How the New L.1004 Standard Aims to End Fast‑Charging Fragmentation

The ITU‑approved L.1004 fast‑charging standard, created by China’s ICT research institute together with Huawei, vivo, OPPO and others, unifies disparate proprietary charging protocols into a single interoperable solution, promising universal 40 W (and higher) fast charging across smartphones, tablets and power banks while reducing waste and safety risks.

IT Services Circle
IT Services Circle
IT Services Circle
How the New L.1004 Standard Aims to End Fast‑Charging Fragmentation

Finally, mobile fast‑charging devices have a global standard.

Recently, the China Information and Communication Research Institute, in partnership with Huawei, vivo, and OPPO, drafted the new fast‑charging standard L.1004, which was approved by the International Telecommunication Union’s Study Group 5 (ITU‑T SG5) and published as an international standard.

This is the first global fast‑charging standard issued by the ITU. The standard adopts China’s own fast‑charging scheme as the sole “best‑practice” case and references the Chinese group standard (CCSA/TAF dual numbering).

The highlighted case is the upgraded UFCS (Unified Fast Charging Specification) protocol, which merges several high‑efficiency, safe fast‑charging technologies to achieve cross‑brand, cross‑device compatibility.

Since 2014, China’s fast‑charging technology has advanced rapidly, leading the world in charging speed and safety. Domestic phone makers now equip new devices with the latest fast‑charging chargers and cables, making fast‑charging efficiency a key selling point.

However, the industry has long suffered from a complex, incompatible landscape of proprietary protocols, leaving users with many chargers that often cannot be used universally. Incompatible chargers can reduce charging speed, cause battery drain, or even overheat devices.

Current fast‑charging protocols fall into two categories: public (industry‑wide) and private (manufacturer‑specific). Public protocols are defined by chip makers or industry groups, such as Qualcomm’s Quick Charge, MediaTek’s Pump Express, USB‑IF’s USB‑PD, and China’s UFCS. These are widely supported across devices.

Private protocols, developed for differentiation, include Huawei’s SCP/SCP, OPPO’s VOOC, vivo’s FlashCharge, Xiaomi’s Mi Turbo Charge, and Samsung’s AFC. These work only with the manufacturer’s own chargers, cables, and devices.

When a device cannot meet a private protocol’s requirements, it falls back to a lower‑power public protocol, resulting in slower charging.

The L.1004 standard aims to unify fast‑charging technology, allowing a single charger or cable to provide rapid charging for devices from different brands. It integrates multiple efficient and safe charging techniques, solving the long‑standing fragmentation caused by proprietary protocols.

The standard’s key innovation is a “protocol‑layer autonomy + physical‑layer compatibility” architecture, merging Huawei’s SCP, OPPO’s VOOC, vivo’s FlashCharge, and others into UFCS 2.0. It already supports 40 W cross‑brand fast charging, adds intelligent reverse‑charging, and makes dynamic power adjustment mandatory, greatly improving compatibility and user experience.

Future versions aim for higher power levels; Huawei’s 100 W power bank has already been certified.

Although challenges remain—40 W is still lower than many private protocols’ 150 W—the release of L.1004 marks a milestone, moving the fast‑charging ecosystem from chaotic competition toward standardized development.

Ultimately, consumers may no longer need separate chargers for each device, reducing clutter, waste, and supporting global sustainability goals.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
StandardizationInteroperabilitymobile devicesfast chargingL.1004UFCS
IT Services Circle
Written by

IT Services Circle

Delivering cutting-edge internet insights and practical learning resources. We're a passionate and principled IT media platform.

0 followers
Reader feedback

How this landed with the community

Sign in to like

Rate this article

Was this worth your time?

Sign in to rate
Discussion

0 Comments

Thoughtful readers leave field notes, pushback, and hard-won operational detail here.