Unless otherwise mentioned, all capacity results are in ascending order, not in slot order. The ranking order between particular tests may vary.

Camelion AlwaysReady 2100 - used. Loaned from a caver to see just how they perform.

Break in (420mA, 0.2C): 1855, 1944 - average 1899.5.
Slow charge (210mA, 0.1C); 2 day rest; 500mA discharge (0.238C): 1771, 1859 - average 1815.

 

Sanyo Eneloop 2000 - bought from Thomas Distributing (8 cells), manufacture date May 2006; bought from Online Shop Singapore (4 cells), manufacture date November 2006. Packaging for Online Shop cells labelled RWPrince,... Singapore, although the cells shipped from Hong Kong. As delivered they were partly charged, with an average cell voltage 1.308V (from TD), while the newer cells (from OSS) were all 1.310V.

Off shelf disch at 500mA (0.25C): 1420, 1420, 1423, 1441 - average 1426.
Off shelf disch at 400mA (0.2C): 1413, 1431, 1452, 1455 - average 1437.75.

1st break in (400mA, 0.2C): 1991, 1996, 1999, 2005, 2010, 2012, 2018, 2036 - average 2008.375.
2nd break in (400mA, 0.2C): 1977, 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2017, 2020, 2032 - average 2007.5.
1 amp (0.5C) disch: 1980, 1983, 1987, 1992, 1992, 2000, 2016, 2025 - average 1996.875.

Testing the charger's effectiveness at fast charging these cells, I also ran some other tests on the 8 TD cells.

1 amp (0.5C) disch after 1A (0.5C) fast charge: 1923, 1930, 1933, 1934, 1936, 1939, 1962, 1962 - average 1939.875.
1 amp (0.5C) disch after 1A (0.5C) fast charge and leave overnight: 1934, 1937, 1973, 1974 - average 1954.5 (first set of four only).
1 amp (0.5C) disch after 2A (1C) fast charge: 1889, 1910, 1912, 1930 - average 1910.25 (first set of four only).

The first break in capacities seemed pretty good but to see if they would all go over 2000mAh I restarted the break in cycle after the discharge rest, and sure enough, the 1999mAh cell was up to 2005mAh. The second break in with the second set of 4 left just one cell below 2000mAh, at just 1977mAh, but strangely the same cell gave 1987mAh at a 1 amp discharge (both in outside slots on the charger). With the best two cells from the second set, the best cell was always the one positioned in slot 2 or 3, while the other was in slot 1 or 4.

Update 20 June 2007: I've just put one set of Eneloops through another break in and was pleasantly surprised to see the results, both for their high capacity and for their consistency, within 1.1% of each other. In slot order, in mAh: 2092, 2115, 2100, 2116.

Another six Eneloops have been tested.
Off the shelf voltage: 1.320 V average.
Off the shelf capacities: 1341, 1348, 1374, 1396, 1387, 1392 mAh.
Break in: 2061, 2072, 2067, 2059, 2086, 2067 mAh. (Same order.)
1 amp (0.5C) discharge: 2045, 2050, 2069, 2066, 2100, 2078 mAh. (Same order - some have gone up!)

April 2008: Another four Eneloops are being tested, with the datestamp June 2006. These results have not been included in the results shown in the table because they were made using an analyser from a different batch.
Off the shelf voltage: 1.295 V average.
Off the shelf capacities: 1316, 1305, 1338, 1318 mAh (in slot order).
Break in 1: 1946, 1936, 1940, 1930 mAh.
Break in 2: 1943, 1934, 1939, 1929 mAh.
Break in 3: 1944, 1933, 1935, 1928 mAh.
1 amp (0.5C) discharge: 1929, 1928, 1930, 1919 mAh.

 

Eneloop XX 2500 - bought online from Intl Outdoor Shop. The XX was rebranded the Eneloop Pro at the end of 2011. Battery model HR-3UWX. Date code "11-10 HM", October 2011; 5 months old at time of test, March 2012.

Four Eneloop XX cells have been tested.
Off the shelf voltage: 1.3075 V average.
Off the shelf capacities: 1230, 1272, 1254, 1284 mAh (in slot order), average 1260 mAh.
Break in capacities: 2444, 2467, 2435, 2496.
1 amp (0.4C) discharge: 2438, 2477, 2449, 2506.

 

GP 1800 - sold by Dick Smith Electronics as a set of four with a fast charger.

First set of four had one cell that died a few months after purchase, leaving only three in that set. The remaining three have performed quite well, and have been observed to have a low self discharge rate.

Break in (360 mA, 0.2C): 1648, 1745, 1764.

(The GP battery charger rejected the faulty cell as defective so it hadn't been used since, but for reasons best understood by squirrels it was kept. It showed 2.4 ohms and 0 volts before the successful (?) attempt was made to resurrect it. That the 500mA test capacity was larger than the 0.2C rate (360mA) indicates that the cell still needs a bit of cycling.)

Four more cells from an identical batteries/charger set were tested in March 2011. They were given two full break in runs (each with two slow charges) plus a 500 mA discharge between.

1st break in (set to 1800 mAh): 1177, 1190, 1325, 1514, average 1301.5 mAh (average 2 worst cells 1183.5 mAh).
Discharge 500 mA: 1157, 1165, 1295, 1509, average 1281.5 mAh.
2nd break in: 1162, 1171, 1322, 1521, average 1294 mAh (average 2 worst cells 1166.5 mAh).

 

Powerhaus 2500 - high capacity cells that are no longer driving a digital camera, but otherwise still seem to work.

Testing in March 2011 showed the inability to power the digital camera was due to one cell that was dying well before the others, combined with serious voltage sag on all cells. In particular, the voltage sag on the worst cell was so severe that it was dropping straight to 0.9 V, at which point the MH-C9000 terminates its discharge. I put the cell into a single cell LED torch and ran it for a while, then tried another discharge. The cell performed better, and didn't terminate immediately. Instead, its voltage slowly recovered then stayed steady at 0.94 V, even after 75 minutes. Voltage recovery on the other cells was about 0.2 V. A fair bit of cycling of the four cells ensued, followed by two break in runs with a 500 mA discharge in between.

1st break in (set to 2200 mAh): 1485, 1969, 1996, 2033, average 1870.75 mAh (average of 3 best cells 1999.33 mAh).
Discharge 500 mA: 1347, 1954, 1973, 2035, average 1827.25 mAh (average of 3 best cells 1987.33 mAh).
2nd break in: 1294 (heading downhill), 1961, 1991, 2006, average 1813 mAh (average of 3 best cells 1986 mAh).

 

Yuasa 450 - hasn't been sold for years, if not decades. These cells are perhaps 25 years old. They've had a hard life and a long one, and will be shortly retired. (Well, when new NiMH cells are available with six times the capacity... yeah.) Testing them will be difficult since the positive lug/nipple isn't big enough to contact the MH-C9000. (Might need some magnets.)

 

Eneloop 800 - premium brand low self discharge AAA made by Sanyo.

First set of 4, manufacture date April 2006, so they're one year old.
Voltage straight off shelf 1.30 V, average shelf capacity 568 mAh.
Average break-in capacity 844 mAh.

8 more, manufacture date October 2006, tested September 2007; about 11 months old.
Straight off the shelf, average voltage 1.301 V.
Capacities straight from packet: 589, 600, 590, 602, 589, 590, 598, 607 mAh, average 596 mAh.
Break in: 836, 835, 844, 856, 842, 849, 839, 849 mAh, average 844 mAh.

8 more, manufacture code 06-07 00 (July 2006), tested January 2008; 18 months old at time of testing.
Straight off the shelf, average voltage 1.294 V - the lowest for Eneloops I've seen yet.
Capacities straight from packet: ?, ?, ?, ?, 555, 564, 570, 570 mAh, average 564.75 mAh.
Break in: 845, 855, 858, 860 (first set), and 853, 860, 839, 857 (second set, slot order) mAh, average 853 mAh.
Capacities @ 0.5C: ?, ?, 841, 853, 831, 850 mAh.

4 more, manufacture code 09-10 S0 (September 2010), tested March 2011; 6 months old at time of testing.
Straight out of the packet: 557, 555, 539, 558 mAh, average 552.25 mAh.
Break in: 796, 794, 775, 792 mAh, average 789.25 mAh.

In April 2011 I managed to retrieve 3 AAA Eneloops that were in a headlamp I'd loaned to someone for a caving trip 20 months earlier. After the caving trip they sat around doing nothing. So I discharged them at 200 mA (0.25C) to see how they fared.
Voltages as retrieved: 1.307, 1.308, 1.309 V.
Capacities @ 0.25C: 560, 567, 588 mAh, average 572 mAh.
While their discharge (under load) voltages seemed a little low, they did very well, especially with being used for about an hour on the caving trip.

 

Energizer 900 - the first result in a Google search for "energizer aaa 900 pathetic" (without quotes) was a page on Energizer's own web site. Pretty much sums it up. (The 6th result was a page on this site, Aqualab.)

Set of two, both stamped "0407" - manufactured in April 2007 perhaps? Tested in March 2011; possibly 4 years after manufacture.
After hearing the initial test results the owner joked he wanted his money back.
Break in: 258, 211 mAh.
Did some cycling to see if I could bring that up. Best result at 500 mA charge, 200 mA discharge was 455, 422 mAh, average 438.5 mAh.

 

Powertech 800 - sold by Jaycar Electronics. Used regularly, seems to have quite a high self discharge. Many also have high impedance - to the point that the MH-C9000 refuses to charge 4 of the 12, and had issues with several more before eventually deciding they were OK. They haven't had several hundred charges, so at this point I cannot recommend these cells.

Break in, 0.2C (160mA) discharge: 603, 615, 616, 619, 651, 687 - average 631.833.
0.5C (400mA) discharge from 16 hour charge: 563, 575, 587, 594 - average 579.75. Also 615, 619 - they've gone up! Time for some cycling perhaps? These will be retested before being include in overall results.

Other testing, to see how well charger works with these cells:

0.5C discharge from 0.5C charge: 512, 518, 528, 544 - average 525.5.
0.5C discharge from 1C charge: 424, 483, 497, 513 - average 479.25.
0.5C discharge from 1C charge, left overnight: 489, 535, 541, 561 - average 531.5.
Same again after a bit of cycling: 515, 581, 608, 613 - average 579.25.

 

Powertech 900 solder tag - sold by Jaycar Electronics. These were installed in the battery of a cellphone in May 2005, and were basically abandoned in February 2007 as being too unreliable to power the phone. They were recharged every 2-3 days on average so probably had only about 250-300 cycles, and probably far fewer than 200 cycles before their capacity noticeably decreased. Not good. The two previous sets of cells each lasted over three years (a respectable 500+ cycles for each set), and while the earlier cells had a lower claimed capacity (eg, 650mAh for the initial set), the life of the phone with the latest set of cells did not seem appropriately longer. So it seems as though the quality of the Powertech cells is decreasing, and once again, I cannot recommend them.