Apple's iPhone 16e 5G surpasses iPhone 16 in most real-world speed tests

Jump to First Reply
Posted:
in iPhone

While much has been written throughout the years about Apple's cellular modem and how it would stack up versus Qualcomm, Apple's C1 modem in the iPhone 16e is no slouch when it comes to actual internet speeds.

Close-up view of a black circuit board with a central chip labeled with an apple logo and 'C1' in white text.
Apple's C1 modem -- image credit: Apple



The iPhone 16e is the first of Apple's phones to employ its in-house, custom C1 modem. Previously, Apple had employed chips created by Qualcomm, including those in the iPhone 16 line.

Ookla, a company known for measuring internet performance metrics, has offered up some data that shows how Apple's iPhone 16e is fairing against its higher-end brethren. In most real-world cases, Apple's modem is on top.

When it comes to worst-case speeds, the iPhone 16e handily outperformed the iPhone 16. For example, T-Mobile users in some of the worst served areas of the network saw download speeds of 57Mbps, while the iPhone 16 saw 27Mbps.

10th percentile performance across networks | Image credit: Ookla
10th percentile performance across networks | Image credit: Ookla



The iPhone 16 lineup, however, has better top-end performance, at least in the ideal scenarios. On T-Mobile, the users with the best overall connectivity and network exposure saw download speeds averaging nearly 890Mbps on the iPhone 16, versus 627Mbps on the iPhone 16e.

Bar chart comparing iPhone 16 and iPhone 16e download speeds across AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon, showing iPhone 16 performs better in best case scenarios.
iPhone 16 sees faster speeds in best case scenarios | Image credit: Ookla



Interestingly enough, despite the fact that the Qualcomm modem supports mmWave, that doesn't seem to be the deciding factor. Even though Apple's C1 modem does not support mmWave, the iPhone 16e still outperformed the iPhone 16 in most scenarios.

On T-Mobile, for example, the iPhone 16e averaged about 265Mbps down, while the iPhone 16 averaged around 357Mbps down. However, the iPhone 16e still outperformed the iPhone 16 on Verizon and AT&T's networks.

Bar chart comparing median download speeds of iPhone 16e and iPhone 16 on AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon, showing varying performance across carriers.
The iPhone 16e outperforms the iPhone 16 in most scenarios | Image credit: Ookla



Despite buildouts continuing, mmWave penetration and service areas are low in the US, and lower still everywhere else. Many countries have no mmWave deployment at all.

For most people, on most networks, most of the time, the iPhone 16e is going to be a fair bit faster than the iPhone 16 lineup. There are situations, like outside, downtown in a large metropolitan area with a robust mmWave deployment, on an uncongested network where the iPhone 16 will win.

Ultimately, which network you use, coupled with when and where you use it, will likely influence your top speeds more than the iPhone model you have.

As Ookla points out, on those on T-Mobile's networks, regardless of phone model, saw higher speeds across the board, whether it be peak performance or the worst-case scenario. Verizon users typically skewed lower than the other two networks.



Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 7
    Xedxed Posts: 3,122member
    That's great news for Apple out of the gate.
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 of 7
    MplsPmplsp Posts: 4,107member
    Xed said:
    That's great news for Apple out of the gate.
    Agreed - a very solid first version chip for Apple. What the numbers listed above tell me is that in day to day use you'll never notice the difference.
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 7
    retrogustoretrogusto Posts: 1,158member
    The difference in best-case scenarios seems unlikely to matter in normal use, but it’s the worst-case scenarios where you need all the help you can get. Apple has a pretty good record of prioritizing the stuff that matters over what is likely to look best on paper, and it sounds like that’s what they’ve done here. 
    thtwatto_cobra
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 7
    thttht Posts: 5,905member
    Yup, the results I wanted to see. Unfortunately, they didn’t measure W/Mbps for the percentiles. 

    If the C1 is getting better bandwidth and is lower power at the 10 percentile of bandwidth, that’s a home run. 
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 7
    mpantonempantone Posts: 2,414member
    As I predicted elsewhere Apple has done what I expect. They produced a modem chip with comparable performance (minus mmWave) to the competition with a huge power savings.

    It's the latter that benefits all iPhone 16e owners.

    Also top speed isn't really beneficial to many users most of the time. What is far more useful is better connectivity in areas of poor coverage because everyone suffers from that periodically.
    jvm156watto_cobra
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 6 of 7
    mpantone said:
    As I predicted elsewhere Apple has done what I expect. They produced a modem chip with comparable performance (minus mmWave) to the competition with a huge power savings.

    It's the latter that benefits all iPhone 16e owners.

    Also top speed isn't really beneficial to many users most of the time. What is far more useful is better connectivity in areas of poor coverage because everyone suffers from that periodically.
    I have posted this earlier and will post it again. There is absolutely NO evidence to backup that claim. The evidence to the contrary is already available. Apple designed C1 modem in iPhone 16e is at least 20% inefficient when compared to Qualcomm modem in iPhone 16. You can look at the battery capacity and talktime tests from GSMArena automated battery life tests in the link https://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_16e-review-2805p3.php. iPhone 16 has higher battery life (~26 hours) in 5G call test against iPhone 16e (~24 hours), despite having lower battery capacity (3560mah Vs 4000mah). Do you have any source/details for the claim that C1 modem in iPhone 16e is more efficient than Qualcomm modem in iPhone 16?
    thtwatto_cobra
     0Likes 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 7 of 7
    mpantonempantone Posts: 2,414member
    mpantone said:
    As I predicted elsewhere Apple has done what I expect. They produced a modem chip with comparable performance (minus mmWave) to the competition with a huge power savings.

    It's the latter that benefits all iPhone 16e owners.

    Also top speed isn't really beneficial to many users most of the time. What is far more useful is better connectivity in areas of poor coverage because everyone suffers from that periodically.
    I have posted this earlier and will post it again. There is absolutely NO evidence to backup that claim. The evidence to the contrary is already available. Apple designed C1 modem in iPhone 16e is at least 20% inefficient when compared to Qualcomm modem in iPhone 16. You can look at the battery capacity and talktime tests from GSMArena automated battery life tests in the link https://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_16e-review-2805p3.php. iPhone 16 has higher battery life (~26 hours) in 5G call test against iPhone 16e (~24 hours), despite having lower battery capacity (3560mah Vs 4000mah). Do you have any source/details for the claim that C1 modem in iPhone 16e is more efficient than Qualcomm modem in iPhone 16?
    It was reported on multiple tech websites when the iPhone 16e was first announced. I'm not a cellular modem engineer, I have no way to verify those reports.

    And for that matter, there's nothing that encourages me to believe GSMArena's tests any more than any other media outlet's.

    A year from now it'll be way more clear once there's a statistically significant sample size of realworld usage data. But I will wager my money on Apple semiconductor design over Qualcomm in the medium term to long run.

    Remember that Apple has the inherent advantage of designing chips for their own usage. They don't have to create a design to sell to others like Qualcomm does. In-house exclusivity is one of Apple's competitive advantages. Apple also writes their own software for their proprietary hardware. No one else gets to use A-series or M-series SoCs nor do they get to run iOS or macOS.
    edited March 21
    Alex_Vwatto_cobra
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.