Short USB C to USB C Cable (100W 5A), 1ft Type C Cable with LED Display, USB C Cord Fast Charging Compatible with iPhone 15/15 Pro/15 Plus/15 Pro Max, MacBook, iPad, Galaxy S23 S22, Pixel

What the product description doesn't tell you is the LED display will read power in either direction, charging or consuming (source/sink). Some other cables with this display require the display plug to be on the device consuming side (sink) to display anything.This 1ft cable provides power charging and transfer of picture data between my laptop and phone. My laptop can take up to 80W charging at (100W) 20V/5A negotiated supply setting, and phone 8W negotiated 5V/2.4A setting. This power display closely matches measurements taken with other devices I own.This cable appears to work with the USB Type-A→Type-C and Micro→Type-C adapters I purchased for legacy devices and legacy sources, Power & Data. Eventually, everything I own will be converted to USB-C.I bought 4 cables, 2 for work, and 2 for home. For me, this was/is a great purchase, and not much more cost than a cable without displays. I prefer the display, so I can see everything is plugged in and operating correctly. And for solar applications, very nice to see how much power is being consumed.Edit 5/16/2023 (for 10ft cable):I recently found myself in the hospital and discovered 6ft is barely long enough to reach the wall from the bed for my laptop. The 1ft cables worked so well for me that I bought the 10ft cables, thinking I'd get the same performance. Turns out 10ft has an issue worth noting for data rates. First the summary:Pro:- 10ft and 1ft will do USB-C PD and higher wattage (100W). My laptop can draw average 70W when operating and charging at the same time. The cable end with the meter gets fairly warm at 70W. Warm is not hot, but warm enough to make me wonder what happens at 100W(5A) if it gets this warm at 70W (3.5A).- 10ft is great for longer distance to sofa, hospital bed, etc. power delivery convenience.Con:- USB 2.0 speed: On the product packaging, it says 480Mbps, which is USB 2.0 speed. My laptop and phone aren't able to detect this USB 2.0 cable limitation and negotiate a higher speed, which the 1ft cable does work, the 10ft cable doesn't. I spent an hour wondering why everything was powered correctly, but I couldn't transfer pictures to my laptop through this 10ft cable, but can using the 1ft version. This is obviously a transmission line design problem. The vendor packaging is up front and honest about this limit if you know how to interpret what is said, and this 10ft performance detail isn't posted in the Amazon advertisement. So if USB 3.0 and higher are needed for data rates, this 10ft cable may not be right for you as an all-in-one solution.- The cable is thick/stiff, which I expect since it is going to need thicker wire to meet USB-C specifications for end-to-end maximum voltage drop (loss <1V). Not sure whether this is a con, rather a reality consumers should know. I'm all about proper performance, so it is what it is, and this cable does it right for PD level (high wattage) charging.I'll be returning one of the two packages for the USB 2.0 data delivery reason. This will leave me with one pair of 10ft cables, which can be used for high power charging in situations where a 10 ft cable is needed and lack of data can be accepted, like in a hospital bed.For consumers trying to "future-proof", this is an intermediate USB-C solution which works as described for 100W USB 2.0 data applications.240W USB-C (48V@5A) is close on the horizon. I suspect these 100W cables with meters will not be able to accept the higher than 20V voltages (48V) negotiated by 240W source and 240W sink with 40GHz data rates. The cables which can do this are currently scarce due to newness of the specification and currently nearly twice as expensive. If you plan to go to 240W later, you may want to only buy the 100W quantity you need now. For instance, I don't see 10ft 240W USB-C available anywhere, 3ft-yes, 10ft-no, and I do want the power meter like this cable provides.

Nice

Good quality cable

I was in the market for some USB-C to USB-C charging cables and came across a couple of 100W 5A cables from two different companies. Both seemed very similar so I bought both to do a comparison. Each has some advantages over the other and some potential downsides described below with photographs illustrating each.Since I just received each cable, I am not really able to comment on their durability, especially that of the digital display. So take any assessment of durability/sturdiness with a grain of salt.1. Construction and projected durability:1a. The cable: Both cables appear to be constructed of nice quality materials. Both have metal housings for their connectors. The Ocetea seems more robust than the other. The Ocetea cable is a little thicker than the competitor, and is much stiffer as well as can be seen by how tightly each can be comfortably coiled. The Ocetea cannot be “doubled up” on itself as it is too stiff whereas the competitor with the much more flexible cable can be. The nylon mesh fabric sheathing on the Ocetea also appears to be much more abrasion resistant than the nylon fabric sheathing on its competitor. The Ocetea cable feels much more “plastic” or polymer-like compared to the competitor’s which feels more like a nylon fabric. I lightly abraded each cable and if you zoom in on the closeups of each cable, you may be able to see the beginning of some slight “fuzz” or stray fibers beginning to show on the competitor’s cable.1b. The Housing and Stress Relief: The stress relief moulding on the Ocetea also appears to be much more robust than the stress relief junction on the competitor as can be seen in the photos. The overall length of the housing on the Ocetea is longer than its competitor. The Ocetea also has some ridges for grip on the sides of the housing as well. The end-on view of each USB-C connector shows that the Ocetea housing is also slightly larger in width and thickness compared to the competitor’s housing (the Ocetea is on the top in red and the competitor is on the bottom in blue). I did not have any problem with this but it is possible that this could potentially cause a clearance problem with some phone cases if the charging port is recessed deeply into the case with little clearance around the port. However, as you can see from the end-on view, the difference very slight and I do not anticipate this to be a problem in the majority of cases.1c. The USB-C connector: Both cables’ connector held firmly in a variety of chargers and ports, so a draw in this regards.2. The display:The main difference that I noted between the two cables is that the Ocetea only displays the wattage in integers/whole values while the competitor displays down to the tenth of a watt. Also, the Ocetea interestingly randomly displayed 1w when there was not load as shown in the photo before “settling down” to “0”. The competitor was very consistent and always displayed “0.0w” with no load. Another consideration is that the display on the Ocetea is quite a bit dimmer than the competitor’s display. This makes the Ocetea much harder to read when there is ambient light. However, the dimmer display may be preferable if using it bedside at night. I personally prefer the brighter display with more digits displayed.3. Accuracy: When tested against an admittedly inexpensive USB meter (so take this at face value), both displayed values within about 0.8w of my USB meter. As the Ocetea only displayed to 1 digit, the actual accuracy is not known in tenths. Again, although it probably is of no real consequence as the accuracy of any of these meters is suspect anyways, I still prefer the competitor’s display due to the number of decimal places displayed and for its brightness. Each cable was able to display when a device was being PD fast charged by accurately displaying “PD” in addition to the wattage.4. Overall: Longevity of the display electronics itself aside (I cannot comment on this as I just received and began testing each), the Ocetea cable appears to be the most robust as far as the cable itself. This comes at the cost of stiffness and potential clearance issues in really tight situations. However, its stiffness is “flexible enough” IMHO and the advantage is that is is very resistant to kinking. It will take up slightly more room when traveling, but you probable have to worry less about it kinking when shoved into your travel bag. So again, the electronics of the display aside, I have to give the advantage to the Ocetea.However, a big disappointment is the readability of the display due to its dimness relative to its competitor’s display. To some, this may be an advantage depending upon your use case (use bedside etc). Also, although probably of minimal practical benefit, I do like the display of the competitor more due to it displaying down to the tenths decimal place as well. So your decision will of course depend on what you value the most and your particular use case.I hope you find this review/comparison helpful. Please like if you found this helpful. I will update if any longevity/durability problems arise.