The “efficiency improvement trap” at 16:05, the “23% improvement in performance” and “20% improvement in efficiency” are mutually exclusive.
However on the battery longevity things are different. What are the conditions when doing the 1000 charge cycles? 0.2C? 0.5C? to 0.03C cutoff? and discharge rate 0.2C? 0.5C? 1C? each different rate gives a different cycle life. The problem with “up to” on battery, if you understand it the same as other tech marketing lies, is that you cannot get higher than 80% of capacity after 1000 cycles no matter how hard you try, which is false.
Here’s a proof
84.7% after 1344
So the problem with “up to” in battery longevity means either you didn’t get 80% on the lab test or you can’t get better longevity no matter how you try, both of them are probably
incorrect.
However, the up to X GHz are still there