The iPhone 16e rivals Apple's base iPhone 16 in every benchmark except one

There's a new entry-level iPhone on the scene and it's not an SE.

The iPhone 16e is Apple's new budget-friendly phone, and it features a powerful A18 chipset, a 2-in-1 48MP Fusion camera, and up to 26 hours of video playback battery life.

On paper, the iPhone 16e is a solid competitor for the iPhone 16, as it has similar specs but costs $200 less. But how does the iPhone 16e stack up against the other 16th-generation iPhones? And what about the old iPhone SE3?

Based on our lab benchmarks, even the iPhone 16 Pro faces serious competition — except in one key area.

iPhone 16e benchmarks: Performance

The iPhone 16e features an A18 chip similar to the iPhone 16 and iPhone 16 Plus, with a 6-core CPU and 4-core GPU. The iPhone 16 and 16 Plus have an additional GPU core in their A18 chipset.

The iPhone 16 Pro and 16 Pro Max feature the A18 Pro chipset with a 6-core CPU and a 6-core GPU. The iPhone SE 3 features a A15 Bionic chipset with a 6-core CPU and a 4-core GPU.

All six Apple smartphones we've compared to the iPhone 16e come equipped with a 16-core neural engine.

We expected the iPhone 16e to handle similarly to the iPhone 16, and in fact, the iPhone 16e outperforms the iPhone 16 on all of our CPU lab tests. The two phones are pretty close, averaging about a 1% difference on Geekbench 6 single-core and multicore benchmarks. The iPhone 16e is also just 2-3% worse than the iPhone 16 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro Max.

The iPhone SE 3 came out in 2022, so we don't have Geekbench 6 results for the SE 3 as Geekbench 6 first launched in February 2023.

GPU Performance is the main differentiator between the iPhones. The A18 Pro-powered iPhone 16 Pro and Pro Max maintain the lead on graphics performance with 3D Mark Wild Life Extreme frame rates that are 45% better than the iPhone 16e.

We do have 3DMark Wild Life performance scores for the SE 3, and we can see that the iPhone 16e's A18 chipset outperforms the SE 3's A15 Bionic chip on graphics performance by 73%.

iPhone 16e benchmarks: Display

Apple's iPhone 16e features a similar 6.1-inch Super Retina XDR display as the iPhone 16, but the two displays are not quite equal.

When tested with Adaptive brightness off, the iPhone 16e (724 nits) isn't quite as bright as the iPhone 16 (775 nits) or iPhone 16 Plus (787). Both iPhone 16 Pro models also have brighter displays (828 nits) compared to the iPhone 16e. But the 16e isn't very far off in display brightness from the iPhone 16 and iPhone 16 Plus.

The iPhone SE 3 measured just 596 nits, which is far behind all five of the 16th-gen iPhones.

Our color gamut tests are where the benchmarks got a bit wild. The iPhone 16e tested significantly higher in both sRGB and DCI-P3 color gamut coverage compared to all of the other iPhones. Apple's Retina displays usually hover around 112-114% sRGB and 79-80% DCI-P3 coverage. The iPhone 16e measured 127% coverage of the sRGB color space and 90% coverage of the DCI-P3 color space, which is about 12% better than all five other iPhones. Including the iPhone 16 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro Max.

iPhone 16e benchmarks: Battery life

We run the Laptop Mag web-surfing battery test the same way across multiple products, with the display set to 150 nits and the device set to surf through a series of static, dynamic, and video web pages. All iPhones use the same Test Flight version of our lab's proprietary testing app. So the process is identical across all of the iPhone models, and the only variables are the phone's chipset, battery size, and display.

Typically, we would expect the iPhone 16e to last about as long on our battery test as the iPhone 16. Both phones are about the same size, feature very similar A18 chips, and have 6.1 Super Retina XDR displays. However, Apple indicated the iPhone 16e was up to 4 hours more efficient than the iPhone 16 on Apple's video playback benchmark.

While our lab benchmarks didn't see quite as high of a difference between the two, the iPhone 16e did last 12 hours and 41 minutes on our battery test, meaning it lasted 28 minutes longer than the iPhone 16 (12:13). The iPhone SE 3 lasted a mere 7:39 on the same battery test, while the iPhone 16 Pro did maintain its lead on the smaller 6-inch phones, with a 14:01 battery life.

As they are larger phones, the iPhone 16 Pro Max (17:35) and iPhone 16 Plus (16:30) outlasted all three of the smaller iPhones.

Bottom line

If you just want a powerful iPhone and don't care about having the latest and greatest camera features, there's no real reason not to opt for the iPhone 16e. It's just as powerful as the iPhone 16. It has a bright, vibrant display and all-day battery life. And it costs just $599 compared to the iPhone 16's $799 price tag.

Apple's iPhone Pro and Pro Max line have held the best cameras of the iPhone lineup for years, and that isn't changing. So if a good phone camera is worth at least $999 for you, then the iPhone 16e isn't even on your radar.

While the iPhone 16 and iPhone 16e both have a 48MP Fusion camera, the iPhone 16 gets you a 12MP Ultra Wide lens, which will work far better for taking wide-angle photos than the 2-in-1 solution on the iPhone 16e. So, if you run an Instagram for your travel photos, you may want to shell out for the iPhone 16.

But if staying on budget is your main concern and you don't need a multi-camera array, there's no reason to get the iPhone 16 when you can get a similar experience on the iPhone 16e.

Pre-order the Apple iPhone 16e now

More from Laptop Mag

• Apple's iPhone 16e brings better performance, battery, and camera to the SE line — and a big price bump
• The iPhone 16's fiercest competitor is actually the cheapest Apple phone you can buy
• The iPhone 16e didn't kill the home button, it just anointed a new one