo X Fold 6 goes even further with a massive 7,000mAh cell.

Meanwhile, the wider and more popular Z Fold 8 only got upgraded to a 4,800mAh cell. While that's still 400mAh more than the Z Fold 7, it's nowhere near enough for a flagship foldable.

Samsung deserves credit for being the second company after OnePlus to launch a phone with a silicon-carbon battery in the US. But the company's conservative approach made the technology adoption feel far less ambitious and exciting than it should have been.

A bigger battery should mean more than catching up

The S27 Pro looks promising, but I expect more from the Ultra

That's why I have mixed feelings about the rumored Galaxy S7 battery upgrades. A 5,700 mAh cell inside the S27 Ultra should provide a decent boost in its runtime. That should be a welcome improvement after years of stagnation.

But I have higher expectations from an 'Ultra' phone. Samsung has spent years setting the bar low for its Ultra flagship. And a slight improvement doesn't automatically make the upgrade feel worthwhile.

With Samsung's optimizations, I'm sure the Galaxy S27 Ultra will deliver excellent battery life. But with mid-range phones now coming with almost 10,000mAh batteries and flagship Chinese phones packing 8,000mAh cells, Samsung should have pushed further with the S27 Ultra and aimed for two-day battery life. That would have put the 'Ultra' in the S27 Ultra.

But Samsung seems content with narrowing the gap rather than closing it altogether or jumping ahead of the pack.

It's the same with the Galaxy S27 Pro, which should be Samsung's first true compact flagship. A 5,200mAh battery would be a respectable size for a smaller phone, but it wouldn’t set a new benchmark. It gives Samsung fans something to look forward to, without giving the competition much to worry about.

Related

The Samsung Galaxy S27 could get the upgrade it needs most

Will we finally get the battery upgrade we need?

Posts 4
By  Rita El Khoury

I’m glad Samsung is moving, but I want more

After years of sticking with a 5,000mAh battery, I am glad that Samsung is finally moving forward and planning to use a larger battery on the S27 Ultra.

However, Samsung's own history and stagnation should not be the only benchmark. Its rivals have raised expectations, and the market has moved forward to using larger 7,000mAh-8,000mAh cells.

A bigger battery would make the S27 Ultra easier to recommend. But after years of waiting, I had hoped Samsung would take a more ambitious approach, instead of settling for a more conservative one.