Apple also said the iPhone 16 was made for Apple Intelligence 🤭
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.
Here's How the iPhone 16e's C1 Modem Stacks Up Against the iPhone 16 Qualcomm Modem
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It has a more power efficient modem and it has Apple Intelligence.
And maybe someone will, after the 9a ships next month?
In the meantime, what does that have to do with this comparison, as described in the headline:
Here's How the iPhone 16e's C1 Modem Stacks Up Against the iPhone 16 Qualcomm Modem
I can confirm, Verizon's network has gotten terrible. I have an iPhone 15 Pro Max and a Verizon unlimited data plan, and unless I'm on 5G-UW the performance is terrible. Even with 2 or 3 bars of LTE or 5G sometimes I can't even open a website, and if I'm in heavy traffic or a crowded location...forget about it.
The takeaway is that Apple's first 5G modem doesn't suck and in many uses cases is pretty OK.
I wonder if they ditched the Hayes command set? I'm not sure how many people here know, but you still control modems with the old ATDT stuff. Crazy, right?
I wonder if they ditched the Hayes command set? I'm not sure how many people here know, but you still control modems with the old ATDT stuff. Crazy, right?
In the US, you have to on Verizon. They charge extra for full access to their “Ultra Wideband” 5G.
AT&T and T-Mobile include full 5G connectivity on all 5G plans.
Two generations, the iPhone 16/16 Pro use the X71 modem which is a derived of the X70. Both the X75 and X80 modems are being sold by Qualcomm. But it does not really matter since you don't want to test just the modem but and entire system the includes the modem, and Apple (in their infinite wisdom), don't use either the available newer Qualcomm X75 or X80 modems.
That's some pretty terrible math, MacRumors. 357.47 - 264.71 = 92.76.
92.76 / 264.71 =0.35 or a 35% difference in speed.
357.47 / 264.71 =1.35 or a 35% increase in speed.
Where is the "24 percent increase" calculation being made?
Quite a solid result for their first modem, considering this is supposed to be the low end version.
Apple isn’t using “Intel modems” for their C1. They are just using Intel IP, to avoid breaking some patents while making their own. The C1 was designed from scratch and never intended to be the fastest modem on the market.
You might not have "Premium Data"? Also I've found this to vary *a lot* based on region. Probably best to say which region/location you experience this in. I can tell you that AT&T and iPhones seem to have a weird case I hit *a lot* in the Portland area where it get stuck on band 12 and I see the same issues (on the elite plan with tons of priority data). Calls work fine but it's as if data just doesn't work with 2-3 bars. No problems in many parts of California though 🤷, but anytime I'm in the bay area, I see Verizon do that too, though I'm chalking that up to "Premium Data" since if I flip to an eSIM I know has QCI8 (or Premium data), it does actually work.
But iPhone 16 uses x75?
iPhone 16 Pro offers significantly faster 5G speeds thanks to new modem - 9to5Mac
The iPhone 16 Pro features an upgraded modem inside courtesy of Qualcomm, bringing several notable improvements. As detailed by SpeedSmart,...
9to5mac.com
In the Philippines it wouldn't be surprising that many min wage earners making $1.00/hr will go into deep debt via home credit to get a $1199 iPhone 16 Pro Max 256GB + interest then use a prepaid SIM whose ARPU is $1-6.
But iPhone 16 uses x75?
iPhone 16 Pro offers significantly faster 5G speeds thanks to new modem - 9to5Mac
The iPhone 16 Pro features an upgraded modem inside courtesy of Qualcomm, bringing several notable improvements. As detailed by SpeedSmart,...
It's a variant of the X70, designated the X71, confirmed by iFixit.
Apple did a great job with the C1. The intel modems in the iPhones before was horrible in lower signal areas. Bravo
Very nice to see its performance. With such good results definitely expecting future versions to be fantastic and perform exceptionally well.
Just to be clear, the test is flawed in its basis, even if it is a good indication about performance. When you are analyzing the modem you should use the same antenna to have a real comparison. iPhone 16 and 16e are probably using 2 different antennas.
Interesting, did not know that.
Seems like this mysterious x71 is closer to x75 thought in terms of performance, wifi7 support etc?
yea it would have been nice to show exactly what the power curve comparison is on these chips, like how they do cpu charts.... 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
The key takeaway with this article is the C1 works well enough for Apple to dump Qualcomm for their low-end devices. I would like to see the C1 added to the laptop and/or iPad devices. If the chip is cheap enough it could be included in all devices and enabled at a latter date.
I disagree, it’s really about system level performance. I’m not going out & buying just a modem chip. I’m going out and buying a phone.
No, it's an X70 with light modification - and Wi-Fi has never been part of the cellular modem package.
I don’t care if you agree or not. That’s how signal transmission works. They are speaking about “the modem” here, not the phone itself. So the test could give you an indication but it’s not giving you all the story about C1
Based on what? Apple or Qualcomm never released specs for X71 so you don’t know how close it is to X75 or X70. Please stop passing guesses as facts