AccessoriesMobileTechTravel

Chargeasap Omega GaN 200W Vs ThunderGo GaN 200W Review

This review compares the design specifications for Chargeasap Omega GaN 200W and ThunderGo GaN 200W charger.

Campaign Results

A quick look at Thundergo and Omega will quickly give the impression that Thundergo is better since it has 3 USB-C ports, as compared to Omega which has only 2 USB-C ports. However, their campaign results are the other way round:

Chargeasap Omega 200W GaN Charger
Thundergo 200W GaN Charger

Technical Comparison

Based on our comparison below, it appears that the Omega is about 10% larger in size, but it is 31% lighter than the Thundergo. So in terms of form factor, we conclude that the Omega is significantly better than Thundergo.

Mobile product design should always aim for lightweight and compact size without sacrificing the intended function.

Although Thundergo has 3 x USB-C port, the power output configuration is quite similar to Omega.

  • The first two USB-C port will always delivery 100W each, if the other two ports are not in use.
  • When three ports are in use, the first USB-C port will always maintain 100W, while the second USB-C port drops to 65W.
  • When all 4 ports are in use, both charges deliver almost the same power configuration.
    • Omega: 100+65+12+12W
    • Thundergo: 100+65+(25W) where the 25W is shared between the third USB-C port and USB-A port.

In the table below, not that the variables used to represent the ports are: First USB-C port is C1, second USB-C port is C2, and so on.

The patented built-in pins for the Omega can be adjusted at two angles, making it more flexible than the Thundergo.

Omega 200W Charger 2-Pin Prong
Omega 200W Charger 2-Pin Prong
Thundergo Built-in Pins
Thundergo Built-in Pins

We are not too concern about the protocols even though Omega did not list as many as Thundergo.

Based on the above, it should be clear by the Omega is better.

Delivery Issues

At this time of writing, it appears that both companies are having issues delivering the products. This could be due to shortages of electronic products due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, the campaigners should explain clearly to the backers. We are not affiliated to them but we do not believe they are scammers.

Chargeasap has a much larger order than Thundergo, so I think it is easier to explain in their case.

Comparison Table

Tech SpecsChargeasap Omega 200W
GaN Charger
ThunderGo 200W GaN Charger
Size88x55x42mm83x63x35mm
Volume203.3cm2183cm2
Weight220g320g
Total Power200W200W
InputAC 100-240V 50/60Hz 1.5AAC 100-240V 50/60Hz 1.5A
Output2xUSB-C: 100W max (3.3-21V/5A, 5V/3A, 9V/3A, 12V/3A, 15V/3A, 20V/5A)
2xUSB A: 18W max (5V/3A, 9V/2A, 12V/1.5A) 22.5W (5V/4.5A)
2xUSB-C: 100W max (3.3-21V/5A, 5V-15V/3A, 20V/5A)
1xUSB-C: 65W max (3.3-11V/5A, 5V-15V/3A, 20V/3.25A)
1xUSB A: 60W max (4.5V/5A, 5V/4.5A or 5V/3A, 9V-20V/3A)
Possible ConfigurationC1 or C2 = 100W
C1+C2 = 100+100W
C1+ A1+A2 = 100+12+12W
C1+C2+A1 = 100+65+22.5W
C1+C2+A2 = 100+65+22.5W
C1+A1= 100+22.5W
C2+A2 = 65+22.5W
A1+A2 = 12+12W
A1 or A2 = 22.5W
C1+C2+A1+A2: 100+65+12+12W
C1 or C2= 100W
C3 = 65W
A1 = 60W
C1+C2 = 100+100W
C1+C2+C3 = 100+65+30W
C1+C3=100+65W
C1+A1=100+60W
C2+C3=100+65W
C2+A1=100+60W
C3+A1=25W (shared)C1+C2+(C3+A1)=100+65+(25W)
ProtocolUSB-C: 100W PD 3.0
USB-A: QC 3.0/AFC/FCP/SCP+VOCC
PPS/PD3.0/PD2.0/QC4+/QC4.0/QC3.0/QC2.0/PE2.0/PE1.1/AFC/FCP
GaN IC2x Navitas 61272x Navitas 6127
Heat DissipationGraphene Membrane and
Nano Heat Sink
Unknown
Show More

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button
error: Alert: Add url