Phone comparison · UK prices · October 2026
The iPhone 17e leads on battery life. The iPhone 16e doesn't pull clearly ahead on anything we compare. The iPhone 17e costs £100 more than the iPhone 16e.
Comparing 2 phones
iPhone 17eOverall score 77/100
iPhone 16eOverall score 75/100
The iPhone 17e costs £100 more than the iPhone 16e.
You get: faster charging by cable and faster wireless charging.
You give up: nothing in the specs we compare.
Worth it if you want faster charging by cable and faster wireless charging. Keep the money if those extras don’t matter to you.
The iPhone 17e charges faster by cable (15 W vs 8 W on the iPhone 16e), so it tops up quicker with a compatible charger.
It also charges faster without a cable (15 W vs 8 W on the iPhone 16e), so cable-free top-ups are quicker.
Both have similar sharpness (460 ppi and 457 ppi), close enough not to matter much day to day.
Both have similar benchmark results, close enough not to matter much day to day.
Both have similar weights (169 g and 167 g), close enough not to matter much day to day.
One quick question, one tap each.
| Score | iPhone 17e | iPhone 16e |
|---|---|---|
| Battery | 57 | 53 |
| Screen | 71 | 71 |
| Camera | 68 | 70 |
| Speed | 91 | 87 |
| Toughness | 95 | 92 |
| Connections and extras | 77 | 77 |
| Overall | 77 | 75 |
How these scores are made: Each score is calculated from the maker's published specs and benchmark results, using one fixed formula for every phone. We have not tested these phones in the hand. How we score phones