Table 2.

Comparison of performances of Li–S cells with g-C₃N₄-based composites

Materials	S loading (mg cm−2)	S content (wt%)	Current rate (C)	Capacity (mAh g−1)/cycle number	Capacity decay rate (%)	References
g-C3N4/Graphene oxide	–	–	~ 0.197	700/300	0.037	[107]
N-doped graphene- g-C3N4/cellulose-citric acid	2.0	65.45	0.05	–	–	[42]
g-C3N4@N, S co-doped hollow porous carbon shell	1.7–2.0	–	1	445/500	0.048	[93]
PEDOT/g-C3N4@CC	4.7	–	1	517/500	–	[41]
g-C3N4@porous carbon nanofiber	1.2	–	0.6	466/500	0.056	[108]
3D Graphene oxide-g-C3N4 sponge	4	73	~ 0.3	974/800	0.017	[32]
g-C3N4/carbon nanotubes	1	64	1	584/500	0.08	[33]
Reduced graphene oxide/ g-C3N4/carbon nanotubes	1.5	56.64	1	620/500	0.03	[34]
Hollow porous carbon nanosphere/g-C3N4	1	51.62	1	719/500	0.049	[94]
Hierarchical porous carbon/g-C3N4	1.0–1.2	51.6	1	757/250	0.024	[109]
g-C3N4/carbon spheres	1.2	46.9	1	636/400	0.09	[88]
g-C3N4/carbon nanotubes	4.74	–	0.5	633/300	0.092	[90]
g-C3N4/carbon cloth	2.5	–	0.2	892/250	–	[95]
g-C3N4/carbon fiber paper	2.21–2.66	45.06	–	–/400	0.068	[110]
Reduced graphene oxide /g-C3N4/carbon fiber paper	1.62–1.89	45	1	–/800	0.056	[111]
g-C3N4/graphene oxide	0.9–1.1	45.81	1	612/1000	–	[91]
graphene@g-C3N4/C	1.0	80	1	464/800	0.050	[92]
g-C3N4/carbon nanotubes	1.4	57.6	1	–/500	0.03	[89]
Co-g-C3N4	1.31	51.2	1	740/300	0.03	[98]
Ag-defective g-C3N4	1.3	53.3	2	652/550	0.053	[96]
Co-CNTs/defective g-C3N4	–	–	1	–/1000	0.04	[99]
PdNi@ND-C3N4	2	55.6	1	989/500	0.027	[97]
Fe/Co-C3N4/C	1.8	47.6	0.2	749/135	0.156	[100]
TiO2/g-C3N4	3.1	59.6	0.5	540/500	0.063	[104]
OTC/C3N4	1.2	–	0.5	750/2000	0.022	[102]
CoFeP@CN	1.0	–	3	606/700	0.014	[101]
MoS2/g-C3N4	1.5	59.1	2	521/400	0.049	[59]
CoS@g-C3N4/KB	1.5	68.4	1	572/500	0.030	[103]
Fe3O4/t-C3N4	0.8–1.0	–	2	658/1000	0.020	[105]
BN/graphene-C3N4	6.0	70	1	603/500	0.01	[52]