Here's How the iPhone 16e's C1 Modem Stacks Up Against the iPhone 16 Qualcomm Modem

[MacRumors]

The iPhone 16e includes Apple's first custom-designed C1 modem, and since it's a new chip category for Apple, there have been questions about how the C1 measures up to the Qualcomm modems that Apple has been using for years. As it turns out, the iPhone 16e performs almost as well or better than the iPhone 16 in many speed tests that compare sub-6GHz performance, but it does vary by network.

According to cellular performance data shared by Ookla, Verizon and AT&T iPhone 16e users saw better median download speeds than iPhone 16 users, but T-Mobile users saw slightly higher median download speeds with the iPhone 16 than the iPhone 16e.

When looking at the highest speeds across carriers, the iPhone 16 wins out over the iPhone 16e because the iPhone 16e does not have mmWave 5G support. The iPhone 16e cannot connect to the fastest mmWave 5G networks, and it is limited to sub-6GHz connectivity. mmWave is found in urban areas and is less widespread than sub-6GHz.

In situations where connectivity was poor, the iPhone 16e outperformed the iPhone 16.

Ookla's test revealed that T-Mobile users with an iPhone 16e saw median download speeds of 264.71 Mb/s, while users with an iPhone 16 saw median download speeds of 357.47, a 24 percent increase in speed. According to Ookla, the iPhone 16e's underperformance on the T-Mobile network could be due to T-Mobile's 5G standalone network and advanced features like carrier aggregation.

For Verizon users, download speeds were low for both the iPhone 16e and the iPhone 16, which seems to be a network issue. iPhone 16e users saw median download speeds of 140.77 Mb/s on Verizon. iPhone 16 download speeds were even lower at 124.4 Mb/s.

As for AT&T users, median download speeds for the iPhone 16e were at 226.9 Mb/s, and 146.49 for the iPhone 16.

The iPhone 16e outperformed the iPhone 16 in upload speeds across all carriers, with the most notable difference on the Verizon and AT&T networks. T-Mobile was the fastest network overall for both the iPhone 16e and the iPhone 16 in download and upload speeds.

With the C1 modem, Apple was able to increase efficiency, and it draws less power than Qualcomm modems. Apple says the C1 is the most efficient modem that's ever been used in an iPhone, and the iPhone 16e does indeed have longer battery life than the iPhone 16.

The C1 modem is Apple's first step toward independence from Qualcomm, and Apple has long been aiming to reduce its reliance on Qualcomm technology. Apple is already working on the C2 modem for future devices, and it is expected to include mmWave 5G support.

Article Link: Here's How the iPhone 16e's C1 Modem Stacks Up Against the iPhone 16 Qualcomm Modem

 

[SoldOnApple]

I wonder if someone more likely to buy the 16e is also more likely to use a lower tier phone plan? I don't know about the U.S., but in Australia you have to pay extra to get the full uncapped 5G speeds on our major telcos.

 

[jz0309]

Great results, excellent work by Apple on the C1!

 

[HJM.NL]

While these numbers might look nice in favor of the C1. I’m missing the information that the modems used in the 16/16 pro are at least two generations older than what Qualcomm is delivering. And most models of Android phones that can be compared with the iPhone 16/16 Pro are using Qualcomm’s latest modemchips.

So when reading those numbers, keep this in mind.

 

[NoGood@Usernames]

Wow, that’s great to see! My plan is to hold onto my 15 for a few years and likely jump to the 18 series, so this is very encouraging. Way to go here, Apple!

 

[HJM.NL]

Great results, excellent work by Apple on the C1!

It’s comparing them with a two generations older modem chipset from Qualcomm 😂

 

[McKodiak]

We have cellular network speeds that are so fast that it's not even noticeable for most use cases. It was wise to prioritize improving the worst cellular connection data rates before trying to improve the best connections.

 

[jz0309]

It’s comparing them with a two generations older modem chipset from Qualcomm 😂

It’s comparing current Apple offerings.
Most smartphone users haven’t even heard the name Qualcomm and are very happy with their cellular connectivity.

 

[ghostface147]

So now I’m curious what Apple did compared to Intel. Intel always had inferior modems.

 

[HJM.NL]

It’s comparing current Apple offerings.
Most smartphone users haven’t even heard the name Qualcomm and are very happy with their cellular connectivity.

I don’t care much either but those numbers are misleading in favor of Apple.

 

[jz0309]

I don’t care much either but those numbers are misleading in favor of Apple.

They’re not misleading at all, they’re comparing current Apple offerings, how is that misleading??

 

[binaryfuneral]

You can hear the EU already starting to think of ways to make this out to be a bad thing.

 

[AppleFeller]

Everyone so quick to go say but Qualcomm has better new modems not in use by Apple.

That’s irrelevant to the fact that in worst case signal testing the 16e was almost double the speed of the 16. That is huge and could be the difference between being able to still use a phone or not in terms of data connectivity.

 

[whateverest]

So now I’m curious what Apple did compared to Intel. Intel always had inferior modems.

Probably just hired the right people. Could be as simple as that.

 

[Slix]

I wonder if someone more likely to buy the 16e is also more likely to use a lower tier phone plan? I don't know about the U.S., but in Australia you have to pay extra to get the full uncapped 5G speeds on our major telcos.

I was coming here to say something similar: I would bet a majority of people likely to buy the iPhone 16e are coming from a phone without 5G at all, so any speed increase will be good.

 

[HJM.NL]

Everyone so quick to go say but Qualcomm has better new modems not in use by Apple.

That’s irrelevant to the fact that in worst case signal testing the 16e was almost double the speed of the 16. That is huge and could be the difference between being able to still use a phone or not in terms of data connectivity.

You should compare the speed of the 16e with the pixel 9a (just saying)

 

[DaniTheFox]

So now I’m curious what Apple did compared to Intel. Intel always had inferior modems.

This is Intel (Mobil Comunication). Bevor it was Infinion. And bevor Siemens. Both from Germany.
I don’t think Apple has changed much.

 

[Digital Dude]

I see Apple is up to their old tricks again “almost as well or better than“. 🙄

 

[Howard2k]

You should compare the speed of the 16e with the pixel 9a (just saying)

That subset of people who make phone purchasing decisions based largely or exclusively on cellular bandwidth capabilities can probably do that themselves. It seems unlikely that those people would be considering a 16e.


“Cellular bandwidth is super important, do I go with the 16e without mmWave? I need to look at some articles”

 

[cdsapplefan]

I wonder if Apple 🍎 will software tweak the modem in the future?

 

[GMShadow]

You can hear the EU already starting to think of ways to make this out to be a bad thing.

"We demand Apple buy modems from Ericsson because fairness."

 

[HJM.NL]

I see Apple is up to their old tricks again “almost as well or better than“. 🙄

These results are like comparing an M4 to an intel i7 😂

 

[sw1tcher]

With the C1 modem, Apple was able to increase efficiency, and it draws less power than Qualcomm modems. Apple says the C1 is the most efficient modem that's ever been used in an iPhone, and the iPhone 16e does indeed have longer battery life than the iPhone 16.

... attributing the iPhone 16e's longer battery life to the C1 modem and not because the 16e has a larger battery than the iPhone 16

iPhone 16e's Battery Capacity Revealed in Real-World Battery Life Test

In its announcement video for the iPhone 16e, Apple said the device features a new internal design that allowed for a larger battery. Apple does...

www.macrumors.com

• iPhone 16 Pro Max: 4,685 mAh
• iPhone 16 Pro: 3,582 mAh
• iPhone 16 Plus: 4,674 mAh
• iPhone 16: 3,561 mAh
• iPhone 16e: 4,005 mAh

 

[M1956]

While these numbers might look nice in favor of the C1. I’m missing the information that the modems used in the 16/16 pro are at least two generations older than what Qualcomm is delivering. And most models of Android phones that can be compared with the iPhone 16/16 Pro are using Qualcomm’s latest modemchips.

So when reading those numbers, keep this in mind.

X85 was just announced and won’t be available until December at best. So it leaves us with just one newer generation for Qualcomm. Would indeed be great to compare c1 with x80.
It is impressive performance nevertheless given how problematic intel modems were.

 

[name99]

This is Intel (Mobil Comunication). Bevor it was Infinion. And bevor Siemens. Both from Germany.
I don’t think Apple has changed much.

Oh FFS.
The same geniuses that know everything about modems (and were confident that the Apple modem would suck) are now additionally experts in company strategy, and know how the modem details changed as the product moved from Siemens to Infineon to Intel to Apple.

I wish I were smart enough to just *know* all this stuff, instead of having to manually trudge through patents, like a chump...