Jump to content

EVO 4G LTE WiFi performance - completely pointless but impressive


irev210

Recommended Posts

Impressive that the EVO has no problem hitting over 90mbit over wifi... not many phones can do that.

 

Over at anandtech, they show the EVO and the One X hitting over 100mbit.

 

While not really that functional, or practical, I suppose if you did a lot of local music syncing over wifi it would be rather fast.

 

Note that I am connected to 5GHz wifi with 40MHz channel width configured.

 

7642989674_f0b9e4b328.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting on the 40mhz. I know other mobile devices would only handshake at 65 or 72 using only 1x1 20mhz 802.11n. Most would handshake at 65 due to the guard interval used. I haven't checked on the EVO if it will actually use a 40mhz 2.4ghz channel. What handshake rates are you seeing on 5ghz?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't checked on the EVO if it will actually use a 40mhz 2.4ghz channel. What handshake rates are you seeing on 5ghz?

 

The hardware/software does not support 802.11n 40 MHz channels at 2.4 GHz, only 5 GHz.

 

Maximum supported MCS index is 7 (150 Mbps in 40 MHz, 72 Mbps in 20 MHz).

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hardware/software does not support 802.11n 40 MHz channels at 2.4 GHz, only 5 GHz.

 

Maximum supported MCS index is 7 (150 Mbps in 40 MHz, 72 Mbps in 20 MHz).

 

AJ

 

I figured all it did was MCS 7 as it was only 1x1. Pulling 96 on a 150 handshake is pretty damn good. Pretty clean connection!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While not really that functional, or practical, I suppose if you did a lot of local music syncing over wifi it would be rather fast.

 

Very practical, the less time Tx/Rx the longer the battery life, faster responses too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very practical, the less time Tx/Rx the longer the battery life, faster responses too.

 

No, do not generalize like that. Higher order modulation and wider bandwidth for faster data throughput (hence shorter Tx/Rx time) often require greater power.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
    • T-Mobile owns the PCS G-block across the contiguous U.S. so they can just use that spectrum to broadcast direct to cell. Ideally your phone would only connect to it in areas where there isn't any terrestrial service available.
    • So how does this whole direct to satellite thing fit in with the way it works now? Carriers spend billions for licenses for specific areas. So now T-Mobile can offer service direct to customers without having a Terrestrial license first?
    • I wouldn’t be shocked if it’s Verizon, too. In my area they have multiple nodes on the same block as full macro sites with mmWave, in direct line of sight. 
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...