Qualcomm's Latest Gobi Chips Support Multiple LTE Frequencies

[pyroscott]

This could be what Sprint has been waiting for to release the floodgate on LTE devices. In the article http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=9883 phonescoop has learned that Qualcomm is releasing a Gobi chip that can handle multiple LTE frequencies. We will see it first in the hotspot devices, but it will be able to be inserted in phones as well. It supports Android and can be paired with snapdragon processors. This should allow Sprint to provision it for all of the frequencies they will be offering LTE, but there is no word on if it is a software provisioning or if it has to be in the hardware from the start.

[Sgt. Slaughter]

This is nice but I think this is not really what the hold up is for LTE on sprint devices. I may be wrong but i think the MDM series of chips is what they currently use for their LTE phones on Verizon like the thunderbolt. That device has both an MDM8655 processor chip and also an MDM9600 modem.

The S4 MSM chipsets include the modem built in the die so there is no need for an MDM set the way I read things.

I took the write up when they stated android as saying the MDM would work fine with android tablets...like this is geared for data devices and not cell.

 

Using the MDM chip negates the improvement with the S4chips having the modems built in the die so I don't see why they would use them honestly.

Less they are going to use the quadcore APQ8064 chip with the new MDM gobi modem...

But after reading some it seems these are being ment to be paired with the new RF IC WTR1605 and PM8018 power management IC...

 

I could be missing something here but that's my take on it...

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

Edited February 21, 2012 by Sgt. Slaughter

[MacinJosh]

This could be what Sprint has been waiting for to release the floodgate on LTE devices. In the article http://www.phonescoo...icle.php?a=9883 phonescoop has learned that Qualcomm is releasing a Gobi chip that can handle multiple LTE frequencies. We will see it first in the hotspot devices, but it will be able to be inserted in phones as well. It supports Android and can be paired with snapdragon processors. This should allow Sprint to provision it for all of the frequencies they will be offering LTE, but there is no word on if it is a software provisioning or if it has to be in the hardware from the start.

 

Aww, you beat me to this article, and I posted it in the misc. smartphone forum. I will try to delete mine so we don't fragment too much around here.

[MacinJosh]

The article mentions specifically laptops and hotspots, but it is a breakthrough to get these chipsets ready for phones in the prime-time. Hopefully soon we will see Qualcomm announcing phone ready modems that will be battery friendly. And I'm sure that Sprint will order them provisioned for all their LTE frequencies including Clear's LTE frequencies.

[WiWavelength]

This should allow Sprint to provision it for all of the frequencies they will be offering LTE, but there is no word on if it is a software provisioning or if it has to be in the hardware from the start.

 

Guys, keep in mind that there is a huge gap in between possibility and certainty. While the upcoming Qualcomm chipsets do make it possible to support any/many LTE band classes, that alone does not make it certain that devices will do so.

 

Chipsets are one piece of the interoperability puzzle. In fact, they are really the easiest piece to fit because they are small and light, not to mention that adding band class capabilities does not really increase size nor power requirements.

 

To illustrate, the iPhone 4S contains a Qualcomm chipset that fully supports T-Mobile's W-CDMA 2100+1700 (band class 4) airlink and many, many others. See this table (from Qualcomm by way of AnandTech):

 

http://images.anandtech.com/doci/4943/zjWXE.png

 

But, of course, the iPhone 4S as a whole does not support T-Mobile's 3G/4G W-CDMA 2100+1700 network because Apple did not follow up the chipset capability with suitable power amp modules and antenna(s).

 

So, in order to support Sprint's LTE 1900 (band class 25) and LTE 800 (band class 18) airlinks plus Clearwire's TD-LTE 2600 (band class 41) airlink, the multi band chipsets (as I have stated previously) should be easy to source, should not be a concern. However, devices will also need to include appropriate power amps and antennas. On the last count -- antennas -- note that is plural. MIMO is basically a standard feature in LTE devices, hence Rx antenna diversity is also practically a necessity. And cramming dual Rx antennas for multiple band classes into handheld devices while keeping size/weight to a minimum seems to be the real sticking point.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

 

Excellent point. I've been discussing in several forums these points since last year. Especially with the people who insist they will be able to convert their WiMax devices to LTE with a hacked firmware update only.

[Sgt. Slaughter]

 

Excellent point. I've been discussing in several forums these points since last year. Especially with the people who insist they will be able to convert their WiMax devices to LTE with a hacked firmware update only.

 

Yeah debated long long time in the evo4g forum after they coded Wimax to work on AOSP. BUT it was ALL theory and very tough for people to understand that. LOL

 

Regardless nothing is certain till you see it pass through FCC clearing and can read what the device is cleared for use...

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

[4ringsnbr]

Guys, keep in mind that there is a huge gap in between possibility and certainty. While the upcoming Qualcomm chipsets do make it possible to support any/many LTE band classes, that alone does not make it certain that devices will do so.

 

Chipsets are one piece of the interoperability puzzle. In fact, they are really the easiest piece to fit because they are small and light, not to mention that adding band class capabilities does not really increase size nor power requirements.

 

To illustrate, the iPhone 4S contains a Qualcomm chipset that fully supports T-Mobile's W-CDMA 2100+1700 (band class 4) airlink and many, many others. See this table (from Qualcomm by way of AnandTech):

 

http://images.anandt.../4943/zjWXE.png

 

But, of course, the iPhone 4S as a whole does not support T-Mobile's 3G/4G W-CDMA 2100+1700 network because Apple did not follow up the chipset capability with suitable power amp modules and antenna(s).

 

So, in order to support Sprint's LTE 1900 (band class 25) and LTE 800 (band class 18) airlinks plus Clearwire's TD-LTE 2600 (band class 41) airlink, the multi band chipsets (as I have stated previously) should be easy to source, should not be a concern. However, devices will also need to include appropriate power amps and antennas. On the last count -- antennas -- note that is plural. MIMO is basically a standard feature in LTE devices, hence Rx antenna diversity is also practically a necessity. And cramming dual Rx antennas for multiple band classes into handheld devices while keeping size/weight to a minimum seems to be the real sticking point.

 

AJ

 

Excellent point. As I determined by reading the FCC approvals for the forthcoming LG LS-696 (3G only) and LS-840 Viper phone on Sprint, the physical room for the antennas is a limiting factor. The Viper had to lose EVDO capability in ESMR so that it could have LTE capability in the PCS band. The thing has 1 Tx and 2 Rx antennas for LTE 1900, 1 Tx and 2 Rx antennas for EVDO 1900, and 1 Tx and 2 Rx antennas for EVDO 850. There is 1 Tx and 1 Rx antenna for 1x/CDMA ESMR. There wasn't room for a 2nd Rx antenna in ESMR to do EVDO there. The 1900 & 850 CDMA 1x signal shares the EVDO antenna set (but only 1 Rx not 2 Rx antennas). The MiMO / Rx diversity is a problem since the two antennas have to be spaced in proportion to the frequency band. I think as long as Sprint has to support 3 different bands for CDMA, they'll have a real problem getting more than 1 band of LTE support in anything small enough to fit in your pocket.

[Sgt. Slaughter]

Yeah this sucks bc I never really thought of the # of antennae in the handset being a limiting factor for # lte bands supported. Figured the chip would control one antennae dedicated to lte freq's...too simple thinking on my part...though I'm not holding out hope for it happening bc if it wasnt possible to be done right now I have trouble seeing sprint wanting to put the tech on those freq's....no way they would plan these freq to be used if they couldn't get them into a device right now.

Only reason they won't certify them to work on all freq is it costs more to do so I'm pretty sure...

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

[Sgt. Slaughter]

another little tid bit on this...besides my thinking before in that I can't see sprint already planning on rolling LTE on these multiple freq if they didnt already know that they could have phones out there able to run on all three I found a little more interesting information I THINK today that might show its possible....at least maybe?

 

If you look at pgae 6 of the FCC doc on ATT's HTC OneX device it shows they got 2 LTE band's approved in there. On top of having GSM 850, GSM1900, WCDMA II, WCDMA V...

https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=329619&fcc_id='NM8PJ83100'

"SAR Report 1" is the item i looked at.

 

The bands listed on the device for LTE band 4 and LTE band 17. These corresponding to LTE on 1710-1725(LTE band4) and on 704-716(LTE band17). http://www.radio-electronics.com/info/cellulartelecomms/lte-long-term-evolution/lte-frequency-spectrum.php

 

 

Also linked here the FCC doc of the LG Viper LS840 mentioned above by 4ringsnbr for those that haven't seen that.

https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=370780&fcc_id='ZNFLS840'

just click on the item listed as "SAR Report (no photos)" and i think its page 11 that has the antennae's shown.

[WiWavelength]

Excellent point. As I determined by reading the FCC approvals for the forthcoming LG LS-696 (3G only) and LS-840 Viper phone on Sprint, the physical room for the antennas is a limiting factor. The Viper had to lose EVDO capability in ESMR so that it could have LTE capability in the PCS band. The thing has 1 Tx and 2 Rx antennas for LTE 1900, 1 Tx and 2 Rx antennas for EVDO 1900, and 1 Tx and 2 Rx antennas for EVDO 850. There is 1 Tx and 1 Rx antenna for 1x/CDMA ESMR. There wasn't room for a 2nd Rx antenna in ESMR to do EVDO there.

 

The single Rx antenna for SMR 800 MHz is most likely an intentional design choice, not a compromise. Sprint has no current plans to deploy EV-DO 800, only 1X Advanced and eventually LTE.

 

AJ

[4ringsnbr]

The single Rx antenna for SMR 800 MHz is most likely an intentional design choice, not a compromise. Sprint has no current plans to deploy EV-DO 800, only 1X Advanced and eventually LTE.

 

AJ

Then someone needs to tell the people doing the phone development and FCC approvals that. The Viper's companion phone, the LS-696 was specifically tested for EVDO in ESMR. It had a copy of the FCC waiver approving EVDO operation in ESMR; specifically, it authorized them to run broadband carriers up to 1.27 MHz in width in the band that was previously only approved for 25 kHz carriers. Also, in December, the existing Samsung SPH-D710 was retested specifically for EVDO operation in ESMR and granted a Class II permissive change. Since LTE has not been approved to run in ESMR and the Viper, the first LTE phone is only able to run LTE in PCS, I would think it will be quite some time before Sprint is able to run LTE in ESMR. In addition, the EVDO they will run in ESMR will allow many existing phones as well as new 3G-only phones like the LS-696 to enjoy additional EVDO carriers in ESMR that cannot be accessed by the prepaid carriers, and this will help tremendously in capacity constrained markets. Specifically, the FCC waiver attachment had one letter singling out the Atlanta market to run EVDO in ESMR.

[S4GRU]

I can say definitively that Sprint is not deploying EVDO carriers in the DFW market in 800 for Network Vision. They are deploying only one 1xA carrier on Channel 476. No EVDO at all. I assume this is the case nationwide, but I need to see more markets to confirm.

[WiWavelength]

Specifically, the FCC waiver attachment had one letter singling out the Atlanta market to run EVDO in ESMR.

 

Yes, we are actively seeking more data on the Atlanta market specifically, as it should be a litmus test for how Sprint intends to coexist with SouthernLINC. I hypothesized to Robert that Sprint in Atlanta, Birmingham, etc., might be forced by spectrum constraints to deploy EV-DO Rev B (2X or 3X Multicarrier) in place of 5 MHz x 5 MHz LTE:

 

I remain a bit concerned that the presence of SouthernLINC in the reconfigured SMR 800 MHz band plan could preclude Sprint from deploying both CDMA1X Advanced and LTE, that Sprint would have to forgo one or the other or deploy EV-DO Rev B instead of LTE.

 

But early data from other markets show that Sprint has chosen a CDMA1X Advanced channel assignment (476) that is directly adjacent to where SouthernLINC's SMR 800 MHz allotment is located in its markets in the Southeast. I think that it is far more than a coincidence. Rather, it could be indication that Sprint and SouthernLINC have come to an interference abatement agreement that will allow Sprint to deploy the same CDMA1X Advanced and, later, 5 MHz x 5 MHz LTE channel assignments nationwide. But we wait for Atlanta Network Vision 3G plans in order to know for certain.

 

AJ

[4ringsnbr]

Yes, we are actively seeking more data on the Atlanta market specifically, as it should be a litmus test for how Sprint intends to coexist with SouthernLINC. I hypothesized to Robert that Sprint in Atlanta, Birmingham, etc., might be forced by spectrum constraints to deploy EV-DO Rev B (2X or 3X Multicarrier) in place of 5 MHz x 5 MHz LTE:

 

 

 

But early data from other markets show that Sprint has chosen a CDMA1X Advanced channel assignment (476) that is directly adjacent to where SouthernLINC's SMR 800 MHz allotment is located in its markets in the Southeast. I think that it is far more than a coincidence. Rather, it could be indication that Sprint and SouthernLINC have come to an interference abatement agreement that will allow Sprint to deploy the same CDMA1X Advanced and, later, 5 MHz x 5 MHz LTE channel assignments nationwide. But we wait for Atlanta Network Vision 3G plans in order to know for certain.

 

AJ

 

Every phone I've seen for Sprint that is approved for ESMR has been tested from channel 476 to 684. Since the rebanding consent decree requires them to lower the power as they get down closer to public safety on the lower channels, I would've thought the logical decision would be to put the 1xA channel as high as possible: 670 -- that gives you your guard band above to separate it from Cellular A and still gives you room to run 3 EVDO carriers below it. Since EVDO rev. B is supposedly more efficient in a 5 x 5 MHz or narrower bandwidth than LTE, it would make sense. Everything I've read has said that due to LTE's overhead and integrated guarding, that it is best to deploy it in 10 x 10 or larger bands.

 

And I would include Memphis & Houston in those constrained markets-- I think Sprint's holdings there are somewhat limited. It's a shame they couldn't move unused spectrum around-- prior to May 2011, Sprint only used 5 MHz of the 40 MHz they had here in Baton Rouge...

Edited March 2, 2012 by 4ringsnbr