Shopping for USB-C cables often reveals a bewildering array of prices and promised capabilities. After all, aren't they just simple connectors? Yet, significant variations exist in their reliability and functionality.
Based on extensive experience at PCWorld, we can confirm that USB-C cables differ substantially in build quality and effectiveness for tasks like powering devices or moving files.
After evaluating a wide selection—from premium established brands to bargain options—certain models stood out as superior performers.
In conducting these assessments, I avoided relying on online feedback; instead, I bought the cables directly from stores and subjected them to personal scrutiny, including internal wiring analysis, resistance measurements, and verification of any included eMarker chips. I also verified their real-world performance against stated specifications for power output, file speeds, and video compatibility.
The recommended USB-C cables are divided into categories: those optimized for charging alone, and others that handle both charging and rapid data movement.
Following Apple's discontinuation of its leading high-capacity charging cable, we sought a comparable substitute and identified the Belkin BoostCharge 240-watt option as a strong contender.
Measuring 2 meters in length, this cable accommodates the maximum USB Power Delivery standard, originates from a trusted manufacturer, and matches the cost of Apple's former 100-watt version, which retailed at $19.99.
Apple phased out the 100-watt 2-meter cable to align with evolving USB standards that elevate power limits to 240 watts for quicker charging, replacing it with a pricier 240-watt model at $29.99.
Fortunately, the Belkin BoostCharge serves as a solid stand-in for Apple's product.
In terms of internal resistance, the Belkin closely mirrors Apple's construction, which we have found to be robust. While Apple's exteriors are prone to wear and fraying, the Belkin's braided design, reinforced ends, and endurance testing for over 30,000 flexes inspire greater durability.
Additionally, the BoostCharge incorporates dual eMarker chips for thermal safeguards, essential at 240-watt levels to halt charging if overheating occurs and resume once cooled.
A notable drawback is the absence of conductors for video signals or swift data flows; it manages only 480 Mbps transfers, far below 10 Gbps or 20 Gbps options.
This limitation suits most users focused on charging laptops, tablets, or smartphones without needing extra bulk from additional wiring. We suggest using a durable basic charger for routine connections and a specialized shorter cable for data tasks to extend the latter's lifespan.
Priced at $20, the Belkin may not offer the ultimate savings, but for those preferring brand reliability, it provides reassurance. In summary, if Apple's $29.99 price deters you, opt for this Belkin alternative.
During testing, the Anker New Nylon two-pack topped Amazon's sales for USB-C cables, likely due to its appeal: around $14 for two 6-foot USB-C to USB-C chargers from a reputable maker, ideal for phones, compact laptops, and tablets. For basic needs, this suffices; otherwise, consider the limitations below.
These braided cables endure 12,000 bends per Anker's claims, surpassing many affordable competitors.
Internally, they represent standard fare for chargers, capped at 60 watts. They support data at 480 Mbps, which delays large file copies to minutes on devices.
Consequently, they cannot connect laptops to displays via USB-C ports for video output.
Beyond affordability and branding, the cables offer little innovation, with average resistance impacting power slightly. Still, they outperform the pricier 2020 Amazon Basics equivalents at $10 each.
Critics might dismiss the 60-watt limit, but it handles charging for phones, tablets, and slim laptops like the Dell XPS 13 or MacBook Air without problems.
For new iPhone 15 users ditching Lightning cables, purchasing multiples of these Anker options simplifies the transition without overcomplicating choices.
Only those requiring bulk file handling or monitor connections should avoid such basics. Premium alternatives exist with superior resistance, speeds, and durability—at higher costs. For stationary charging setups, the Anker performs reliably from a dependable source.
We occasionally appreciate novel features, and the SooPii USB-C to USB-C cable delivers with its built-in screen showing real-time power draw for devices like phones or laptops.
Though niche, this appeals to enthusiasts, with our Charger Lab Power-Z analyzer confirming its precision.
Beyond the display, issues emerge: rated for 100 watts (outdated compared to 240-watt norms), and its eMarker inaccurately lists 1-meter length (actual 2 meters) plus unsupported 10 Gbps/20 Gbps claims, managing only 480 Mbps.
Product details clarify its charging focus, avoiding deception, though quality control raises concerns.
Resistance levels fall short of top chargers but exceed some budget picks like the 2020 Amazon Basics. At $13.99 for 6.6 feet, value is middling; better options exist at similar prices.
The draw remains the display, which accurately tracks usage—like 42 watts for a laptop or 2 watts for a phone. We've relied on it for two months across devices without faults.
For gadget fans, flaws may not deter; cautious buyers might prefer established brands like those previously noted.
For charging-focused users, the prior selections suffice. Those needing data or display support should consider these:
The Cable Matters 6-foot USB-C cable excels in versatility, handling 100-watt charging, USB 3.1 file speeds, and monitor output, though Thunderbolt tops at 20 Gbps—typical for its length, requiring shorter versions for 40 Gbps.
Its robustness adds weight (3.5 ounces, heaviest non-extended tested) and reduces flexibility due to robust wiring.
Frequently $18, it commands a premium for quality and performance enthusiasts.
The shorter 2.6-foot Cable Matters USB4 variant prioritizes speed, achieving 100-watt charging with minimal resistance from quality wires and compact size, plus top USB 3.1 rates, display compatibility, and full 40 Gbps Thunderbolt for our SSD.
Sturdier build yields stiffness and elevates cost to $6 per foot versus $3.17 for Amazon Basics alternatives.
While excelling in Thunderbolt (rarely needed), it suits demanding setups despite length and price drawbacks.
Relative to top choices, other tested cables underperform; no need for subpar options. Still, for completeness, here are the rejects:
The Dockcase USB-C to USB-C cable offers poor length-to-price ratio at 8.5 inches, but its brevity boosts performance with low resistance.
It claims 100-watt charging, 4K video, and 20 Gbps Thunderbolt 3 (not full 40 Gbps), successfully powering our laptop at 100 watts.
Flat and rubber-coated, its weak strain relief questions longevity.
Best for portable SSDs or occasional charging/displays, but not high-speed Thunderbolt due to limits.
The 6-foot Amazon Basics USB-C to USB-C USB 2.0 embodies basics, supporting 60-watt charging for phones/tablets/laptops but sluggish 480 Mbps data—taking nearly a minute for 1 GB files versus seconds on USB 3.1.
Ultralight weight suggests thin wires, yielding higher resistance and 2% less power than elites, like a barely passing grade.
Positives include branding, slimness, and flexibility. Suitable for occasional phone charging, less for daily laptops.
Anker's original Powerline, a USB 2.0 (480 Mbps) model, features a smooth plastic cover and average internals, delivering better than Amazon Basics at 60 watts (versus Javex's 100 watts). Ideal for light devices, but $12 pricing (or $8 sales) makes it less appealing than alternatives.
JSAUX's two-pack 2-meter USB-C to USB-C cables cost what singles do elsewhere, honestly marketed for 60-watt charging and 480 Mbps without video or Thunderbolt. High resistance indicates skimpy wiring, risking durability, yet over 31,000 positive reviews affirm adequacy for phones/tablets.
We'd choose costlier options or even Amazon Basics, but for basic needs, it satisfies many.
All cables were retail purchases; we gauged lengths, weights, and connectors (preferring seamless shells, as all featured). Weight correlates with wire count; the 32-inch Cable Matters USB4 outweighs the longer, basic Amazon 2.0.
Heavier cables with thicker wires resist bending and pack bulkier.
Connector pins don't reveal capabilities; unused ones mimic USB 2.0 wiring, as green LEDs showed for Amazon Basics.
Advanced cables like Cable Matters USB4 light up full wiring, eMarker, grounding, and low resistance via our USB Cable Checker 2.0.
We measured ground (max 83 milliohms) and VBUS (167 milliohms) resistance with a milli-ohm meter and breakouts (adding 30 milliohms); most complied, highlighting quality differences.
E-Markers were checked for accuracy; most matched claims, save one falsely stating 10 Gbps and 1-meter when 2 meters and 480 Mbps.
Performance tests used real devices: charging an Asus ROG Strix 15 at 100 watts under load with Aukey PD charger (all hit 60 or 100 watts).
No housing temps recorded, but a budget cable at 100 watts for an hour rose 50°F externally—warm but functional; others endured two hours.
Final charge: 20V/3A and 5A loads measured end voltage with CT-3; thin wires dropped more.
Thermal imaging of a cheap 6.6-foot at 100 watts showed heat from resistance.
Data speeds via CrystalDiskMark 8 on MSI Prestige 14 Evo USB-C/Thunderbolt 4; Thunderbolt SSD tests yielded 20/40 Gbps or failure on basics.
Monitor test: Asus ROG Strix 17-inch (1080p 240Hz, akin to 4K 60Hz) confirmed display modes.
PCWorld has evaluated hardware since the 1980s, rigorously assessing performance and usability; we only endorse what we'd use.
Gordon Mah Ung, with decades in tech journalism starting as a 1993 PCWorld intern, began tinkering with his Commodore VIC-20 in school.
USB-C to USB-C variants include USB 2.0, 3.1 Gen 1/2, and Thunderbolt 4, differing in data rates and power (basics: 480 Mbps/60 watts for small devices; higher for larger laptops).
Speeds: USB 2.0 at 480 Mbps; USB 3 from 5-20 Gbps; USB4/Thunderbolt 3/4 up to 40 Gbps. Many support DisplayPort video.
USB-C cables now power data, displays, and devices from gadgets to tools, overtaking Lightning and legacy USB via reversibility and 240-watt potential.
USB-C to USB-A features a one-way rectangular end (4-9 pins) and reversible C; slower charging/data than C-to-C, often proprietary for fast phones. Prefer C-to-C for modern chargers.
Choose based on ports: USB-A to C for older chargers like Galaxy S24 or iPhone 15 setups.
C-to-C enables 240 watts/40 Gbps versus A-to-C limits; most phones cap at 480 Mbps-10 Gbps anyway, suiting 10/20 Gbps A-to-C for data. C-to-C shines for 30+ watt charging.
Phones rarely max rates, so A-to-C suffices for most, though C-to-C boosts charging modestly.
USB-C defines the connector only, not speeds (480 Mbps to 40 Gbps). USB PD handles charging up to 240 watts in 3.1 spec, though laptops lag adoption.
USB-C charges diverse devices, from fans to laptops.
No-name USB-C failures often stem from device negotiation lacks; A-to-C works as USB-A supplies fixed low power. Cheap device cables may omit data wires (visible in A end).
Upgrade to data-supporting cables fixes this.
Avoid magnetic USB-C adapters; exposed pins risk shorts from attracted metal.
iPhone speeds cap at 10 Gbps (Pro models) or 480 Mbps; use 10 Gbps C-to-C for Pros if transferring. All models charge similarly with quality C-to-C and charger.
Apple's $130 1.8m Thunderbolt 4 cable draws ire; internals justify some cost, but overkill for iPhones—$15 3-foot 10 Gbps C-to-C like Cable Matters suffices for data/video, as iPhones max 10 Gbps.
Cables wear from connector damage or wire fatigue; quality extends life, but abuse shortens any. Name brands endure better than cheap ones under stress.
PCWorld endorses Belkin BoostCharge 240-watt (6.6 feet, < $20, 240-watt PD, durable braiding, brand trust).
Also Cable Matters 6-foot USB-C (100-watt charge, USB 3.1 data, monitor support; 20 Gbps max, shorter for 40 Gbps).