Sprint TD-LTE 2500/2600mhz Discussion

[KD8JBF]

Crazy!! I have never seen a negative number on the ping before...!!

 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

 

It's that awesome! Lol

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

[WiWavelength]

Yes, a negative latency spec would be indicative of an acausal system.  The data arrives before you request it.  Maybe that is Network Vision's secret weapon.

 

AJ

[IamMrFamous07]

I thought the speeds on band 41 were supposed to be crazy fast.? Lol jk

[Vince]

I thought the speeds on band 41 were supposed to be crazy fast.? Lol jk

It can be because of the channel width. But like pcs LTE, can be deteriorated by site traffic, terrain, distance, etc.

[KD8JBF]

It can be because of the channel width. But like pcs LTE, can be deteriorated by site traffic, terrain, distance, etc.

Just FYI, I was LOS with the tower across the street, prob 1/2 mi away during that speed test...

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

[lilotimz]

It's because TD-LTE sites are fired up regardless of if the clearwire site has its backhaul upgraded. Many still use the legacy clearwire backhaul which are not provisioned for super high speeds because clearwire was cheap..

[IamMrFamous07]

It can be because of the channel width. But like pcs LTE, can be deteriorated by site traffic, terrain, distance, etc.

I know I was just kidding

[Paynefanbro]

It's because TD-LTE sites are fired up regardless of if the clearwire site has its backhaul upgraded. Many still use the legacy clearwire backhaul which are not provisioned for super high speeds because clearwire was cheap..

In NYC, I think that most Clearwire sites have fiber backhaul. At my old home I'd get 16Mbps on WimAx on my EVO, and at my school I'd usually get about 12Mbps.

[S4GRU]

If you're using a hotspot, there can be a lot of loss with WiFi channel width and WiFi pollution. There was one site in Denver that I was connected to on my Triband hotspot and was getting 8-12Mbps through WiFi. I changed to a direct USB connection to the hotspot and turned off the WiFi and I was getting ~40Mbps.

 

Using a WiFi hotspot, your speeds cannot go much above 35-40Mbps, even with little to no WiFi pollution. Until these hotspots start supporting wider channels, and AC protocols, we are stuck.

 

I was consistently hitting 50Mbps speeds on several sites direct tethering my laptop to my hotspot though and not using the WiFi signal. I have to done this with my VZW and ATT hotspots too to get speeds faster than 30-45Mbps. Smartphones will not have this limitation for data used on the phone, though. But many will with their hotspot function.

 

But really, I only need speeds faster than 30-45Mbps for the purposes of testing the limits. After I'm done testing, I just use the WiFi because I certainly don't have any needs for speeds faster than this. Also, there is no real world application for speeds higher than 30Mbps...even downloading. Yes, I said it. That's because the file transfer when you upload or download files is also dependent on the speed and connection of the server your moving files to/from and every switch in between. The odds of you connecting to a file server that will provide a usable speed on their end greater than 30Mbps is almost nil. Maybe 1 out 300.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

[mhammett]

2x2 N on 20 MHz of clean spectrum can do 75 megabit. Wider channels may or may not help in dirty RF.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

 

 

[JosefTor]

2x2 N on 20 MHz of clean spectrum can do 75 megabit. Wider channels may or may not help in dirty RF.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

I know I'm going to make the wireless pros cringe with the inexperience of this question but....

 

If you have a 20 MHz channel of 1900 versus a market with an equal demand on 10 MHz of 800 and 10 MHz of 1900, would the speeds be equal for the same network conditions/signal?

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

 

[WiWavelength]

I know I'm going to make the wireless pros cringe with the inexperience of this question but....

 

The post you quoted is referencing a 2x2 MIMO Wi-Fi 802.11n 20 MHz channel.  It is not about LTE.

 

AJ

[dedub]

If you have a 20 MHz channel of 1900 versus a market with an equal demand on 10 MHz of 800 and 10 MHz of 1900, would the speeds be equal for the same network conditions/signal?

 

 

To my understanding, 20 mhz of bandwidth is going to provide a similar amount of bandwidth, regardless of where the frequency lies. (disregarding distance and other factors)

 

The frequency affects propagation characteristics, meaning how far out from the tower the signal can penetrate physical objects (like buildings, trees, etc).

 

If you have 20mhz split between 800 and 1900 (ie 10 + 10, instead of solid 20), your going to have half the bandwidth unless some type of bonding occurs (ie lte advanced carrier aggregation).

 

Actual speed of carrier aggregated channels split between wildly differing bands (ie 800/1900/2600) will never equal the total bandwidth that would have been available from a sequential amount of the same spectrum in a single band due to aggregation overheads and propagation differences and many other factors.

 

Think of it just like a disk drive array (raid 0 striped).

 

The best speed and space is going to occur with equal size and speed drives.

 

If you made a raid array of different sizes and/or speeds, the array gets less efficient and you end up wasting either usable space and/or speed.

[mhammett]

If you have a 20 MHz channel of 1900 versus a market with an equal demand on 10 MHz of 800 and 10 MHz of 1900, would the speeds be equal for the same network conditions/signal?

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Yes, well, not maximum speed on an empty sector, but...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

 

 

[Mobilesolutions]

I know I'm going to make the wireless pros cringe with the inexperience of this question but....

 

If you have a 20 MHz channel of 1900 versus a market with an equal demand on 10 MHz of 800 and 10 MHz of 1900, would the speeds be equal for the same network conditions/signal?

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

There are too many variables to properly answer this question.  More things make up your end experience as a wireless consumer than just channel width & frequency.  Who designed your network? What did they design it for? what is the distance between cells? What is the topography like?  The complexity of the question has little to do with the channel width & the frequencies broadcast. 

-Will

[David Mackler]

But really, I only need speeds faster than 30-45Mbps for the purposes of testing the limits. After I'm done testing, I just use the WiFi because I certainly don't have any needs for speeds faster than this. Also, there is no real world application for speeds higher than 30Mbps...even downloading. Yes, I said it. That's because the file transfer when you upload or download files is also dependent on the speed and connection of the server your moving files to/from and every switch in between. The odds of you connecting to a file server that will provide a usable speed on their end greater than 30Mbps is almost nil. Maybe 1 out 300.

 

True enough Robert, and that is exactly why my home U-Verse at 18 Mbps is plenty fast for anything I do at home.

 

That said, there are certainly exceptions. I work for a large tech company in Silicon Valley, and the speed at my work laptop is limited by the gig ethernet wire speed. Software updates from Microsoft and Apple, as two examples, are able to saturate my ethernet connection. Granted, not many can sites can sustain that today. As Google fiber and the competitive response to Google fiber increase our bandwidth, more and more (generally powered by Akamai or other network edge CDNs for now) downloads will be able to saturate that speed. So yes, your calculation of the odds is spot on for today, but our experiences and then our expectations will continue to rise.

[GregSmoov]

How much spectrum does Sprint hold on each band in the NYC market? ( Band 25, 26 and 41 )

Also is there map that has this kind of info for other markets?

[Nickel]

How much spectrum does Sprint hold on each band in the NYC market? ( Band 25, 26 and 41 )

Also is there map that has this kind of info for other markets?

14MHz of 26 (total, not all will be used on LTE) 10 MHz on 25 (like every other market) and 41, who knows but more than enough for 20 MHz TDD, I'm guessing.

[mozamcrew]

14MHz of 26 (total, not all will be used on LTE) 10 MHz on 25 (like every other market) and 41, who knows but more than enough for 20 MHz TDD, I'm guessing.

Nickel, you aren't including Sprint's existing PCS spectrum currently allocated for it's legacy 3G network. Sprint controls the 15x15 B block in NYC.

 

[Nickel]

Nickel, you aren't including Sprint's existing PCS spectrum currently allocated for it's legacy 3G network. Sprint controls the 15x15 B block in NYC.

Yeah, I knew they had a good chunk of it but I couldn't remember and didn't really care enough to look it up. Besides as far as LTE goes, It's kinda pointless because it's going to be a LONG time before they start to refarm the A-F blocks.

[mhammett]

I started to build a map of their holdings nationwide, but I got busy.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

 

 

[Deval]

Nickel, you aren't including Sprint's existing PCS spectrum currently allocated for it's legacy 3G network. Sprint controls the 15x15 B block in NYC.

 

 

Yep, nationwide, we have 10mhz on PCS G block for LTE for BC25.

[mozamcrew]

Yeah, I knew they had a good chunk of it but I couldn't remember and didn't really care enough to look it up. Besides as far as LTE goes, It's kinda pointless because it's going to be a LONG time before they start to refarm the A-F blocks.

In markets where they only have 10x10 of PCS A-F I'd agree, they need that all for CMDA. But where they still have 15x15 I can see them splitting off a 5x5 for LTE in the next few years. Even more so in markets like Chicago where they now have a 15x15 AND another 5x5 in PCS A-F.

[IamMrFamous07]

http://www.telecoms.com/186362/vp-sprint-technology-development-and-corporate-strategy-three-largest-economies-in-the-world-embrace-band-41-and-represent-2bn-potential-subs/

 

Pretty much everything we already know but band 41 better be promising. Like I said before I hope it's like the second coming of Jesus because all sprints executives are hyping it up

[Guest DigiClaws]

My wife and I were at Buy Buy Baby and I ran a speedtest with my wife's S4 mini. It was fast. I then ran one with my S4 and it was fast but not near as fast. I checked the LTE Engineering screen on my wife's phone and it was Band 41. Good consistent speed. Sceenshots to come. How do I post screenhots within this post?