r/SpecSheet

The Redmi K100 Pro Max spec sheet is kind of absurd.

And I mean that in a good way.

6.9-inch OLED

• 2608 × 1200
• 185Hz refresh rate
• Up to 4500 nits peak brightness
• Dolby Vision + HDR10+

Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5

• 3nm
• Dedicated D2 graphics chip
• Up to 16GB LPDDR5X Ultra RAM
• Up to 1TB UFS 4.1

Then there's the camera setup:

• 200MP main camera with OIS
• 50MP 5x periscope with OIS
• 50MP ultrawide
• 32MP selfie camera

No random 2MP macro sensor pretending to contribute. Nice.

But the part that caught my attention is the battery.

9,070mAh.

Not 5,000mAh.

Not 5,500mAh.

Nine. Thousand. Seventy.

And it still supports:

• 100W wired charging
• 50W wireless charging
• 27W wired reverse charging
• 22.5W wireless reverse charging

The phone is around 8.45mm thick and 238g, so obviously Xiaomi hasn't broken physics. It's a heavy phone.

But I'd happily take 238g if it means I stop looking at the battery percentage every few hours.

There are some other fun details too:

• IP66 / IP68 / IP69
• Wi-Fi 7
• Bluetooth 6.0
• USB 3.2 Gen 1
• 3D ultrasonic fingerprint reader
• HyperOS 3 / Android 16
• 2.1-channel speaker setup tuned by Bose

The 185Hz display feels like classic spec-sheet flexing. I'm not convinced I'd notice much difference between 144Hz and 185Hz on a phone.

The 9,070mAh battery, though?

That I would notice every single day.

For years, flagship phones have hovered around 5,000mAh while processors, displays and cameras kept getting more demanding. If these new high-density batteries let manufacturers get close to 9,000mAh without making phones ridiculously thick, I'm all for it.

Would you rather have:

A lighter ~200g phone with a 5,000-6,000mAh battery

or

a ~238g phone with 9,070mAh?

I'd take the battery.

Also, 185Hz: useful or completely unnecessary? 😅

I posted an earlier version of this chart asking for feedback on what RAM would have provided a smooth, comfortable experience for basic tasks on different generations of Windows and mobile devices.

I received some helpful feedback, particularly that some of my earlier PC estimates were too high for their respective periods, and also how some weaker chipset could run efficiently in certain periods. I've revised the data accordingly.

I could post another update again if people point out more inaccuracies that I have not seen from my previous chart . I'm only interested in historical accuracy and firsthand experience, not defending my original estimates.

I made a chart showing what I think are reasonable hardware recommendations for running basic tasks smoothly on PCs and mobile devices across different years.

By “smooth basic tasks,” I mean things like web browsing, office/productivity software, basic multitasking, and ordinary everyday use,not gaming, video editing, or other demanding workloads. I also don't mean, start web browing on modern-day YouTube on a WIndows 98 PC with 128MB of RAM.

If any of these RAM recommendations seem too high or too low for their respective era, let me know.