iPhone 16e Got a Review: Budget Phone or Just Overpriced?

Apple has introduced the iPhone 16e as a more affordable alternative to the regular iPhone 16. It comes with several key features found in its more expensive counterparts, such as Apple Intelligence and a programmable Action Button. However, it also makes notable compromises, particularly in camera quality, display refresh rate, and the absence of MagSafe charging.

The 16e retains the core iPhone experience, but it struggles to justify its price compared to competing Android devices. In the past, Apple’s SE models were positioned as budget-friendly entry points into the iOS ecosystem. With the 16e costing significantly more than the now-discontinued SE, it raises the question: Is this truly a budget phone, or is Apple simply redefining what "affordable" means in its lineup?

Who Is It For?

Apple is marketing the iPhone 16e as an entry-level option for new users – particularly those switching from Android or upgrading from older iPhones. The phone aims to attract customers who want a relatively modern iPhone without paying flagship prices.

Image Credit: Halie Chavez | Bloomberg

According to Bloomberg’s review, at $599, the iPhone 16e struggles to fit into the traditional "budget" category. In the United States, where Apple dominates the smartphone market, this price point might still be palatable for loyal iOS users. But in other regions, especially in markets like India or China, the price makes it a much tougher sell. In these areas, local manufacturers offer phones with superior hardware at a lower cost, making it difficult for the iPhone 16e to compete purely on specifications.

For long-time iPhone users who want a familiar experience without the premium cost of an iPhone 16 or Pro model, the 16e could still be an attractive choice. However, for those outside the Apple ecosystem looking for the best value, it faces stiff competition from Android alternatives.

What Works?

Image Credit: Halie Chavez | Bloomberg

• Design & Build. The iPhone 16e retains Apple’s minimalist aesthetic and is available in black and white. While it lacks the premium materials of the Pro models, it still feels well-made. The white version also does a better job at hiding scratches, which is a plus for long-term durability.
• Battery Life & Performance. Equipped with Apple’s A18 chip, the 16e delivers consistently smooth performance. While it has a slightly weaker GPU than the standard iPhone 16, the difference is negligible in everyday use. Battery life is also solid, lasting a full day with ease, even under heavy usage. Compared to some recent Android models, which have seen declines in battery efficiency, the 16e holds up well.
• iOS Ecosystem & Software Optimization. One of Apple’s biggest strengths is its software experience. Face ID works universally across apps, eliminating the inconsistency often found on Android devices. Siri has also improved, though it still lags behind AI-powered assistants from Google and Samsung. The integration of Apple Intelligence is a nice touch, but its full potential remains unrealized due to delays in Apple’s more advanced AI features.
• Speakers & Audio Quality. Surprisingly, the iPhone 16e outperforms many premium Android phones in terms of speaker quality. Whether listening to podcasts, music, or watching videos, the sound output is clear and well-balanced. This is an often-overlooked aspect of smartphone design, but Apple has maintained a high standard in this area.

What’s Missing?

Image Credit: Halie Chavez | Bloomberg

• Camera Limitations. The 16e features a single 48-megapixel camera on the back, lacking a dedicated telephoto or ultra-wide lens. This puts it at a disadvantage compared to similarly priced Android phones, which often include multiple lenses for added versatility. The lack of premium video recording modes also makes it a weaker choice for content creators. While image quality is decent, it falls short of what Google’s Pixel lineup offers at a lower price.
• Display & Refresh Rate. The 16e’s screen is clear and bright but limited to a 60Hz refresh rate. In contrast, many Android phones at this price point offer 120Hz displays for a noticeably smoother experience. Given that Apple’s Pro models include ProMotion technology, this feels like an intentional downgrade to differentiate the lineup rather than a true cost-cutting measure.
• Limited Storage Options. At $599, the base model of the iPhone 16e comes with just 128GB of storage. Competitors like OnePlus and Google offer 256GB options at the same or lower prices. Since Apple does not support expandable storage via microSD, users may find themselves quickly running out of space.
• Slow Charging & No MagSafe. While the 16e does support wireless charging, it lacks MagSafe, Apple’s magnetic charging system. Wired charging is also significantly slower than what’s available on competing devices. Phones from Xiaomi and OnePlus, for example, support much faster charging speeds, allowing users to get a full charge in under 30 minutes – something the 16e can’t match.
• Connectivity Issues. Some users have reported minor Bluetooth connectivity issues, particularly when using multiple wireless accessories at once. While this may not be a dealbreaker, it’s an inconvenience that stands out given Apple’s usual emphasis on seamless device integration.

Verdict: Is the iPhone 16e Worth It?

The iPhone 16e is a well-built device that delivers a solid iOS experience. It retains most of the key features that make Apple’s phones appealing – smooth performance, reliable battery life, and software consistency. However, at $599, it fails to stand out in a competitive market where Android alternatives offer better hardware for the same price or less.

For loyal Apple users who need an upgrade from an older iPhone but don’t want to spend $800+ on a flagship model, the 16e is a reasonable choice. But for those who prioritize value, better cameras, faster displays, and more storage can be found elsewhere.

If Apple had priced the 16e closer to the now-discontinued iPhone SE, it could have been a real contender in the mid-range market. But at its current price, it’s neither a true budget phone nor a compelling alternative to Android’s best offerings.