Head to head
Apple iPhone 17 ProvsApple iPhone 16
The short answer
Choose the iPhone 17 Pro for peak brightness, more base storage, battery life per charge and video playback time. Choose the iPhone 16 for lower weight. The iPhone 16 is £400 cheaper at UK RRP (£699 against £1,099). Apple publishes no date for either; its record with retired iPhones points to 2032–2036 for the iPhone 17 Pro and 2031–2035 for the iPhone 16, our estimate, not Apple’s.
- Released
- 2025-09-19endoflife.date, retrieved 2026-08-19
- Price
- £1,099Apple UK store, retrieved 2026-08-19
- Security updates until
- Not published by the makerendoflife.date — iPhone, retrieved 2026-08-19
- Released
- 2024-09-20endoflife.date, retrieved 2026-08-19
- Price
- £699Apple UK store, retrieved 2026-08-19
- Security updates until
- Not published by the makerendoflife.date — iPhone, retrieved 2026-08-19
4 wins for iPhone 17 Pro1 win for iPhone 166 gaps borderline0 differences you won’t notice£400 apart at RRP
Verdict: iPhone 17 Pro ahead on 4 rows, iPhone 16 on 1 row
On the makers’ published figures, the iPhone 17 Pro wins on peak brightness (3,000 nits against 2,000 nits), storage (base) (256 GB against 128 GB), battery per charge (47 h against 37 h) and claimed video playback (31 h against 22 h); the iPhone 16 wins on weight (170 g against 204 g). 6 gaps are borderline, differences most people would not notice: display size (6.3 in against 6.1 in) for the iPhone 17 Pro, HDR peak brightness (1,600 nits against 1,200 nits) for the iPhone 17 Pro, RAM (12 GB against 8 GB, both from GSMArena) for the iPhone 17 Pro, battery capacity (3,998 mAh against 3,561 mAh, both from GSMArena) for the iPhone 17 Pro, fast charging (40 W against 20 W) for the iPhone 17 Pro and Geekbench 6 (CPU, multi-core) (8,770 against 7,558, both from Geekbench Browser) for the iPhone 17 Pro. Both state the same typical brightness, battery lifespan and wireless charging. The other 35 rows have no threshold or no direction to judge by, so nobody wins them.
True to scale
Outlines from each maker’s published dimensions, drawn to scale. Corner rounding is our drawing convention, not a measurement.
Specifications
A win is marked only where the figures can be ranked and the gap is one you could notice. A row the site has no threshold for says whether the two differ, and that it is not ranking them. = marks the same figure on both, ≠ not ranked a difference with no ranking. Every figure carries its source.
Body
Display
Platform
Memory
Camera
Battery
Connectivity
Benchmarks
2 attributes neither phone has a sourced figure for
Google Mobile Services · AnTuTu benchmark. Rows appear as sources are cited — a gap in our data, not a statement about either phone.
Questions
Is the iPhone 17 Pro better than the iPhone 16?
On the figures, neither is better overall: the iPhone 17 Pro wins on peak brightness, 3,000 nits against 2,000 nits (both Apple UK), storage (base), 256 GB against 128 GB (both Apple UK), battery per charge, 47 h against 37 h (both EU energy label) and claimed video playback, 31 h against 22 h (both Apple UK); the iPhone 16 wins on weight, 170 g against 204 g (both Apple UK). Every other row is borderline, too close to notice, or not ranked.
Which has the better battery?
The iPhone 17 Pro, by a gap you’d notice: battery per charge, 47 h against 37 h (both EU energy label). The iPhone 17 Pro, by a gap you’d notice: claimed video playback, 31 h against 22 h (both Apple UK). The iPhone 17 Pro is ahead, narrowly: battery capacity, 3,998 mAh against 3,561 mAh (both GSMArena), a borderline gap most people would not notice.
Which is lighter?
The iPhone 16, by a gap you’d notice: weight, 170 g against 204 g (both Apple UK).
Which has the brighter screen?
The iPhone 17 Pro, by a gap you’d notice: peak brightness, 3,000 nits against 2,000 nits (both Apple UK). Both state 1,000 nits for typical brightness (Apple UK). The iPhone 17 Pro is brighter, narrowly: HDR peak brightness, 1,600 nits against 1,200 nits (both Apple UK), a borderline gap most people would not notice.
Which gets updates for longer?
Apple publishes no date for either; its record with retired iPhones points to 2032–2036 for the iPhone 17 Pro and 2031–2035 for the iPhone 16, our estimate, not Apple’s. Sources: Apple’s record from endoflife.date and Apple security releases.
Which is cheaper?
The iPhone 16 is £400 cheaper at UK RRP (£699 against £1,099). Prices from iPhone 17 Pro: Apple UK store; iPhone 16: Apple UK store.
Other comparisons
The pairs a buyer of either phone would also weigh. Any two phones in the catalogue can be compared from the chooser.