Well, how could MacRumours or others test the modem speeds, when the devices haven't been delivered yet - or those that got pre-delivery review models are still under NDA?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Says iPhone 16e's New C1 Modem is Just the 'Start' in Interview
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Given that most users need the bandwidth for music or video streaming, even a 3G modem would be more than fast enough.
For the segment the 16e is aimed at, I don't see most users even noticing if the phone only delivers 1.9gbps instead of 2gbps, because they are are streaming at <0.03gbps. I just did a speedtest, here at work, I get 0.15gbps over 5G on my iPhone 14 (T-Mobile), my iPhone 16 Pro gets 0.05gbps (congstar)
I think, for Apple, the current generation needs to prove its reliability and that it gets a good signal and performance in the "normal" ranges, compared to traditional modems in other iPhones and Android phones.
Fine tuning the last 1-2% throughput performance can come later, before the C2 or C3 appears in premium devices. That it is reliable for the other 99.9% of situations is much more important than total throughput speed for outlier cases.
For the segment the 16e is aimed at, I don't see most users even noticing if the phone only delivers 1.9gbps instead of 2gbps, because they are are streaming at <0.03gbps. I just did a speedtest, here at work, I get 0.15gbps over 5G on my iPhone 14 (T-Mobile), my iPhone 16 Pro gets 0.05gbps (congstar)
I think, for Apple, the current generation needs to prove its reliability and that it gets a good signal and performance in the "normal" ranges, compared to traditional modems in other iPhones and Android phones.
Fine tuning the last 1-2% throughput performance can come later, before the C2 or C3 appears in premium devices. That it is reliable for the other 99.9% of situations is much more important than total throughput speed for outlier cases.
In another thread I suggested this phone should have been priced at $450 because you are essentially beta testing Apple’s new modem. So an extra $50 off from your suggested price for that service seems fair to me.
The modem is supposedly more power efficient. Consumers may not care who makes their phone parts, but improved battery life is always something users can notice and appreciate.
Don’t trust Apple, then. Don’t buy the 16E. We will have to wait to see actual performance and efficiency.
I had a phone with the intel modem. It was not as bad as made out to be.
The c1 has to be good enough that’s what Apple wants, imo.
The 16E isn’t for people who believe they are beta testing apples products. The 16E is for those who want a solid upgrade, costing less than a 16 and believe Apple puts a good product out of the gate.
And of course that belief is subjective.
I've always found it problematic; when my iPhone uses it I often get a dropped signal.
Intel bought the modem business from Infieon. By that 'logic' they are Infineon modem ... which is what the original iPhones shipped with.
Go look up the tech specs of the iPhones with Intel modems and look at the frequences covered. Go look at the 16e set of frequencies. They are not the same. It is not the same implementation.
P.S. here is first step.
iPhone SE 2
iPhone SE (2nd generation) - Technical Specifications - Apple Support
$450 as you suggest would be $150 off, not $50. The 16e is supposed to retail for $599, not $499.
Well, it’s not like I think most consumers set out to deliberately buy a product to beta test it. But you have to admit the price along with the features it lacks (vs. 16) means many looking for a new phone may simply opt to go for the 16 for $200 more instead. Some here have suggested that is the reason for some of the most glaring omissions, like MagSafe. To encourage stepping up.
We obviously don’t and can’t know, but why this phone, and why now? Thinking that perhaps Apple themselves did not feel confident enough in their modem tech to simply work it into their traditional phones just yet does not seem like such a far fetched idea.
As WebKit pointed out, some people may view this as incremental features from the se3. I suppose how people view this new phone is indeterminate.
Maybe. But then again some people may not care about MagSafe and just want a basic phone.
It could be exactly that thinking or not. We’ll never know, but the conspiracists in us like the think the worst.
After all the money & time Apple has spent on this modem, Apple owns it now. For Good or Ill it’s an Apple modem.
I am not planning to buy iPhone 16E. I haven't brought any new iPhone recently, mostly used iPhone. iPhone 16E isn't worth the price they are charging for. If it is Apple SE 3 pricing, then it is pretty good deal, but for $599US ($899CAD) it is stupid.
I had iPhone XS, iPhone 11 Pro Max. The Intel modem is constantly underperforming than my Android (Pixel) with Qualcomm (in terms of cell reception).
We shall see. Judging from history and stories about Apple struggling with modem development, I don't hold my breath. The lack of mmWave, shows Apple is behind Qualcomm. It is inferior product, that's the fact.
I had the xs max for 4 years, cell service worked to my satisfaction. Inferior doesn’t mean bad. Imo you are using the wrong phrase; should be less capable.
And less capable could be absolutely satisfactory for many. mmWave to me is an oversold feature.
Exactly. It is aimed at a specific market; and smart companies differentiate products based on features. Having all the same features on all devices would mean no one would buy the high end products; differentiating products let users decide on what features they need and can afford.
I’ve found mmWave to be flacky in real word use. My phone switched and then loses signal when switching back, causing streaming to pause.
Then I guess your opinion really will not have any impact on Apple’s product choices as you are not a customer of theirs (and have not been for a while).
Judging from history, Apple’s Silicon has been pretty impressive, so I would bet on that team before I would bet on your analysis. Lack of mmWave shows that Apple has a different set of priorities than Qualcomm. Apple’s stated focus is battery life, not flashy functions that do not provide value to most average customers (like mmWave).
No, that is your opinion. If I were asked to choose between battery life and mmWave I would pick battery life every time. You have different priorities, which is fine.
Last edited:
I'm mistaken here. I was only referring to my own articles.
My intent was not to be self righteous. Here’s a direct quote from the article linked to in this article:
Literally says “main difference” and it doesn’t even mention the possibility of increased battery capacity.
I don't know Joe, this really reads like what @xxray is saying (below in Bold)
(just a third party opinion with no dog in this fight)
Thank YOU! I’m not even trying to be a jerk, I’m just trying to encourage journalistic standards to be upheld. The team does a good job writing articles or I wouldn’t keep visiting and reading. But stuff like this makes me not want to anymore.
Can you point to any other articles that MR has released, with regard to the iPhone 16e, where battery life improvements were discussed outside of the C1 chip.
I would appreciate you pointing out where these discussions show the C1 as being just a "contributing factor", as opposed to being the "main factor".
It looks like all the discussion of better battery life has been CENTERED around the C1 chip. I would even go further to say that nothing has been discussed about battery life improvements outside of the C1 chip.
To use the work "main" in this context seems entirely appropriate given the totality of discussion around the topic.
It's journalist malpractice to disregard battery size as part of the equation.
You disregarding the valid assessment and use of the word "main" to fulfill your own self-righteous argument should be beneath a journalist who claims to have integrity.
I don’t see the 16e as an upgrade to my 13PM in ANY shape/form. With Apple finally jumping on fast-charging, the whole battery debate falls away. If it’s an entry level phone, the user probably won’t care about AI. If it’s a way to get them to step up to an actual 16, the new user probably does not care about the other bells & whistles.
It just an oddly cobbled together project, with a suspect modem. It’s also 2025, just give us mm radios, all major USA cities have it. It reduces congestion, by getting the data to your phone faster, and off the network, as needed.
It just an oddly cobbled together project, with a suspect modem. It’s also 2025, just give us mm radios, all major USA cities have it. It reduces congestion, by getting the data to your phone faster, and off the network, as needed.