Quick answer: Choose Mcdodo CA-2990 when you need a USB-C to USB-C cable rated up to 240W. Choose CA-7132 when a 100W USB3 cable meets your equipment. Both are listed at PKR 3,900 and 1.2m at AvaNext, so your device and data needs matter more than the bigger number.
For Pakistani buyers, the same connector can serve a phone, iPad or laptop while the actual limits differ. This comparison separates charging wattage from data performance so you can order the right cable.

What is the difference between Mcdodo 100W and 240W cables?
CA-7132 is listed as 100W USB3 USB-C to USB-C. CA-2990 is listed as USB4 240W USB-C to USB-C. Both are 1.2m and PKR 3,900 when checked on 12 September 2026.
| Feature | CA-7132 | CA-2990 |
|---|---|---|
| Power rating | 100W listed | 240W listed |
| Connector | USB-C to USB-C | USB-C to USB-C |
| Length | 1.2m | 1.2m |
| Data label | USB3 | USB4 |
| Price checked | PKR 3,900 | PKR 3,900 |
Will a 240W cable charge an iPhone faster?
No. iPhone charging is controlled by the phone and charger. A 240W cable cannot turn a 20W adapter into a faster source. Buy it for future laptop headroom or USB4 tasks, not for a guaranteed phone speed increase.
When does 240W matter for a laptop?
USB PD 3.1 supports up to 240W across a compatible source, cable and device. Your laptop must accept that power and your charger must provide it. Check the computer manual before replacing a working 100W cable.
Read the USB-IF Power Delivery explanation for the system requirements.
Does USB4 guarantee faster file transfers?
No. The host port, drive, hub and cable all affect performance. The CA-2990 listing identifies USB4, while CA-7132 identifies USB3; neither label should be treated as a measured speed promise for your specific setup.
For a monitor or SSD, verify documented data and video support for the exact model. A charging rating alone says nothing about display output.
Is 1.2m suitable for Pakistani homes and offices?
Measure the route from socket or power bank to device. 1.2m suits many desks and bedside tables, but a distant outlet may require another length. Avoid tight bends and do not let a laptop hang from the connector.
Which cable is better value?
At the checked equal price, CA-2990 is the stronger value if you can use USB4 or need above-100W headroom. CA-7132 is sensible when your equipment stays within 100W and you only need the USB3 listing.
Compare the Mcdodo CA-7132 100W cable and Mcdodo CA-2990 240W cable. AvaNext offers COD across Pakistan subject to confirmation and coverage.
What should you check before ordering?
- Both device ports are USB-C.
- Your charger and device support the required power.
- Your SSD, monitor or hub supports the required data mode.
- The 1.2m length fits your setup.
- Price and stock are confirmed on the live listing.
FAQ: Mcdodo 100W vs 240W cable
Which cable should I buy for an iPhone?
Choose by connector and charger requirements. A 100W cable is already sufficient for phone charging within that limit. A 240W model is useful only when you also need its higher system capability.
Are both cables the same price?
AvaNext listed both at PKR 3,900 on 12 September 2026. Prices can change, so confirm the live product page before checkout.
Can I use the 240W cable with a 20W charger?
Yes, if the connectors and charging standards are compatible. The cable does not force 240W; the charger and device negotiate the available power.
Is USB4 always faster than USB3?
The generations have different capabilities, but actual transfer speed depends on every component in the chain. Verify the exact model specification for your computer and drive.
Can I order with COD in Lahore?
Open the selected AvaNext listing and enter your Lahore address to confirm COD and delivery coverage. Keep the invoice showing the exact Mcdodo model.
Key Takeaways
- CA-7132 is listed at 100W USB3; CA-2990 at 240W USB4.
- Both are USB-C to USB-C and 1.2m.
- Both checked prices are PKR 3,900.
- 240W does not make an iPhone charge at 240W.
- Verify data and video support separately.
- AvaNext.pk offers COD across Pakistan subject to coverage.
0 comments