The 6,000 mAh battery on the Razr Fold should worry Samsung and Google: Here’s why


If there’s something that stands between foldables and the mainstream smartphone market, it’s their battery life, and Motorola has taken it upon itself to fix that. Almost all smartphone giants have their own book-style foldable available in the U.S., and all of them justify the premium with intricate hinges, flexible displays, and other engineering marvels, but somehow, that doesn’t extend to their batteries.

You can unfold a foldable to double its screen size; that’s its entire pitch. But does the battery life also double? Unfortunately, it doesn’t. Among the two widely available book-style foldables in the U.S. — Samsung’s Galaxy Z Fold 7 and Google’s Pixel 10 Pro Fold — the average battery life remains less than that of regular handsets.

But haven’t smartphones already unlocked over 10 hours of screen-on time using silicon-carbon battery technology? This is exactly the gap Motorola is walking into with its first book-style foldable: the Razr Fold. For the first time, a foldable is entering the U.S. market with a 6,000 mAh battery that supports 80W wired charging, no less. 

Should it deliver, the Razr Fold could bridge that gap before Samsung or Google even comes close.

The battery problem foldables have always had

Think about what the battery on the Fold 7 or a Pixel 10 Pro Fold is actually running: two displays (the cover screen and the foldable screen), a flagship-tier chipset borrowed straight from the slab phones, and at least two to three rear-facing cameras, along with constant Wi-Fi or cellular connection. 

It is because of this compounded power draw that foldables require larger batteries to provide similar endurance to regular phones. A couple of years ago, when the technology wasn’t as mature as today, using a 4,000 or 4,400 mAh battery on a foldable was par for the course. 

To me, it feels like OEMs, especially in the U.S., are deliberately holding back on battery capacity in foldables, while Chinese brands like Honor and Oppo continue to push the limits. 

This is the core problem that the Motorola Razr Fold could solve.

Phone Battery Wired Charging Wireless Charging Status
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7 4,400 mAh 25W 15W (Qi2 Ready*) Available
Google Pixel 10 Pro Fold 5,015 mAh 39W 15W (Qi2) Available
Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold 5,600 mAh 45W 15W (Qi) Discontinued
Motorola Razr Fold 6,000 mAh 80W 50W Launching May 21

Who does the Razr Fold compete with?

I’ve used the Fold 7 briefly, and by many measures, it’s an impressive piece of technology. The thinnest book-style foldable in the U.S. is just 4.2 mm when unfolded. However, with a 4,400 mAh battery that offers around six hours of screen-on time on average, that didn’t make the phone last an entire day, at least for me. 

The phone also takes around 90 minutes for a complete charge, thanks to support for only 25W wired charging. You can’t just plug it 20 minutes before leaving your home; you’d have to plan around it.

Google’s Pixel 10 Pro Fold took a meaningful leap with a 5,015 mAh cell and up to 39W charging, offering between seven and eight hours of screen-on time, genuinely lasting an entire day of usage. 

But that’s enough, right? Not quite. Now that we’re in the era of over-7,000-mAh battery phones (I’m talking about the OnePlus 15 and the OnePlus 15R) that deliver nearly two days of battery life between charges, plugging in a foldable at around 8 or 9 PM feels like getting shortchanged on a $2,000 purchase

If foldable phones stand a chance against mainstream handsets, manufacturers have to step up to the plate on battery life, and that’s exactly why the Razr Fold has my attention. 

What should you expect from the Razr Fold?

The Razr Fold’s 6,000 mAh battery is roughly 36% larger than the Galaxy Z Fold 7’s and about 20% larger than the Pixel 10 Pro Fold’s. The company has achieved this using the same tech on modern Chinese flagships: silicon-carbon battery chemistry, which packs more energy into less physical space without adding bulk. The result is a book-style foldable that unfolds to just 4.7 mm, slightly thicker than the Fold 7, but not by a margin that should trouble anyone. 

Now, this is the part where I’m using years of experience to speculate something without trying to sound too optimistic. The Razr Fold, with its 6,000 mAh battery and the Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 chip that’s actually less powerful than the Snapdragon 8 Elite on the Fold 7, should provide a screen-on time of around eight to nine hours under mixed usage. 

If Motorola has optimized the software well for a big-screen foldable, and that’s a big if, given that this is the company’s first foldable, the screen-on time might nudge past nine hours as well. 

This way, the foldable could actually match the battery life of modern flagships. If that doesn’t happen, however, I’d be disappointed, and seven to eight hours is where the phone would sit, with the Pixel 10 Pro Fold, despite featuring a significantly bigger battery.

Please don’t drop the ball, Motorola

The charging speed is equally important here. Razr Fold’s 80W wired charging speed is more than three times what Samsung offers on the Fold 7 and double what Google offers on the Pixel 10 Pro Fold. The caveat, here, is that none of this has been proven yet, and we’ll have to wait a couple of weeks to find out the truth. 

It’s worth knowing that the company also promises over 12 hours of use from under 10 minutes of being plugged in. For added convenience, and to leave the competition baffled, the Razr Fold also supports 50W wireless charging. While achieving those speeds requires Motorola’s proprietary hardware, I’d definitely pay for that kind of speedy convenience. 

Moreover, the Razr Fold’s 6,000 mAh battery, paired with 80W wired and 50W wireless charging, is the spec combination that the U.S. buyers deserve. If it delivers, it will bridge the gap between the battery life we get from regular smartphones and foldables, making the Razr a compelling buy and forcing Samsung and Google to go back to the drawing board. 



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


Vibe coding has taken the development world by storm—and it truly is a modern marvel to behold. The problem is, the vibe coding rush is going to leave a lot of apps broken in its wake once people move on to the next craze. At the end of the day, many of us are going to be left with apps that are broken with no fixes in sight.

A lot of vibe “coders” are really just prompt typers

And they’ve never touched a line of code

An AI robot using a computer with a prompt field on the screen. Credit: Lucas Gouveia / How-To Geek

Vibe coding made development available to the masses like never before. You can simply take an AI tool, type a prompt into a text box, and out pops an app. It probably needs some refinement, but, typically, version one is still functional whenever you’re vibe coding.

The problem comes from “developers” who have never written a line of code. They’re just using vibe coding because it’s cool or they think they can make a quick buck, but they really have no knowledge of development—or any desire to learn proper development.

Think of those types of vibe coders as people who realize they can use a calculator and online tools to solve math problems for them, so they try to build a rocket. They might be able to make something work in some way, but they’ll never reach the moon, even though they think they can.

Anyone can vibe code a prototype

But you really need to know what you’re doing to build for the long haul

For those who don’t know what they’re doing, vibe coding is a fantastic way to build a prototype. I’ve vibe coded several projects so far, and out of everything I’ve done, I’ve realized one thing—vibe coding is only as good as the person behind the keyboard. I have spent more time debugging the fruits of my vibe coding than I have actually vibe coding.

Each project that I’ve built with vibe coding could have easily been “viable” within an hour or two, sometimes even less time than that. But, to make something of actual quality, it has always taken many, many hours.

Vibe coding is definitely faster than traditional coding if you’re a one-man team, but it’s not something that is fast by any means if you’re after a quality product. The same goes for continued updates.

I’ve spent the better part of three months building a weather app for iPhone. It’s a simple app, but it also has quite a lot of complex things going on in the background.

It recently got released in the App Store—no small feat at all. But, I still get a few crash reports a week, and I’m constantly squashing bugs and working on new features for the app. This is because I’m planning on supporting the app for a long time, not just the weekend I released it, and that takes a lot more work.

Vibe coders often jump from app to app without thinking of longevity

The app was a weekend project, after all

A relaxed man lounging on an orange beanbag watches as a friendly yellow robot works on a laptop for him, while multiple red exclamation-mark warning icons float around them. Credit: Lucas Gouveia/How-To Geek | ViDI Studio/Shutterstock

I’ve seen it far too often, a vibe coder touting that they built this “complex app” in 48 hours, as if that is something to be celebrated. Sure, it’s cool that a working version of an app was up and running in two days, but how well does it work? How many bugs are still in it? Are there race conditions that cause a random crash?

My weather app has a weird race condition right now I’m tracking down. It crashes, on occasion, when opened from Spotlight on an iPhone. Not every time does that cause a crash, just sometimes.

If a vibe coder’s only goal is to build apps in short amounts of time so they can brag about how fast they built the app, they likely aren’t going to take the time to fix little things like that.

I don’t vibe code my apps that way, and I know many other vibe coders that aren’t that way—but we all started with actual coding, not typing a prompt.


Anyone can be a vibe coder, but not all vibe coders are developers

“And when everyone’s super… no one will be.” – Syndrome, The Incredibles. It might be from a kids’ movie, but it rings true in the era of vibe coding. When everyone thinks they can build an app in a weekend, everyone thinks they’re a developer.

By contrast, not every vibe coder is actually a developer, and that’s the problem. It’s hard to know if the app you’re using was built by someone who has plans to support the app long-term or not—and that’s why there’s going to be a lot of broken apps in the future.

I can see it now, the apps that people built in a weekend as a challenge will simply go without updates. While the app might work for the first few weeks or months just fine, an API update comes along and breaks the app’s compatibility. It’s at that point we’ll see who was vibe coding to build an app versus who was vibe coding just for online clout—and the sad part is, consumers will lose out more often than not with broken apps.



Source link