Apple took seven years and invested billions of dollars to launch its first self-developed baseband chip, C1, but a recent research report attempts to break Apple's technological myth. It shows that in cellular network environments covering densely populated urban areas, the first smartphone equipped with C1, the iPhone 16e, lags far behind Android devices powered by Qualcomm chips in both download and upload speeds.The smartphone evaluation study conducted by Cellular Insights Inc., commissioned by Qualcomm, shows that the iPhone 16e performed disappointingly on T-Mobile's 5G network in New York City. The report points out that while C1 performs reasonably well under ideal conditions, it clearly falls behind in &#34;scenarios where next-generation modems should excel.&#34;The report emphasizes that better 5G performance for users using devices in dense urban, indoor, or uplink-dense environments is &#34;not just theoretical, but quantifiable, repeatable, and operationally significant.&#34;Cellular Insights' research report shows that compared to the iPhone 16e, two similarly priced Android phones using Qualcomm chips can achieve data download speeds up to 35% faster, and upload speeds up to 91% faster. This gap is even more pronounced when the network is busy or the phone is far from the signal tower.More concerning is that during the tests, the iPhone 16e exhibited &#34;significant heating&#34; and &#34;screen dimming sharply&#34; within just two minutes of testing intervals. This performance starkly contrasts with Apple CEO Tim Cook's previous claim that C1 is &#34;the most energy-efficient modem in iPhone history.&#34; However, the report did not specify whether consumers would notice a decline in data communication speeds during actual use, nor did it discuss battery life issues.On the day the report was released, on May 27, Eastern Time, both Qualcomm and Apple's stock prices maintained gains of over 2% at midday, following signals of easing trade tensions between the EU and US leaders and officials, tracking the rebound of the US stock market.<h2>Qualcomm's Precise Counterattack</h2>The timing of this research report is quite delicate. Qualcomm is launching an attack on one of its largest customers, Apple. Historically, Apple has contributed about 20% of Qualcomm's revenue, and before the launch of the iPhone 16e, Qualcomm was the exclusive modem supplier for the iPhone product line.Qualcomm had previously informed investors that it expects revenue from Apple modem sales to eventually drop to zero, but the company plans to make up for this loss by expanding into other areas. Media reports indicate that Apple paid Qualcomm $7.2 billion in licensing fees in 2022 alone.From a technical specifications standpoint, the limitations of C1 are evident. Media reports state that C1 only supports low-frequency 6-GHz networks with four-carrier aggregation, with peak speeds of about 4 Gbps; whereas the Qualcomm X75 supports low-frequency 6-GHz networks with five-carrier aggregation, plus ten millimeter-wave carriers, with theoretical speeds reaching 7-10 Gbps.<h2>The Cost and Compromise of a Seven-Year Journey</h2>Apple's journey in baseband chips began in 2017 with a lawsuit against Qualcomm, accusing it of charging excessive patent fees. After a failed collaboration with Intel, Apple launched its self-developed baseband project in 2018, acquiring Intel's baseband team of over 2,200 employees and more than 17,000 technology patentsHowever, this project faces numerous challenges. Former Apple Wireless Director Jaydeep Ranade once stated, &#34;It is absurd to think that just because Apple makes the best chips on Earth, they can also make modems.&#34;The final compromise of C1 is clearly visible: the iPhone 16e does not support 5G millimeter wave technology globally, which may affect its network performance in crowded places such as shopping malls and airports in the U.S. market.<h2>Market Impact and Future Games</h2>Despite the performance gap, C1 has indeed made breakthroughs in energy consumption. According to Apple's official website, the iPhone 16e has a video playback endurance of up to 26 hours, surpassing the similarly configured iPhone 16 (22 hours) and approaching the iPhone 16 Pro's 27 hours.Apple's Senior Vice President of Hardware Technologies, Johny Srouji, stated in a media interview, &#34;We have built a platform that spans generations. C1 is just the beginning.&#34; According to Apple's plan, next year's C2 will address the millimeter wave shortcoming and be launched across all iPhones, while the goal for C3 is to surpass Qualcomm's baseband.However, research commissioned by Qualcomm from Cellular Insights reminds the market that Apple's journey to catch up in baseband technology may be more challenging than expected. As Apple attempts to reduce costs and improve profit margins through self-developed basebands, the performance gap may become its biggest challenge. For investors, the outcome of this technological game will directly impact Apple's future competitiveness and profitability

AAPL

A study commissioned by Qualcomm shows that the iPhone 16e performs particularly poorly in densely populated urban areas. In just a two-minute testing interval on T-Mobile's 5G network in New York City, there was noticeable overheating and "dramatic screen dimming." In terms of data download speeds, Android phones using Qualcomm chips and priced similarly are up to 35% faster, while upload speeds can be up to 91% faster

- A recent study by Cellular Insights Inc. reveals that Apple's first self-developed modem chip, C1, underperforms compared to Qualcomm's chips in the iPhone 16e, particularly in urban 5G networks.  
- The report highlights significant speed differences, with Qualcomm-powered Android devices outperforming the iPhone 16e by up to 35% in downloads and 91% in uploads, especially in congested areas.  
- Despite improvements in energy efficiency, the C1's limitations, including lack of support for 5G millimeter-wave technology, may hinder Apple's competitive edge in the market.

Apple's first baseband chip falls short? Research shows that the iPhone 16e performs far worse than Android phones powered by Qualcomm chips