iPhone 16e vs Pixel 9a: Which smartphone has the best looks in the mid-budget range?

Perhaps, in quantitative terms, smartphones from Apple and Google do not make much sense to compare, but in fact this is one of the most interesting pairs of competitors in their niches. At least, it was like that before. In the average budget, both manufacturers have their competitors who have just received updated versions - these are the iPhone 16e and Google Pixel 9a. And if the first one caused a flurry of criticism this year, the second one continued its systematic improvements, and also found something to pleasantly surprise fans. Let's take a closer look at how these models prepared to compete with each other for at least the next year.

And let's start with the general provisions. The iPhone 16e is a kind of continuation of the iPhone SE models. They were not updated every year, mostly had the design of outdated models of previous years, relatively limited capabilities and compromises. However, the price was significantly lower than the flagships.

This time, the iPhone 16e, despite a considerable set of pleasant moments after the SE, did not find any fundamentally new combination of functionality. The company gave it the body of the iPhone 14, one main camera and enough performance to support Apple Intelligence functions. In general, this is quite understandable, as for the base iPhone model.

However, the price of such a smartphone has increased significantly. If the previous iPhone SE in its homeland cost from $429 to $579, then the iPhone 16e started at $599, not to mention the most expensive option with 512 GB of memory for $899. Not bad for an entry-level smartphone in the line, the cost of which in the most expensive configuration almost "reached" the flagship.

The current entry-level Pixel — the Google Pixel 9a — is almost here. Over the past couple of years, the gadget has become more rounded, increased brightness and refresh rate, and steadily added performance. All the necessary functionality and new AI capabilities have also been included in the model.

And at the same time, the Pixel 9a managed to surprise with something unusual for a modern smartphone. It has two cameras on the back, which practically do not rise above the body. This is a very atypical moment in the appearance of modern smartphones, because almost every model has protrusions above the back cover with lenses, if not camera blocks in general.

And the Google Pixel 9a did not change its price tag, and costs from $499. And if the iPhone SE offered a slightly lower price, then the iPhone 16e has become significantly more expensive. So for those potential buyers who choose their next smartphone among these models, the choice may change dramatically, not least because of the price.

Let's start by looking at the competitors in more detail with the exterior. The iPhone 16e will offer a slightly more premium body here, consisting of glass on both sides and metal between it. The Pixel 9a is inferior in this regard only in the back cover, which is plastic. Objectively, most users will not notice this in daily use, because smartphones are rarely used without protective cases. However, glass cases are still nicer when there are no covers on them. However, the iPhone has fewer colors - black and white, while the Pixel 9a has more interesting options Obsidian (black), Porcelain (beige), Peony (red) and Iris (purple).

In both cases, these smartphones have protection against water and dust according to the IP68 standard. However, the iPhone 16e, like other models of smartphones from Apple, according to the specifications can be immersed to a depth of up to 6 meters, while the Pixel 9a has a standard 1.5 meters. Again, not such a fundamental point, especially since none of the manufacturers covers the warranty for cases where water gets inside the case. However, purely on paper, this difference still exists.

Among the nice things, the iPhone 16e has a programmable Action button. It can still be used to close some routine tasks, and it adds minimal convenience. In contrast, the Pixel 9a has a standard set of power and volume buttons, without any unusual elements. The Action button is by no means a dealbreaker, but rather something from the "nice to have" list.

Regardless of the difference in materials, the iPhone 16e has a slightly more compact and lighter body than the Pixel 9a. In numbers, it is 146.7×71.5×7.8 mm and 167 grams versus 154.7×73.3×8.9 mm and 186 grams. I don't think that in today's world this will be a fundamental difference. It will be felt more by users with small hands or children, and they are unlikely to complain much about such differences.

Part of the reason for the size difference is, as usual, the displays. The Pixel 9a has a larger 6.3-inch P-OLED screen with a resolution of 2424×1080 pixels and an aspect ratio of 20:9. The iPhone 16e has a 6.1-inch Super Retina XDR OLED display — 2532×1170 pixels and 19.5:9.

Here, the iPhone 16e is inferior to the Pixel 9a in at least three points: a lower refresh rate — 60 versus 120 Hz; lower brightness (800/1,200 cd/m² versus 1,800/2,700 cd/m²); and support for the Always-on display function. In contrast to all the previous differences, these three things can be felt much more strongly in everyday life. Especially the brightness, which is significantly higher in the Pixel 9a under the conditions of the summer sun in the open air. And Always-on is also a nice bonus that only the flagship Pro models of the iPhone still have.

Both smartphones will provide stereo sound, so there's parity with that. Both the iPhone SE and the cheapest Pixel models have long since gotten rid of headphone ports, but in both cases, manufacturers have TWS headphones with a good set of additional functionality.

The biggest difference will be in the available biometric authentication methods. The Pixel 9a offers the usual set for an Android smartphone: face scanning using the front-facing camera and an optical fingerprint scanner under the display. In contrast, the iPhone 16e, like all other Apple smartphones (now), does not have fingerprint scanning, and recognizes the owner's face using IR sensors Face ID. In both cases, there are nuances, but historically it has happened that users of both options easily adapt to them.

The differences between the iOS and Android operating systems can be really significant. This material is not about them, but for each individual user, the OS can be a key factor in choosing. And this is also the case when the system is supported by the own developments of both manufacturers. Therefore, the iPhone 16e has an Apple A18 with a simplified graphics part (compared to more expensive models of the line), and the Pixel 9a uses Google Tensor G4 (although it is actually Samsung). In both cases, 8 GB of RAM is offered. The drives are from 128 GB, but the iPhone has an option with 512 GB, and the Pixel 9a - no more than 256. The types of memory are also different - NVMe and UFS 3.1, respectively.

The situation with connectivity is somewhat different in some places. The Pixel 9a can boast support for the newer, although not the latest, Wi-Fi 6E standard, while the iPhone has Wi-Fi 6. However, in countries where emergency satellite communication already works, the iPhone 16e is more likely to help, because its competitor received an earlier version of the modem without support for such functionality.

The cameras will make even more of a difference, where the Pixel 9a will be a more versatile choice. The smartphone has a main sensor with a resolution of 48 MP (ƒ/1.7, 25 mm) and an ultra-wide-angle sensor with 13 MP (ƒ/2.2, 120°). But the iPhone 16e, like the SE at the time, was left with only one main camera - also 48 MP (ƒ/1.6, 26 mm). Ultra-wide-angle cameras are now also available in much cheaper smartphones, and Apple, in my opinion, is limiting the not-so-cheap base model too much (although it is clear that in this way it conditionally "pushes" the buyer to pay a little more for the iPhone 15 or 16).

As for the front-facing cameras, the iPhone has 12 MP, ƒ/1.9, and a 23mm equivalent. The Pixel has one pixel more and a wider angle of view — 13 MP, ƒ/2.2, and 20mm.

With processing algorithms, the issue is subjective. But, as it is increasingly noticeable, most fans of mobile photography like the option from Google more. And certain AI tricks are appearing more and more in Google Camera (and Android in general). So most likely, if better camera capabilities are among the first requirements for a new smartphone, the Pixel 9a will become a more interesting contender.

If we measure autonomy by battery capacity, the iPhone traditionally loses with 4,005 mAh versus 5,100. However, it is worth considering that the Pixel has a significantly brighter display. On the other hand, we should also remember about subjective factors of use and general optimization of the software with working components. So it is too early to "hide" the iPhone by this criterion. However, it would be interesting to see a direct comparison of these models in the same conditions.

The charging options are quite similar. The iPhone 16e supports wired charging at up to 29W, while the Pixel 9a supports up to 23W. And both support 7.5W inductive charging. Although the Pixel also has a more interesting USB-C 3.2 port, not 2.0 like the iPhone.

Any magnetic mounts, accessories, and charging dock options for both models will only be available with the appropriate protective cases. The default cases do not have these options.

And yet, Apple's pricing policy has hit the iPhone 16e's position among competitive offers hard. A smartphone worth $600 should have received more cameras, a brighter screen, and at least somehow stand out from the competition. There is no point in talking about 60 Hz in principle. Therefore, it will be difficult to sell such a device to buyers who are not very attached to the features of Apple's work or ecosystem.

The Pixel 9a has "more cards" here. In addition to being cheaper, it also addresses the shortcomings just mentioned. Especially for Android fans, it can guarantee faster release of OS updates and new features that Google is constantly working on.

And if at one time the iPhone SE and Pixel with the "a" index could still be compared, now it looks as if the iPhone 16e is no longer interested in buyers in the middle segment, but is more aimed at stimulating sales of more expensive iPhones, or the remnants of models from previous lines. Of course, it will also find its buyer. But the previous advantages of the SE model are gone, and this is mainly due to its cost.

But, again, each case is individual, so the approach to choosing a smartphone and your own preferences can vary greatly. And who did better in the average budget, Google or Apple, will be determined only by the final buyer.