Product comparison · 2 mobile device chargers

Hama 00201943 mobile device charger Smartphone, Laptop, Tablet, Headset, Power bank White AC Fast charging Indoor vs i-tec 65W USB-C GaN Charger

Add a product
  • 21specifications compared
  • 6differ
  • 15identical
  • 14known for one product only

Key differences

The i-tec 65W USB-C GaN Charger has 11.3% more efficiency (@10 %) than the Hama 00201943 mobile device charger Smartphone, Laptop, Tablet, Headset, Power bank White AC Fast charging Indoor (88% vs 76.7%). Product colour: White on the Hama 00201943 mobile device charger Smartphone, Laptop, Tablet, Headset, Power bank White AC Fast charging Indoor, Black on the i-tec 65W USB-C GaN Charger. Input voltage: 200 - 240 V on the Hama 00201943 mobile device charger Smartphone, Laptop, Tablet, Headset, Power bank White AC Fast charging Indoor, 110–240 on the i-tec 65W USB-C GaN Charger. Input frequency: 50 / 60 Hz on the Hama 00201943 mobile device charger Smartphone, Laptop, Tablet, Headset, Power bank White AC Fast charging Indoor, 50/60 Hz on the i-tec 65W USB-C GaN Charger.

  • Product colour
    • 00201943 mobile device charger Smartphone, Laptop, Tablet, Headset, Power bank White AC Fast charging Indoor:White
    • 65W USB-C GaN Charger:Black
  • Input voltage
    • 00201943 mobile device charger Smartphone, Laptop, Tablet, Headset, Power bank White AC Fast charging Indoor:200 - 240 V
    • 65W USB-C GaN Charger:110–240
  • Input frequency
    • 00201943 mobile device charger Smartphone, Laptop, Tablet, Headset, Power bank White AC Fast charging Indoor:50 / 60 Hz
    • 65W USB-C GaN Charger:50/60 Hz
  • Efficiency (@10 %)
    • 00201943 mobile device charger Smartphone, Laptop, Tablet, Headset, Power bank White AC Fast charging Indoor:76.7%
    • 65W USB-C GaN Charger:88%

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only (off)
Comparison of 00201943, CHARGER-GAN65W
35 specifications
B

i-tec

65W USB-C GaN Charger

Model CHARGER-GAN65W

View product
Performance2 differ
Charger typeIndoorIndoor
Charger compatibilityDiffersSmartphone, Laptop, Tablet, Headset, Power bankUniversal
Power source typeACAC
USB Type-C ports quantity11
Wireless chargingNoNo
Fast chargingYesYes
Fast charging technologyDiffersQuick Charge 2.0, Quick Charge 3.0, Power Delivery 3.0GaN
Number of simultaneously connected devices (max)11
USB Power Delivery (USB PD)YesYes
USB Power Delivery revisionKnown for one3.0Unknown — not stated by the source
Power protection featuresKnown for oneOver current, Short circuit, OverloadUnknown — not stated by the source
USB Power Delivery up toKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source65 W
Design1 differ
Product colourDiffersWhiteBlack
Plug and PlayKnown for oneYesUnknown — not stated by the source
Gallium nitride (GaN) transistorsKnown for oneYesUnknown — not stated by the source
Power3 differ
Input voltageDiffers200 - 240 V110–240
Input frequencyDiffers50 / 60 Hz50/60 Hz
Maximum power65 W65 W
Output current (5V)3 A3 A
Output current (9V)3 A3 A
Output current (12V)3 A3 A
Output current (15V)3 A3 A
Output current (20V)3.25 A3.25 A
Average active efficiencyKnown for one81.4Unknown — not stated by the source
Efficiency at low load (10%)Known for oneYesUnknown — not stated by the source
Efficiency (@10 %)Differs76.7%88%
Power plug typeKnown for oneType CUnknown — not stated by the source
Input currentKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source1.5 A
Packaging contentidentical
Quantity per pack1 pc(s)1 pc(s)
ManualYesYes
Weight & dimensionsidentical
WidthKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source53.4 mm
DepthKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source43.3 mm
HeightKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source32 mm
WeightKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source92 g
Operational conditionsidentical
Operating temperature (T-T)Known for oneUnknown — not stated by the source0 - 30 °C

A dash means the value is not stated by the source. Unknown values are never counted for or against a product, and there is no overall score.

More mobile device charger comparisons

All mobile device charger comparisons