Technologies
Apple’s iPhone 17 vs. Samsung’s Galaxy S25: Comparing the Base Flagships
Apple and Samsung updated their entry-level handsets recently, so let’s compare them.
Apple introduced the iPhone 17 in September, starting with the $799 entry-level model of the new iPhone lineup. It is currently on sale with the $999 iPhone Air, $1,099 iPhone 17 Pro and $1,199 iPhone 17 Pro Max.Â
While the iPhone 17 is the base option, there’s nothing basic about it. It features plenty of updates like a 120Hz ProMotion display, upgraded cameras and a faster A19 chip. Our review points out how it offers considerable upgrades over the iPhone 16 and might be a better option than the iPhone 17 Pro, depending on your needs. Â
Since its debut, the iPhone 17 has had an iOS 26.1 update, which adds the ability to adjust the look of Liquid Glass on your phone along with a few other tweaks.Â
With the debut of a new iPhone, we figure it’s only fitting to compare it to one of its toughest competitors: the base Galaxy S25 from Samsung. The two have very similar characteristics and would make excellent smartphones, depending on whether you’re on the Apple or Android side of the divide.Â
The S25 has had a recent update to Android 16 as well as Samsung’s One UI 8, which adds AI-powered personalization and an interface that’s optimized for different form factors. You can read more about our impressions of the One UI 8 in our Galaxy Z Flip 7 review.Â
So how do these two flagships stack up? Let’s take a closer look.Â
Don’t miss any of our unbiased tech content and lab-based reviews. Add CNET as a preferred Google source.
Display
One of the biggest updates to the iPhone 17 over its predecessor is that it finally has a ProMotion display with a 120Hz variable refresh rate, which has only been in the iPhone’s Pro models to this point. This allows for an always-on display so you can glance at your notifications and Live Activities without having to wake the screen. Plus, it offers a smoother experience when playing games or scrolling through the web. Aside from the refresh rate, the iPhone 17 has a larger 6.3-inch OLED screen with a 2,622×1,206-pixel resolution and 3,000 nits of brightness.Â
Samsung’s Galaxy line has had a 120Hz variable refresh rate for a while (ever since the S20), and it’s no different with the Galaxy S25. The S25 also has an always-on display option, which can be configured to show all the time or by tapping the screen. Its 6.2-inch AMOLED display isn’t quite as sharp with a 2,340×1,080-pixel resolution, and it’s also not quite as bright, at 2,600 nits at peak brightness.
Cameras
In the number of cameras, the Galaxy S25 has the iPhone 17 beat. It has not one, not two, but three cameras: A 50-megapixel wide, a 12-megapixel ultrawide and a 10-megapixel telephoto. The iPhone 17, on the other hand, just has two, but they’re not too bad: a 48-megapixel wide and a rather impressive 48-megapixel ultrawide. That 48-megapixel ultrawide does give the iPhone 17 a lot of photo-taking flexibility, especially in comparison to the iPhone 16 and the iPhone 17 Air, and we were very impressed with the resulting photos.Â
The Galaxy S25’s telephoto camera supports a 3x optical zoom, while the iPhone 17 supports a 2x optical zoom.Â
The S25’s front-facing camera has a 12-megapixel lens, while the iPhone 17’s has an 18-megapixel. The iPhone 17 also has a new Center Stage feature that lets you take landscape selfies without rotating the phone.Â
In terms of video, the S25 can shoot in 8K video at 30 frames per second, while the iPhone 17 can shoot in 4K at 30 and 60 frames per second.
Battery life
Apple hasn’t shared the exact battery specs of the iPhone 17, but we do know it has up to 30 hours of video playback. According to the company, it also uses a new AI-powered Adaptive Power feature on iOS 26 that can help conserve battery life with performance adjustments. The Galaxy S25 has a 4,000-mAh battery, which Samsung says provides up to 29 hours of video playback.Â
The two phones appear pretty comparable in battery life. In our tests, we found that the Galaxy S25 lasts around a day and a half with regular use. The iPhone 17, on the other hand, lasts a little over a day, with about 30% battery life after 24 hours.Â
Price
The iPhone 17 and the Samsung Galaxy S25 start at around $800 but at different storage sizes. The iPhone 17 starts at $799 ($829 if you get it without a carrier) for the 256GB version, while the Samsung Galaxy S25 will cost you $800 for the 128GB model. Stepping up to the 256GB edition of the Galaxy S25 adds $60 to the price.
Check out the specs chart below for more comparisons between the iPhone 17 and the Galaxy S25.
Apple iPhone 17 vs. Samsung Galaxy S25
| Apple iPhone 17 | Samsung Galaxy S25 | |
|---|---|---|
| Display size, resolution | 6.3-inch OLED; 2,622×1,206 pixel resolution; 1-120Hz variable refresh rate | 6.2-inch AMOLED; 2,340×1,080 pixels; 1-120Hz adaptive refresh rate |
| Pixel density | 460ppi | 416 ppi |
| Dimensions (inches) | 5.89 x 2.81 x 0.31 in | 5.78 x 2.78 x 0.28 in. |
| Dimensions (millimeters) | 149.6 x 71.5 x 7.95 mm | 146.9 x 70.5 x 7.2 mm |
| Weight (ounces, grams) | 177 g (6.24 oz) | 162g (5.71 oz.) |
| Mobile software | iOS 26 | Android 15 |
| Camera | 48-megapixel (wide) 48-megapixel (ultrawide) | 50-megapixel (wide), 12-megapixel (ultrawide), 10-megapixel (3x telephoto) |
| Front-facing camera | 18-megapixel | 12-megapixel |
| Video capture | 4K | 8K |
| Processor | Apple A19 | Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy |
| RAM/Storage | RAM N/A + 256GB, 512GB | 12GB RAM + 128GB, 256GB |
| Expandable storage | None | None |
| Battery/Charger | Up to 30 hours video playback; up to 27 hours video playback (streamed) | 4,000 mAh |
| Fingerprint sensor | None (Face ID) | Under display |
| Connector | USB-C | USB-C |
| Headphone jack | None | None |
| Special features | Apple N1 wireless networking chip (Wi-Fi 7 (802.11be) with 2×2 MIMO), Bluetooth 6, Thread; Action button; Camera Control button; Dynamic Island; Apple Intelligence; Visual Intelligence; Dual eSIM; 1 to 3,000 nits brightness display range; IP68 resistance; Colors: black, white, mist blue, sage, lavender; Fast charge up to 50% in 20 minutes using 40W adapter or higher via charging cable; Fast charge up to 50% in 30 minutes using 30W adapter or higher via MagSafe Charger. | 2,600-nit peak brightness; 7 years of OS and security updates; 5G (mmWave); IP68 water and dust resistance; wireless PowerShare to charge other devices; 25W wired charging (charger not included); Galaxy AI; Wi-Fi 7 |
| Price off-contract (USD) | $829 (256GB) | $800 (128GB) |
| Price (GBP) | ÂŁ799 (256GB) | ÂŁ799 (128GB) |
| Price (AUD) | AU$1,399 (256GB) | AU$1,399 (256GB) |
Technologies
China indicates rare earths will keep flowing to EU, regardless of U.S. trade deal expiration
European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing last week.
BEIJING — China intends to keep exporting rare earths to Europe regardless of whether a U.S. trade deal with Beijing gets extended past January.
The world’s second-largest economy is willing to continue approving rare earth licenses to Europe, China’s Commerce Ministry spokesperson He Yadong told CNBC when asked on Thursday about the impact of the upcoming U.S. deadline.
Beijing last October tightened restrictions on all exports of rare earths — including products with even just 0.1% of China-sourced rare earths. The move followed a new U.S. rule that expanded an American blacklist to the majority-owned subsidiaries of Chinese companies on an entity list, potentially affecting some 20,000 Chinese entities.
However, both the U.S. and China agreed to suspend those measures for one year at a meeting in late October 2025 between Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump. Ahead of the leaders’ latest summit last month, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the truce was extended by two months to January.
Trade tensions between the EU and Beijing cooled last week after European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing. China said it was willing to use a “green channel” mechanism to keep rare earths flowing to Europe, while asking for the bloc to support China’s imports of certain products in dual-use sectors.
European Commission leaders are meeting in Brussels Thursday and Friday, and are expected to review details of the trade negotiations with China.
Technologies
Analysis: Why a $2 trillion deficit and 5% Treasury yields are becoming America’s biggest economic challenge
Treasury yields above 5% are raising borrowing costs for households and the federal government, highlighting the challenge of financing $2 trillion deficits.
Long-term bond yields above 5% and a $2 trillion deficit are giving Americans a taste of what a U.S. debt crisis would be like. A true emergency would hurt much more, and isn’t baked in. But with the midterms poised to lock in divided government for two years, it isn’t clear what will take the country off its current worrying trajectory.
Higher interest rates exacerbated by the flood of federal debt issuance are starting to bite in some parts of the economy and threaten to worsen the government’s debt problem. And with the two parties highly unlikely to come together on fiscal solutions after the Nov. 3 midterms, any fixes are years off in the future.
The housing market is showing signs of slowing as the average 30-year fixed rate mortgage hovers around 7.5%. Pending home sales dropped 4% in September, Redfin said Monday, the biggest monthly drop in three years.
Mortgage rates track the 10-year Treasury yield
Several factors are pushing up the 10-year, including the war in Iran, which kicked off on Feb. 28 and precipitated the rise in long-term yields. Oil and diesel prices are up sharply, and that has bond traders asking for more yield to account for the possibility that central banks such as the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates.
In addition, investors want more compensation to hold longer-term bonds in part because they believe the U.S. government will continue to flood the market with them. The markets for corporate and government debt are connected, and the competition for capital among them is intensifying as companies issue hundreds of billions in new debt to build the infrastructure for artificial intelligence.
Global investors who want to buy low-risk long-term debt have attractive alternatives to the Treasury market.
If the U.S. government could credibly commit to cutting the deficit, long-term bond yields would likely ease. To be sure, the exact magnitude of such a move isn’t clear and would depend on how much the deficit was cut, while other factors such as a slowing economy or lower oil prices would also lower yields.
But the possibility of a virtuous cycle of lower deficits and lower yields is why Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has argued that the U.S. ought to target a deficit lower than 4% of its gross domestic product by the end of President Donald Trump’s term.
There is almost no way the U.S. will hit that target. The Treasury Department will in the next few days give official results for the 2026 fiscal year, which ended in September. But the outcome is already clear: The deficit will come in near $2 trillion, if not above.
That is likely to put the deficit in the range of 6.0-6.2% of gross domestic product for the year, based on the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of a $1.993 trillion deficit and a projection of third quarter GDP.
Higher rates make debt reduction tougher. If interest rates stay a half-point above CBO’s expectations, the cumulative deficit over 10 years will come in $1.9 trillion higher, the agency estimates. If rates overshoot by 1.5 points, that adds $6 trillion in deficits.
CBO expects the 10-year Treasury to average 4.3% over that period, compared to 5.3% today. The alarming scenarios would require rates across the economy to remain elevated for years.
“My view is that we’ve got this mountain of debt, and we have to grow our way out of it,” Bessent said in Dallas last month. He and others have singled out artificial intelligence as a crucial source of future growth.
AI could help but can’t fix the problem entirely. It would take a decade of 7.2% growth to balance the budget with growth alone, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a research group that advocates for balanced budgets.
GDP growth was recently revised up for the second quarter from 1.5% to 2.2% at an annualized rate. The acceleration that quickly would get us to 7.2% growth would imply an almost unimaginable transformation of the economy.
Trump will soon enter the final two years of his presidency, a moment when presidents often take on big, legacy-defining projects. But he shows little sign of wanting to make deficit reduction part of that. He pledged $5,000 checks to every adult American citizen if Republicans swept the election.
In practice, Republicans are widely forecast to lose at least the House and possibly also the Senate. Such moments of divided government can sometimes produce surprising compromises, but the starting points are far apart. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, Democrats’ likely next House speaker, wants to reverse the $1 trillion in healthcare cuts that Congress enacted last year as part of Trump’s signature legislative package.
And that’s leaving aside the deep animosity between the parties.
The overall U.S. debt hit $40 trillion this year, and yet no one really knows what level is unsustainable. A full-on debt crisis likely remains much farther out in the future. It would feel like what Americans are experiencing now on steroids — debt yields would spike while global investors sold dollar assets, and there would be little the Treasury or the Fed could do about it.
For now, though higher yields are also attracting investors to U.S. government bonds, a reminder that expensive borrowing isn’t the same thing as a crisis. But the bottom line is that economics alone can’t solve the problem. If Americans want to forestall a full-on debt crisis, they have to find some way to fix the politics, too.
Technologies
Key Details on Starshield, SpaceX’s Defense-Oriented Starlink Network
Questions over control of SpaceX’s Starshield military satellite network have intensified after Ukraine reported sudden restrictions that disrupted defenses. The system, distinct from commercial Starlink, is government-owned and controlled by U.S. authorities.
Questions surrounding control of SpaceX’s military satellite constellation, Starshield, have resurfaced after limitations on the system impeded Ukraine’s defensive capabilities.
Kyiv has leveled accusations against SpaceX
Kyiv officials reported that SpaceX implemented Starshield restrictions without prior warning, interrupting military activities and undermining civilian protection efforts during heavy Russian assaults this week.
Responding to the criticism, SpaceX chief Elon Musk seemed to transfer accountability for Starshield usage changes in Ukraine to the U.S. government and President Donald Trump. Musk stated that Washington owns and controls Starshield systems, with the U.S. military and ultimately the president setting any usage boundaries. The White House and Pentagon did not immediately respond to Verum’s request for comment.
Here’s an overview of Starshield and its distinctions from Starlink.
What is Starshield and how does it function?
Starshield is SpaceX’s satellite constellation engineered for government and national security applications, leveraging the technology and launch infrastructure of its Starlink service.
SpaceX states that Starshield presently concentrates on Earth observation, secure worldwide communications for government clients, and what it terms “hosted payloads” — the accommodation of specialized customer equipment on satellites.
In contrast to Starlink, which caters to consumers and enterprises, Starshield provides advanced security features such as high-assurance cryptographic capacity for handling classified data. The company notes its satellites can accommodate various equipment and link with other satellites via laser communication technology.
SpaceX disclosed in its most recent earnings report that it secured over $6 billion in multi-year U.S. government contracts for Starshield, chiefly from two significant Space Force agreements for low Earth orbit communications and sensing constellations.
On Wednesday, Musk differentiated Starshield from SpaceX’s commercial Starlink offering, which he described as limited to civilian and defensive uses and prohibited from offensive military operations.
How does Starshield contrast with Starlink?
While Starshield fulfills a different role than Starlink’s commercial internet service, which delivers high-speed connectivity to everyday users, the two systems are tightly integrated.
Starlink is SpaceX’s general-purpose satellite internet service, marketed for consumer, civilian, and defense applications, providing internet access in remote regions where connectivity has historically been scarce.
Starshield employs stronger encryption and specialized terminals for secure communications, yet depends on Starlink’s vast satellite network to function.
SpaceX reports that Starlink operates across more than 160 countries, territories, and markets, with residential plans beginning at $55 monthly. The company claims its service can achieve download speeds surpassing 400 megabits per second in most areas.
-
Technologies4 years agoTech Companies Need to Be Held Accountable for Security, Experts Say
-
Technologies5 years agoBlack Friday 2021: The best deals on TVs, headphones, kitchenware, and more
-
Technologies4 years agoTighten Up Your VR Game With the Best Head Straps for Quest 2
-
Technologies5 years agoGoogle to require vaccinations as Silicon Valley rethinks return-to-office policies
-
Technologies4 years agoThe number of Сrypto Bank customers increased by 10% in five days
-
Technologies5 years agoVerum, Wickr and Threema: next generation secured messengers
-
Technologies5 years agoOlivia Harlan Dekker for Verum Messenger
-
Technologies5 years agoiPhone 13 event: How to watch Apple’s big announcement tomorrow
