Latest news with #iPhone16e
Time of India
15 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Qualcomm questions Apple's decision to use its own C1 chip in iPhone 16e, claims its modems are significantly more dependable
Qualcomm has raised questions about Apple 's decision to use its in-house C1 modem chip in the iPhone 16e. This stems from a study commissioned by the chipmaker, which suggested that its chips perform better than Apple's in certain conditions. The study found that its modem chips delivered better performance than Apple's rival component, particularly for cellular customers in dense urban areas. According to a report by Cellular Insights (seen by Bloomberg), the iPhone 16e , the first smartphone to feature Apple's in-house C1 modem, exhibited slower download and upload speeds on T-Mobile's 5G network in New York City compared to Qualcomm-powered Android devices . Apple has spent several years developing the C1 component. This effort is part of a broader strategy by Apple to replace parts from external suppliers with its own internally developed technology. Modern chips are a crucial component in any mobile phone, as they facilitate the device's connection to cellular towers, enabling calls and internet access. What Qualcomm said about Apple's CI modem chip The report claims to have compared the C1 phone's modem performance with that of Android smartphones using Qualcomm chips. It found that while the C1 'performed adequately under optimal conditions,' it lagged in 'the very scenarios where next-generation modems are expected to excel.' by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Buy Brass Idols - Handmade Brass Statues for Home & Gifting Luxeartisanship Buy Now Undo In dense urban, indoor, or uplink-intensive environments, Android devices with Qualcomm modems demonstrated improvements that were 'quantifiable, repeatable and operationally significant.' Apple CEO Tim Cook described the iPhone 16e rollout as successful and said it features 'the most energy-efficient modem ever in an iPhone.' However, the study reported that two similarly priced Android phones equipped with Qualcomm components achieved download speeds up to 35% faster and upload speeds up to 91% faster than the iPhone 16e. These gaps widened under heavy network load or when the phones were farther from cell towers. The report also noted the iPhone became 'noticeably hot to touch and exhibited aggressive screen dimming within just two-minute test intervals,' though it did not assess real-world data drops or battery life. Modems convert radio waves into data and voice signals, and enhancing signal strength consumes additional energy, which can affect battery performance. Qualcomm maintains that modem development requires expertise to model varied network conditions—such as weather, building density, and congestion—to secure consistent performance. AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Tom's Guide
15 hours ago
- Tom's Guide
Qualcomm-funded study shows that Apple's C1 modem is slower — but there's a catch
Apple recently released the iPhone 16e, which includes the C1 modem, the first built in-house. However, it seems Qualcomm has commissioned Cellular Insights to compare the iPhone 16e's connection abilities to two Android phones to see which is best. All three devices were placed in various real-world environments around New York while connected to T-Mobile's sub-6GHz network. According to the report, the phones were all tested in near, far and mid-cell conditions in an attempt to get the most comprehensive results. Now, the report doesn't specify which Android devices were used, but we can make an educated guess. The first device is stated to be a January 2025 flagship with an X80 modem and a $799 price tag. Meanwhile, the second was a January 2024 flagship with the older Snapdragon X75 modem and a $619 price tag. As such, we can guess that the two models were the Galaxy S25 and Galaxy S24, respectively. The report found that the Android phones offered a 34.3% to 35.2% faster download speed than the iPhone 16e, while also featuring an 81.4% to 91% faster upload speed. Now, it should be noted that the report found that all three devices offered "somewhat comparable 5G performance under ideal, near-cell conditions, performance deltas became increasingly pronounced as signal conditions deteriorated." The reason for this disparity is suggested to be due to Qualcomm modems supporting downlink carrier aggregation and uplink carrier aggregation features. If you've not heard of these terms, they're essentially techniques used in cellular networks that increase the bandwidth and data rates by combining multiple data channels. The C1 modem also lacks mmWave 5G support, which is usually found in urban areas and offers the fastest speeds. It is important to take this with a healthy level of salt for several reasons. Firstly, this is a report commissioned by Qualcomm, so there's always a level of bias in the end report. Secondly, this test was only on a single network. Meanwhile, an Ookla comparison revealed that the iPhone 16e modem far exceeded the iPhone 16 on all networks. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. Finally, and arguably more importantly, Qualcomm has been the leader in cellular modems for over a decade, so it knows how to get the most out of its hardware. As such, Apple's first modem managing to outperform it completely would be unlikely. So, what do you take away from this comparison? The main takeaway is that T-Mobile users in areas with no or limited coverage would be much better served by owning one of the best Android phones. However, if you live in a city with better coverage, then you really won't notice the difference in 5G connection.
Android Authority
21 hours ago
- Business
- Android Authority
Qualcomm shares study showing Androids beat iPhone 16e on 5G
Ryan Haines / Android Authority TL;DR A Qualcomm-commissioned report has found that Apple's C1 modem lags behind Qualcomm's last two flagship modems. The report found that two Android phones with Qualcomm modems consistently outperformed the iPhone 16e and its custom modem. The Android phones opened the gap to the iPhone 16e as they moved away from the cell towers. Apple launched the iPhone 16e earlier this year, and this is a landmark release as it includes the company's first cellular modem. We've already seen reports about its performance, and now a Qualcomm-commissioned study has revealed some (unsurprising) results. Cellular Insights posted a report comparing two Qualcomm-powered Android phones to the iPhone 16e and its Apple C1 modem. The company tested these phones in New York City in various real-world environments while connected to T-Mobile's sub-6GHz network. It added that these tests were conducted in 'near-, far-, and mid-cell' conditions. One of these Android phones was described as a January 2025 flagship with the Snapdragon X80 modem and a $799 price tag. Meanwhile, the other phone was described as a January 2024 flagship with a slightly older Snapdragon X75 modem and a $619 price tag. We're guessing that the former is the Samsung Galaxy S25. Based on the release date, it seems like the latter device is a Galaxy S24. So which one was better? The report found that the Android phones consistently beat the iPhone 16e in all situations. It specifically said that the Android phones were 34.3% to 35.2% faster on average than the Apple device in terms of download speeds. There was a huge advantage in terms of average upload speeds, as the Android devices were a claimed 81.4% to 91% faster. Cellular Insights reported that the iPhone 16e narrowed the gap to the Android phones in near-cell conditions, but that the Android devices stretched their lead as they moved to mid-cell and far-cell conditions. It suggested that this disparity was due to the Qualcomm modems supporting downlink carrier aggregation and uplink carrier aggregation (ULCA) features, while the Apple C1 seemed 'constrained on the downlink and lacks observable ULCA support.' So what was the key takeaway? Here's what the company had to say: The Android A and B smartphones powered by Qualcomm modems deliver measurably superior performance in real-world 5G standalone environments. While the iPhone 16e powered by Apple C1 performs adequately under optimal RF and network load conditions, it lags significantly in edge cases—the very scenarios where next-generation modems are expected to excel. You'll want to take these results with a healthy dose of salt as Qualcomm commissioned the study after all. Nevertheless, it's been the undisputed leader in the cellular modem space for over a decade now, and this is simply Apple's first modem. So it's not a surprise to see Qualcomm's modems delivering faster speeds. However, it does suggest that you're better off with a premium Android phone if you're constantly in areas with less-than-ideal coverage, particularly on T-Mobile. The study also comes after Ookla reported that the iPhone 16e offered 'better worst-case speeds' than the iPhone 16, but that the latter device offered higher top-end speeds. It's worth noting that the iPhone 16 uses a less capable Snapdragon X72 modem than contemporary Android phones anyway. In any event, Apple doesn't appear to be standing still on the modem front. An apparent Apple modem roadmap suggests that the company's 2026 release will offer mmWave support and improved carrier aggregation technologies ahead of a potential Qualcomm-rivaling modem in 2027. Got a tip? Talk to us! Email our staff at Email our staff at news@ . You can stay anonymous or get credit for the info, it's your choice.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
I was convinced a discounted iPhone 15 was the best ‘budget' iPhone to buy in 2025 but, after 2 weeks with Apple's iPhone 16e, I'm a complete convert
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. As the proud owner of an iPhone 15 for almost two years, I've had no issues with the handset since I bought it. It runs perfectly for my needs – music, YouTube, texting and aimless doomscrolling social media – and seamlessly integrates with my other Apple devices. Other than its Pro siblings and a handful of Android competitors, the iPhone 15 was top of the line when I bought it. I'd just been paid, so I plonked down AU$1,499 ($799 / £799) to purchase it outright to replace my broken iPhone 12 Mini. (That's a purchase I cringe at after experiencing the value on offer from the best cheap phones, but I digress…) The iPhone 16 marked a larger upgrade over its predecessor than usual thanks to the addition of Apple Intelligence – even if its launch has been less than smooth, with many parts of the promised Siri upgrade still up in the air. Still, the iPhone 15 is an excellent smartphone in 2025, which is why it caught my eye when I found it for AU$1,077 here in Australia where I'm based (which converts to around $692 / £519). There's similarly enticing deals abroad, too – like in the US, where it's just $100 when switching to T-Mobile. However, in February, Apple threw a curveball at the iPhone 15 when it introduced another option for Cupertino loyalists looking to save on an upgrade when it launched the iPhone 16e for $599 / £599 / AU$999. Like the iPhone 5c and the three iPhone SE models, this new 'budget' Apple handset has made small concessions to keep the price down, while still allowing buyers to purchase a truly new iPhone that can access the latest iOS features. The iPhone 16e is arguably even more enticing than its SE forebears, as it offers the power to handle Apple Intelligence. This creates an interesting conundrum – if I needed a new phone and didn't want to splurge on the iPhone 16, which device is the better choice: the iPhone 15, or iPhone 16e? TechRadar has an entire iPhone 16e vs iPhone 15 comparison article based on this question and it concludes that, for most people, it's worth spending a little extra and go for the older iPhone 15. But after spending a week with the iPhone 16e, I disagree. For many smartphone buyers, camera quality is key – but for me, battery life is far more important and the iPhone 16e dominates the iPhone 15 in this category. While Apple doesn't disclose exact battery capacity, third-party reporting shows that the iPhone 16e has a 3,961mAh battery compared to the iPhone 15's 3,349mAh. It's not just that larger size that makes the 16e longer lasting either. The iPhone 16e's C1 cellular chip – which is exclusive to the device – processes power more efficiently, resulting in a significantly improved stamina. This was very noticeable in my time with it. Granted, my iPhone 15's battery capacity is slightly degraded down to 91% these days, but I limit its overnight charging to stop at 85%. As a result, after about three hours of listening, watching, scrolling and texting, my iPhone 15's often sitting at less than 30% by 9:30am. It's 3:30pm as I write this, and with the same battery settings and general screen-on time, the iPhone 16e I'm currently using is sitting at 44%. My experience seems to fully back up Apple's own claims, with the brand boasting that the iPhone 16e offers 26 hours of video playback – 15% better than the iPhone 16's 22 hours and a 23% increase over the iPhone 15. We're still waiting for AI Siri – and Apple might have to let users swap Siri for another default voice assistant party alternatives – I was surprised by how much I enjoyed Apple Intelligence on the iPhone 16e, a set of features the iPhone 15 lacks. Visual Intelligence is helpful, letting you quickly search for or ask ChatGPT about any object you take a photo of. And the Clean Up feature is useful for removing photo bombers or objects from any given image, like Samsung's similar Object Remover tool as found on newest Galaxy devices. And, while I rarely used them, I appreciated the (mostly) constructive AI-generated message replies and smarter phrasing suggestions. Highlighting your written text opens an array of AI-powered options by clicking the Apple Intelligence logo (or 'Writing Tools'). In any app it can proofread or rewrite your text to sound more friendly, professional or concise. Image 1 of 3 Image 2 of 3 Image 3 of 3 Moreover, and especially helpful when writing up notes, is its ability to format text into key points, a list or a table. You also have the option to compose text with ChatGPT. However, I think my favorite thing about Apple Intelligence is the ability to create my own emojis. Called Genmojis, it lets you turn anything – like my own face and other regularly found faces in my camera roll, or a highland cow surrounded by flowers – into an emoji or sticker. As someone who uses emojis quite sparingly, I'm now a Genmoji-making dynamo. While the AI tools and features of the iPhone 16 family are far from revolutionary, they're both fun and generally useful. It's a small but significant advantage for the iPhone 16e over the iPhone 15. The last little feature that I think puts the 16e above the 15 is the Action Button. It, like Apple Intelligence, is exclusive to the iPhone 15 Pro, Pro Max and the iPhone 16 series. This handy little button replaces the mute/silent switch from older iPhones. There's nothing revolutionary here: all it does is offer shortcuts for commonly used features like Silent Mode, Focus, Camera, Visual Intelligence, Torch and any other app, like Instagram. Personally, I didn't find myself using any of those preset options, and instead set the Action Button to control my Do Not Disturb mode. It's such a small difference – after all, unlocking the device, bringing up the Control Center and activating Focus is hardly a laborious task. However, it's a small quality-of-life change that I thoroughly appreciated – letting me turn it on without even directly looking at my phone. The iPhone 16e vs iPhone 15 contest is by no means a knockout by the newer model. There are two main reasons that the older iPhone may be the better choice for some people: display and camera. The iPhone 16e only has a single 48MP Fusion camera, while the iPhone 15 pairs a 48MP main camera with a 12MP ultrawide lens that's equally useful for grand nature shots and trying to fit the whole family into one photo. More importantly, the 16e's single lens means you can't take silly up-close photos of your friends or dog with the 0.5x zoom. The 15 also has a (small) lead on the 16e in terms of display, as the latter reverts back to the iPhone 14's notched display rather than the Dynamic Island found on subsequent devices. Personally, I don't mind it, but for some users it could be the reason to spend a little more for the iPhone 15. The latter's display is brighter and (slightly) higher res too – 1179 x 2556 with a max brightness of 2,000 nits compared to the 16e's 1170 x 2532 and 1,200 nits. MagSafe charging is also missing from the iPhone 16e. It was rumored this was to make room for the C1 chip, but that has since been denied by Apple according to Macworld. The 16e can still wirelessly charge, but it lacks the magnet. I'd never much required MagSafe until I recently purchased a magnetic power bank – which is now all but useless with the iPhone 16e. And users who have a magnetic car mount will probably sorely miss this functionality. The iPhone 15 still has a place, then, and it's a wonderful purchase if you can get it for close to the same price as the iPhone 16e. It's still ultimately more expensive than its new sibling, though – and unless you really need a telephoto lens, I think the iPhone 16e is the budget iPhone to have. The best iPhone 2025: which Apple smartphone reigns supreme? The iPhone Fold is apparently being tested with a feature we've been waiting years for iPhone 17 Air leak hints at how the super-slim phone might solve its potential battery life issues
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
I was convinced a discounted iPhone 15 was the best ‘budget' iPhone to buy in 2025 but, after 2 weeks with Apple's iPhone 16e, I'm a complete convert
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. As the proud owner of an iPhone 15 for almost two years, I've had no issues with the handset since I bought it. It runs perfectly for my needs – music, YouTube, texting and aimless doomscrolling social media – and seamlessly integrates with my other Apple devices. Other than its Pro siblings and a handful of Android competitors, the iPhone 15 was top of the line when I bought it. I'd just been paid, so I plonked down AU$1,499 ($799 / £799) to purchase it outright to replace my broken iPhone 12 Mini. (That's a purchase I cringe at after experiencing the value on offer from the best cheap phones, but I digress…) The iPhone 16 marked a larger upgrade over its predecessor than usual thanks to the addition of Apple Intelligence – even if its launch has been less than smooth, with many parts of the promised Siri upgrade still up in the air. Still, the iPhone 15 is an excellent smartphone in 2025, which is why it caught my eye when I found it for AU$1,077 here in Australia where I'm based (which converts to around $692 / £519). There's similarly enticing deals abroad, too – like in the US, where it's just $100 when switching to T-Mobile. However, in February, Apple threw a curveball at the iPhone 15 when it introduced another option for Cupertino loyalists looking to save on an upgrade when it launched the iPhone 16e for $599 / £599 / AU$999. Like the iPhone 5c and the three iPhone SE models, this new 'budget' Apple handset has made small concessions to keep the price down, while still allowing buyers to purchase a truly new iPhone that can access the latest iOS features. The iPhone 16e is arguably even more enticing than its SE forebears, as it offers the power to handle Apple Intelligence. This creates an interesting conundrum – if I needed a new phone and didn't want to splurge on the iPhone 16, which device is the better choice: the iPhone 15, or iPhone 16e? TechRadar has an entire iPhone 16e vs iPhone 15 comparison article based on this question and it concludes that, for most people, it's worth spending a little extra and go for the older iPhone 15. But after spending a week with the iPhone 16e, I disagree. For many smartphone buyers, camera quality is key – but for me, battery life is far more important and the iPhone 16e dominates the iPhone 15 in this category. While Apple doesn't disclose exact battery capacity, third-party reporting shows that the iPhone 16e has a 3,961mAh battery compared to the iPhone 15's 3,349mAh. It's not just that larger size that makes the 16e longer lasting either. The iPhone 16e's C1 cellular chip – which is exclusive to the device – processes power more efficiently, resulting in a significantly improved stamina. This was very noticeable in my time with it. Granted, my iPhone 15's battery capacity is slightly degraded down to 91% these days, but I limit its overnight charging to stop at 85%. As a result, after about three hours of listening, watching, scrolling and texting, my iPhone 15's often sitting at less than 30% by 9:30am. It's 3:30pm as I write this, and with the same battery settings and general screen-on time, the iPhone 16e I'm currently using is sitting at 44%. My experience seems to fully back up Apple's own claims, with the brand boasting that the iPhone 16e offers 26 hours of video playback – 15% better than the iPhone 16's 22 hours and a 23% increase over the iPhone 15. We're still waiting for AI Siri – and Apple might have to let users swap Siri for another default voice assistant party alternatives – I was surprised by how much I enjoyed Apple Intelligence on the iPhone 16e, a set of features the iPhone 15 lacks. Visual Intelligence is helpful, letting you quickly search for or ask ChatGPT about any object you take a photo of. And the Clean Up feature is useful for removing photo bombers or objects from any given image, like Samsung's similar Object Remover tool as found on newest Galaxy devices. And, while I rarely used them, I appreciated the (mostly) constructive AI-generated message replies and smarter phrasing suggestions. Highlighting your written text opens an array of AI-powered options by clicking the Apple Intelligence logo (or 'Writing Tools'). In any app it can proofread or rewrite your text to sound more friendly, professional or concise. Image 1 of 3 Image 2 of 3 Image 3 of 3 Moreover, and especially helpful when writing up notes, is its ability to format text into key points, a list or a table. You also have the option to compose text with ChatGPT. However, I think my favorite thing about Apple Intelligence is the ability to create my own emojis. Called Genmojis, it lets you turn anything – like my own face and other regularly found faces in my camera roll, or a highland cow surrounded by flowers – into an emoji or sticker. As someone who uses emojis quite sparingly, I'm now a Genmoji-making dynamo. While the AI tools and features of the iPhone 16 family are far from revolutionary, they're both fun and generally useful. It's a small but significant advantage for the iPhone 16e over the iPhone 15. The last little feature that I think puts the 16e above the 15 is the Action Button. It, like Apple Intelligence, is exclusive to the iPhone 15 Pro, Pro Max and the iPhone 16 series. This handy little button replaces the mute/silent switch from older iPhones. There's nothing revolutionary here: all it does is offer shortcuts for commonly used features like Silent Mode, Focus, Camera, Visual Intelligence, Torch and any other app, like Instagram. Personally, I didn't find myself using any of those preset options, and instead set the Action Button to control my Do Not Disturb mode. It's such a small difference – after all, unlocking the device, bringing up the Control Center and activating Focus is hardly a laborious task. However, it's a small quality-of-life change that I thoroughly appreciated – letting me turn it on without even directly looking at my phone. The iPhone 16e vs iPhone 15 contest is by no means a knockout by the newer model. There are two main reasons that the older iPhone may be the better choice for some people: display and camera. The iPhone 16e only has a single 48MP Fusion camera, while the iPhone 15 pairs a 48MP main camera with a 12MP ultrawide lens that's equally useful for grand nature shots and trying to fit the whole family into one photo. More importantly, the 16e's single lens means you can't take silly up-close photos of your friends or dog with the 0.5x zoom. The 15 also has a (small) lead on the 16e in terms of display, as the latter reverts back to the iPhone 14's notched display rather than the Dynamic Island found on subsequent devices. Personally, I don't mind it, but for some users it could be the reason to spend a little more for the iPhone 15. The latter's display is brighter and (slightly) higher res too – 1179 x 2556 with a max brightness of 2,000 nits compared to the 16e's 1170 x 2532 and 1,200 nits. MagSafe charging is also missing from the iPhone 16e. It was rumored this was to make room for the C1 chip, but that has since been denied by Apple according to Macworld. The 16e can still wirelessly charge, but it lacks the magnet. I'd never much required MagSafe until I recently purchased a magnetic power bank – which is now all but useless with the iPhone 16e. And users who have a magnetic car mount will probably sorely miss this functionality. The iPhone 15 still has a place, then, and it's a wonderful purchase if you can get it for close to the same price as the iPhone 16e. It's still ultimately more expensive than its new sibling, though – and unless you really need a telephoto lens, I think the iPhone 16e is the budget iPhone to have. The best iPhone 2025: which Apple smartphone reigns supreme? The iPhone Fold is apparently being tested with a feature we've been waiting years for iPhone 17 Air leak hints at how the super-slim phone might solve its potential battery life issues
