Jump to content

Contributors to this blog

The RF evolution/revolution of the HTC 2016 Nexus

WiWavelength

20,734 views

blog-0133502001471589857.png

by Andrew J. Shepherd

Sprint 4G Rollout Updates

Friday, August 19, 2016 - 2:04 AM MDT

 

Earlier this week, the two HTC 2016 Nexus handsets -- codenamed "Marlin" and "Sailfish" -- were caught in the net of the FCC OET (Office of Engineering and Technology) authorization database.

 

While Google has yet to reveal them officially as Nexus handsets, that HTC is the manufacturer of choice this year has been a heavily leaked secret the past few months. And the circumstantial evidence now is overwhelming.

 

The FCC grantee code, NM8G, appends a "G" to the usual NM8 grantee code for HTC branded devices, and the user manual declaration document posits that the final draft manual will be available publicly on the Google web site in the Nexus support section. Neither handset has been identified or named individually, though the 2PW4100 likely is the larger "Marlin," the 2PW2100, the smaller "Sailfish."

 

Both are at least the domestic variants with airlink support across the board for VZW, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint. No international variants have passed through the FCC OET. Unless international variants do get authorized in the coming days/weeks, the two HTC Nexus handsets could end up in uncharted waters as single variants for the world, covering all supported international LTE bands, too. Full disclosure, however, probably will have to wait until the Google announcement event when accompanying tech specs are published.

 

In the meantime, the domestic RF uplink test results and declarations are out in the world. S4GRU will not run down every last RF capability. But, just to confirm, some of the highlights are...

  • LTE bands 2/4/5/7/12/13/17/25/26/29/30/41
  • VoLTE bands 2/4/5/12/13 (for VZW, AT&T, and T-Mobile)
  • Downlink 2x/3x CA
  • Dual, switched WWAN Tx antennas 0 and 1, bottom and top
  • 802.11ac 2x MIMO

The primary purpose of this article is to present a retrospective on the uplink RF powers of the current 2013-2016 era of 3GPP/3GPP2, Sprint compatible Nexus handsets as well as two recent HTC handsets. Those domestic variant Nexus handsets and the Sprint variant HTC One A9 and HTC 10 are the RF and design forebears of the 2016 Nexus handsets. So, how do the new kids on the block hold up to their predecessors?

 

S4GRU culled relevant data across all eight handsets from thousands of pages of authorization documents in the FCC OET. For the radiated power figures, the usual clauses about lab testing versus real world performance and uplink versus downlink always apply. The figures represent best averaged and rounded estimates of maximum uplink ERP/EIRP test results provided to the FCC OET in the authorization filings for the domestic variant Nexus devices and Sprint variant HTC devices. See below:

 

14y33ol.png

 

The numbers can speak for themselves. The LG, Motorola, and Huawei manufactured handsets generally are more powerful. The HTC handsets are not blatantly deficient -- though the One A9 comes uncomfortably close -- but the 2016 Nexus do spec out typically average or slightly below.

 

Source: FCC

  • Like 14


8 Comments


Recommended Comments

I'm suspecting these Nexus devices will be a big letdown this year. I got the impression from reading certain articles about the HTC Nexus models that perhaps Google made some concessions to get HTC to manufacture these this year.Google should never have to do this when choosing a manufacturer for the Nexus line.

 

For that matter, Google really should have chosen Sony, or even Blackberry. I know that could really help Blackberry's business, who would do anything to make the perfect Nexus, if given the opportunity to do so.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I'm suspecting these Nexus devices will be a big letdown this year. I got the impression from reading certain articles about the HTC Nexus models that perhaps Google made some concessions to get HTC to manufacture these this year.Google should never have to do this when choosing a manufacturer for the Nexus line.

 

For that matter, Google really should have chosen Sony, or even Blackberry. I know that could really help Blackberry's business, who would do anything to make the perfect Nexus, if given the opportunity to do so.

 

HTC is as good a phone manufacturer as anybody. The only concession I see Google having to make is the desire to sell the devices for Sub-$500 prices, not in terms of quality or features of the devices themselves.

Share this comment


Link to comment

For that matter, Google really should have chosen Sony, or even Blackberry. I know that could really help Blackberry's business, who would do anything to make the perfect Nexus, if given the opportunity to do so.

 

That is a two way street.  Google does not point a finger and, voila, it just selects a Nexus OEM.  The OEM has to accept or submit an RFP.  Not every OEM is going to do so.

 

Think about it.  What does an OEM gain by making a Nexus device?  A generally low margin, niche device with primarily Google branding, not OEM branding.

 

To make matters even more attractive, that Nexus device could compete in the same product space as one of the OEM's own branded devices.  See the Nexus 5 and the LG G2.

 

In short, I highly doubt that Sony and BlackBerry were in the running this year or ever will be considered to be a Nexus OEM.

 

AJ

Share this comment


Link to comment

 

To make matters even more attractive, that Nexus device could compete in the same product space as one of the OEM's own branded devices.  See the Nexus 5 and the LG G2.

 

In short, I highly doubt that Sony and BlackBerry were in the running this year or ever will be considered to be a Nexus OEM.

 

AJ

 

While they are competing in the same product space, an OEM is saving on R&D as much of the work is reused on the OEM branded device.  Google is paying them to make the device, so there is a savings to offset the lost sales.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I joined this site because I'm interested in learning from you all.I hope that I won't be in the way.I clicked on this website because I was trying to find out about Sprint Spark and I found you all and may I say you have really "sparked" my interest. Thank you.

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

Is iPhone 7 the only Sprint phone with 2x CA Uplink?  I thought that starting with iPhone and Pixel, all new phones would have it.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • The Wall Articles

  • Wall Comments

    • to me rural coverage matters most....because i like being able to make phone calls and send texts in remote areas of the country ...i dont care about speeds i just care about per square mile coverage and over all usability and reliability
    • Tell us how you really feel @MrZorbatron!

      I think that most cellular players exaggerate their coverage. Yes, I suspected a long time ago that T-Mobile was one of the most egregious. Now according to the merger presentation, they will end up with 85,000 macro sites. That will be enough to match the coverage of pretty much everybody.

      Like you, I appreciate not having dropped calls or undelivered texts. In my area on my T-Mobile MVNO, I don't get any but can't say it won't happen elsewhere. Once Charter offers service via their Verizon MVNO, I think I will move my 4 personal lines there. My business line will stay on Sprint/T-Mobile, well, because I can't control that.
    • I do not welcome any part of this.  I don't think T-Mobile really cares about doing anything they say they care about.  I have seen how truly bad their network is in the ways that matter for essential communication, and I want nothing to do with it.  Say what you want about Verizon, but the one thing they have in common with Sprint is that they have historically built out a solid network before trying to make it extremely fast.  I don't care about 50 Mbps to my phone.  I care about calls that don't get disconnected constantly.  I care about that stock trade getting through when I send it, even if carried by EVDO, because EVDO still gets it through. Sprint's "Outdoor coverage" maps might seem exaggerated to some, but T-Mobile's maps are a complete joke.  Maybe Michigan is a bubble, the only state where this is true, but it really is very true here.  T-Mobile is the network of dropped and undelivered calls, mysterious disconnection, and "call failed" error messages. If this goes through, look for me at the nearest Verizon store because price to me is absolutely irrelevant.  I see two things happening if this merger goes through:  1:  Sprint spectrum is used to bolster capacity at T-Mobile sites, and 2:  As much of the current Sprint network as possible goes away, even if it means losing sites that would provide valuable fill-in density.  I saw the latter happen with Sprint and Nextel, after they insisted that all Nextel sites that could serve to increase Sprint coverage would be used.  Similarly, there were locations T-Mobile could have used MetroPCS locations to improve their own coverage but didn't, even where it left holes in their network.
    • Not when Verizon just bought 1GHz of mmwave spectrum. Those were the policies of the past. If it does not get approved, it would the loss of jobs and the fact that it might not be good for consumers. Although when I look at the table on this page, comparing unlimited plans, it is already evident that the other three are not really competing and Sprint's lower prices are not working since they did not manage to steal anybody from the other other three. To me it is evident that were Sprint to remain independent they need massive investment in their network since competing on price is not enough anymore and low prices just deprive their network of investment.
    • And I would definitely say that merger probably or probably not won't be approved. If not I would have to say it would be on the grounds of cellular asset divestiture.
×