Charger Comparisons · 8 min read
Anker 737 Charger vs 735 Nano II: Which Fits Your Laptop and Travel Kit?
Choose the Anker 737 A2148 for more laptop and shared charging headroom. Choose the 735 Nano II A2667 when its 65W single-port and 40W three-device laptop allocation meet your needs.
Updated Oct 10, 2026
Research date Oct 10, 2026
Quick Verdict
737 Charger: choose it for higher laptop demand or more shared power. Its single USB-C port reaches 100W, and selected multiport combinations have a 120W combined ceiling. The 120W name does not promise 120W to one laptop.
735 Nano II: choose it when a modest laptop-and-accessories kit fits its sharing limits. One USB-C connection reaches 65W. With all three ports occupied, the first USB-C port is limited to 40W, while the second USB-C and USB-A ports each receive up to 12W. If that meets your actual device needs, extra charger wattage may add little value.
Current Verified Prices
Current price cards appear only after the exact US model and its offer pass the live deal checks. There is currently no confirmed purchase mapping for these two chargers on this page, so no price or purchase button is displayed. That does not establish that either charger is unavailable. Compare the whole kit, including suitable cables, when verified offers become available.
RecentProfit may earn a commission from qualifying purchases. Read our affiliate disclosure. This comparison combines official specifications with published hands-on reviews; it is not a RecentProfit hardware test.
Official Specifications: A2148 vs A2667
This page compares the 737 Charger GaNPrime 120W, A2148, with the 735 Charger Nano II 65W, A2667. The 735 GaNPrime A2668 and the 737 Power Bank are different products. The table follows the A2148 official manual and A2667 US product page, checked October 10, 2026. The manual's English specification panel is numbered pages 11–12.
Scroll horizontally to compare all columns →
| Official limit or feature | 737 Charger (A2148) | 735 Nano II (A2667) | Buying implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| Port layout | 2 USB-C + 1 USB-A | 2 USB-C + 1 USB-A | Both fit a three-cable kit; sharing limits differ. |
| One USB-C port | 100W maximum from C1 or C2 | 65W maximum from C1 or C2 | 737 offers more headroom for a compatible laptop. |
| USB-A alone | 22.5W maximum | 22.5W maximum | The USB-A ceiling alone does not distinguish them. |
| C1 + C2 | 120W combined maximum | 45W + 20W | Do not read a combined rating as the output of each port. |
| C1 + USB-A | 120W combined maximum | 40W + 22.5W | The first USB-C port matters when using an older USB-A cable. |
| C2 + USB-A | 24W combined maximum | 12W + 12W | This pair is unsuitable for a high-power laptop on either charger. |
| All three ports | 120W combined maximum | 40W + 12W + 12W | 735's laptop allowance drops below its single-port headline. |
| AC input | 100–240V, 1.9A, 50–60Hz | 100–240V, 1.8A, 50–60Hz | Voltage support does not replace checking the local plug and socket. |
The 737 manual gives combined limits for its higher-power sharing modes; it does not provide a fixed per-device split for every combination. Actual negotiated output depends on connected devices and cables. Its ActiveShield 2.0 note also describes output adjustment under high-temperature, high-load conditions. These figures are ceilings, not a promise of a constant rate throughout charging.
Pros and Cons at a Glance
Hands-on context comes from 9to5Toys' GaNPrime review, which tested the 120W three-port charger alongside a separate 150W model, and GearLab's USB wall charger tests, which identify the 735 Nano II 65W three-port version. Strengths reflect those reviewers' use. Port-limit implications come from Anker; they are not additional measured test results.
Scroll horizontally to compare all columns →
| Trade-off | 737 Charger | 735 Nano II |
|---|---|---|
| Pro 1 | The reviewer found the 120W model capable in a mobile MacBook charging setup. | GearLab found it useful for charging compatible laptops as well as phones. |
| Pro 2 | A folding plug makes it easier to pack as a multi-device travel charger. | Its folding plug and compact body suit a travel kit. |
| Pro 3 | The review describes an optional wall-support accessory for less secure outlets. | Two USB-C ports and a USB-A port accommodate a mixed cable collection. |
| Con 1 | One USB-C connection tops out at 100W, below the combined 120W headline. | Using all three ports reduces the laptop's first USB-C allowance to 40W. |
| Con 2 | C2 plus USB-A has only a 24W combined ceiling; port choice still matters. | GearLab observed that it can sag in loose sockets. |
| Con 3 | The review flags charger size and support in worn outlets as travel considerations. | Its body extends outward from the socket, which can be awkward in tight spaces. |
The GaNPrime review states that Anker supplied its review units and discloses affiliate links. GearLab describes buying and testing its products and discloses affiliate revenue. Review-era prices are excluded, and neither review is presented as a controlled head-to-head test of this exact pair.
One Laptop: Compare Its Accepted Input
For a laptop that accepts no more than 65W, both chargers may satisfy its single-device input needs. Choosing 737 solely for its larger headline may not increase that laptop's accepted charging rate. If a compatible laptop can use more than 65W over USB-C, 737's 100W single-port limit becomes a meaningful reason to consider it.
Check the laptop manufacturer's input requirements and use a cable rated for the intended power. Charging while running a demanding workload can produce a different battery result from charging an idle laptop. A maximum adapter rating alone cannot promise how quickly your battery percentage will rise.
Laptop, Phone and Accessories: Plan the Port Combination
For the 735 Nano II, put the laptop on C1 if all three devices will be connected. Its official three-port allocation is 40W on C1 and 12W each on C2 and USB-A. GearLab found the priority given to that first port useful in mixed-device use, but a laptop expecting a higher sustained input may need more headroom than this arrangement provides.
737 raises the combined ceiling in the C1+C2 and three-port arrangements. It still has a weak combination for high-power laptop use: C2 plus USB-A is limited to 24W combined. Choosing the more powerful charger does not remove the need to follow its port diagram. Do not assume two cables plugged into any two sockets produce the same result.
Charging the 737 Power Bank: The Shared Name Is Not a Shortcut
The 737 Power Bank is a separate device, A1289. Anker's charger-to-power-bank support explanation says the A2148 charger's USB-C port is limited to 100W and explains why the power bank's displayed input can be around 90W. That explanation concerns this combination; it is not a universal charging-rate promise for every power bank. For the battery comparison, see 737 Power Bank vs Prime 27,650mAh.
Travel and Phone Compatibility
Both reviews discuss folding plugs, but their socket-fit observations matter as much as packability. GearLab found the Nano II could sag in loose outlets; the GaNPrime review describes a support accessory for the larger chargers. Consider the sockets and space you expect to use, especially when cables pull outward from an adapter.
Anker's A2667 page says it supports Super Fast Charging for the Samsung S22 Ultra but not 45W Super Fast Charging 2.0. A 65W USB-C headline therefore does not guarantee a phone's maximum proprietary charging mode. Check the exact phone, charging protocol and cable rather than assuming laptop wattage translates directly to phone charging.
Which Should You Buy?
- A laptop above 65W, with compatible USB-C input: favor 737's higher single-port ceiling.
- A modest laptop plus low-power accessories: start with 735 Nano II if the 40W/12W/12W three-port allocation fits the devices you actually use.
- Two demanding USB-C devices: compare their input requirements with 737's combined ceiling; do not assign both ports their single-device maximum.
- Travel first: weigh port needs against socket fit and packing space. Both have folding plugs, and both reviews identify outlet-fit considerations.
- Budget first: compare current verified offers and required cables. If your kit cannot use the extra output, the higher-power specification alone is not a reason to upgrade.
Sources and Verification
- Anker 735 Nano II A2667 US product page — official output, port allocation and compatibility; checked October 10, 2026.
- Anker 737 A2148 official manual page and linked user manual PDF — model identity and English specification panel, pages 11–12; checked October 10, 2026.
- Anker 737 charger/power-bank support explanation — distinction between combined output, one USB-C port and reported bank input; checked October 10, 2026.
- 9to5Toys GaNPrime hands-on review — published July 25, 2022; the 120W three-port model was part of its test; body checked October 10, 2026.
- GearLab USB wall charger tests — the Nano II 65W three-port model is explicitly identified; body checked October 10, 2026.
FAQ
Does the Anker 737 Charger deliver 120W to one laptop?
No. Model A2148 has a 100W maximum from one USB-C port. Its 120W rating is a combined maximum in the supported multiport arrangements.
What happens when all three 735 Nano II ports are used?
For model A2667, Anker specifies up to 40W from USB-C1, 12W from USB-C2 and 12W from USB-A. A laptop on the first USB-C port therefore receives less headroom than its 65W single-port ceiling.
Is the 735 Nano II the same as the 735 GaNPrime?
No. This comparison covers the 735 Nano II A2667. The 735 GaNPrime A2668 is a different model, so its specifications and purchase listings should not be substituted.
Can you use C2 and USB-A for a high-power laptop?
That combination is limited to 24W combined on both chargers. On the 735 Nano II it is specified as 12W plus 12W. Use the official port diagram to choose an appropriate combination.
Why are current price cards missing?
The exact US purchase mappings and current offers have not passed this page's publication checks. Prices and purchase buttons remain unavailable until they are confirmed; this does not prove that the products are unavailable.