/    Measurement database » Chargers » Baseus 160W CCZX-160CX or CHOETECH Q4004
Support the project on Patreon


Comparison · Chargers

Baseus 160W CCZX-160CX or CHOETECH Q4004

Two models side by side: measurements taken by the author in their reviews, and their conclusions. The better value in each row is highlighted.

In brief: Based on review measurements: In test: Baseus 160W CCZX-160CX (110 W vs. 70); Temperature rise: Baseus 160W CCZX-160CX (76 °C vs. 100).

ModelBaseus 160W CCZX-160CXBaseus 160W CCZX-160CX2023Read review →CHOETECH Q4004CHOETECH Q40042020Read review →
In test, W11070
Temperature rise, °C76100
Review conclusion—With reservations

Only in one review: Voltage 60 V (CHOETECH Q4004); Power 60 W (CHOETECH Q4004); Ripple 200 mV (CHOETECH Q4004); Efficiency 90 % (CHOETECH Q4004).

Baseus 160W CCZX-160CX: It supports many protocols, but sustains its rated power only briefly and overheats.

CHOETECH Q4004: It stably delivers the rated 60 W and up to 70 W, but runs hot with little thermal headroom at maximum power.

Figures were taken from the review text and checked against the quoted passages. Measurement conditions differ between reviews, so read the reviews yourself before buying. Prices at the time of review.

Compare two modelsor

Similar comparisons

← All: chargers