Jump to content

LTE Plus / Enhanced LTE (was "Sprint Spark" - Official Name for the Tri-Band Network)


Recommended Posts

So variances don't matter then... 

 

attachicon.gifScreenshot from 2015-04-09 15:07:51.png

 

T-Mobile, Sprint, and Verizon all fall within each other's margins of error, so there's no clear speed winner here, hence the 3-way tie.  You could test all the networks again within a week and it could swing back to T-Mobile or Verizon recording the fastest median.

 

Hey, they won!  Get over it.  You're pissing me off, pal.  This is not one speed test.  It's thousands.  And a full meg difference in download is a clear winner in download.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, jackass,  They won!  Get over it.  You're pissing me off, pal.  This is not one speed test.  It's thousands.  And a full meg difference in download is a clear winner in download.

Well not according to root it isn't.

 

I rest my case.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well not according to root it isn't.

 

I rest my case.

 

Root shows that Sprint won in download.  They only show Tmo tied in overall data speed when counting upload speeds as part of the equation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This RootMetrics bickering needs to stop.  In the immortal words of that cracked out prophet...

 

 

Think of the older people and the kids, please.

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So variances don't matter then... 

 

attachicon.gifScreenshot from 2015-04-09 15:07:51.png

 

T-Mobile, Sprint, and Verizon all fall within each other's margins of error, so there's no clear speed winner here, hence the 3-way tie.  You could test all the networks again within a week and it could swing back to T-Mobile or Verizon recording the fastest median.

Yes and no. I'd tend to think the one that has the 1 mb/s greater median download with a 20% smaller 95% confidence interval likely has the faster download speed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So variances don't matter then... 

 

attachicon.gifScreenshot from 2015-04-09 15:07:51.png

 

T-Mobile, Sprint, and Verizon all fall within each other's margins of error, so there's no clear speed winner here, hence the 3-way tie.  You could test all the networks again within a week and it could swing back to T-Mobile or Verizon recording the fastest median.

Yes and no. I'd tend to think the one that has the 1 mb/s greater median download with a 20% smaller 95% confidence interval likely has the faster download speed.

 

And I would say that over 25,000 tests conducted across greater than 1100 miles driven would be enough to invoke the Law of large numbers.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_large_numbers

 

The variance is interesting for standard deviation.  But it should not affect the median or average.  Run the same tests again next week, and I would expect notably similar results.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 The variance is interesting for standard deviation.  But it should not affect the median or average.  Run the same tests again next week, and I would expect notably similar results.

 

AJ

That is more or less what I was trying to say, not as well as you put it. I don't see how invoking variance helps his argument here. They're using median, a measure already designed to reduce the effects of variance. Added to that they're giving you 95% CI or error bars. Sprint's is approximately 20% smaller than T-Mobile. On both counts 1) the median d/l being about 1 mb/s higher and 2) standard deviation for Sprint's results being smaller, Sprint's download speeds are statistically significantly better. And yes, with the large sample size, similar results should be expected if the experiment was repeated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The variance is interesting for standard deviation.  But it should not affect the median or average.  Run the same tests again next week, and I would expect notably similar results.

 

AJ

 

 

Variance matters when you're trying to apply the statistics to a real life decision; for example if you need consistent speeds more than fast peak speeds, that might be something to consider. But you've also got to consider the circumstances as well if you want to apply statistics to a real-world experience. With Sprint still finishing up its network vision upgrades I'd expect to see more variance in it's performance. If we were to run the same tests again next week I'd expect similar results; next month or next quarter Its I'd expect better overall results with less variance. That would be consistent with the trend of the results we've seen over the last year or so, and with the fact that we know that network improvements are ongoing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was at the Duck Commander 500 last night. -98dBm band 41 and it seemed over capacity. Couldn't get web pages to load or Hangouts to send.

 

No idea if they had COWs or anything to supplement capacity, but it seems that they should put extra effort into events that carry the Sprint branding.

 

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was at the Duck Commander 500 last night. -98dBm band 41 and it seemed over capacity. Couldn't get web pages to load or Hangouts to send.

 

No idea if they had COWs or anything to supplement capacity, but it seems that they should put extra effort into events that carry the Sprint branding.

 

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

Sadly the advertising department and deployment department probably don't talk as much as they should. They might have thought that the existing towers would be more than enough capacity for the event, or just not thought about it at all.

 

But I agree that they should make sure that they conver all major events better (especially if they're a sponsor) because customers will remember a bad experience like you're describing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have sprint started deployment spark cells (Band 41 small cells)? I know they stated back in December that small cells will play a huge role for 2015 but I don't think we heard anything yet...

 

Only in FITs for testing purposes. Mass deployments of small cells have not begun yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They definitely need small cells along the piers in Frisco ca data stinks. Voice and text is perfect

Really? I seem to recall that LTE (Band25) was good enough for web browsing and Facebook last time I was walking though the piers.

 

Are you using a triband device?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? I seem to recall that LTE (Band25) was good enough for web browsing and Facebook last time I was walking though the piers.

 

Are you using a triband device?

Yeah it's a triband.

It's just inside I don't get any lte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Also noticed 2x the upload speeds during 2XCA testing, good to see that as well.

 

Yeah no. There are no carrier aggregating of uplink. 

 

No existing UE will have that capability until later this year or next year and will most likely be included with the 3xCA devices. All CA certified devices are specifically only for downlink CA and no other LTE advance technologies. 

 

The PCC will provide the downlink and uplink and the SCC will provide downlink to be aggregated. Uplink on SCC is unused. 

 

See: 

 

mXuK3tz.png

 

Multiple the theoretical max download speeds of a 20 mhz carrier by 2 and you get the theoretical maximum of 2xB41 carrier aggregation downlink speeds. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah no. There are no carrier aggregating of uplink. 

 

No existing UE will have that capability until later this year or next year and will most likely be included with the 3xCA devices. All CA certified devices are specifically only for downlink CA and no other LTE advance technologies. 

 

The PCC will provide the downlink and uplink and the SCC will provide downlink to be aggregated. Uplink on SCC is unused. 

 

See: 

 

 

 

Multiple the theoretical max download speeds of a 20 mhz carrier by 2 and you get the theoretical maximum of 2xB41 carrier aggregation downlink speeds.

So its safe to say its device limited and technically possible to CA the uplink.

 

I saw it on signal research testing(page 11on PDF), but it looks like it came from some type of software tool that they use to test cellular tech and not the Samsung note edge device they used as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So its safe to say its device limited and technically possible to CA the uplink.

 

I saw it on signal research testing(page 11on PDF), but it looks like it came from some type of software tool that they use to test cellular tech and not the Samsung note edge device they used as well.

 

Whatever tools they have does not represent what commercialy available devices are capable of. Uplink CA will be coming in later releases. 

 

It is a good indicator of what future performance increases will be when the devices that are capable of it are released along with it being enabled on the network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever tools they have does not represent what commercialy available devices are capable of. Uplink CA will be coming in later releases. 

 

It is a good indicator of what future performance increases will be when the devices that are capable of it are released along with it being enabled on the network.

Definitely makes more sense on this thread, thx Tim.

 

BTW probably should move this one as well..

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/6319-marcelo-claure-town-hall-meetings-new-family-share-pack-plan-unlimited-individual-plan-discussion-thread/?p=421755

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Yeah no. There are no carrier aggregating of uplink. 

 

No existing UE will have that capability until later this year or next year and will most likely be included with the 3xCA devices. All CA certified devices are specifically only for downlink CA and no other LTE advance technologies. 

 

The PCC will provide the downlink and uplink and the SCC will provide downlink to be aggregated. Uplink on SCC is unused. 

 

See: 

 

mXuK3tz.png

 

Multiple the theoretical max download speeds of a 20 mhz carrier by 2 and you get the theoretical maximum of 2xB41 carrier aggregation downlink speeds. 

 

 

Why wouldn't it aggregate uplink in TDD configuration? The same spectrum is being used in time slots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't it aggregate uplink in TDD configuration? The same spectrum is being used in time slots.

UE and RAN limitation. Device makers need to add another transmitting radio to transmit another uplink stream back to the towers to take advantage of the sccs uplink.

 

In addition to compatible devices Sprint and vendors need to push LTE rel 11/12 software that actually enables uplink CA. Not expected til next year as they only just began pushing some major LTE rel 10 software like B41 2xCA only just recently. 

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

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

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Today I was driving over in Bothell/Kenmore area. I noticed the site which used to host Sprint eNB 745953 (where Waynita Way NE turns into 100th Ave NE) before it was fully decommissioned last year is now hosting all new T-Mobile gear. The gear isn't live yet but is fully installed. My guess is they plan to decommission the T-Mobile B2/B66 (enB 84647) only site a few blocks up the hill. This is a great move because decommissioning that old site would reduce interference with eNB 84740/175124. At the same time, the new location should notably improve coverage in the geographically shielded area along Waynita/100th.  The weird thing is I can't find a permit for this anywhere!
    • Mint and Ultra: Welcome to the T-Mobile Family! https://www.t-mobile.com/news/business/t-mobile-closes-acquisition-mint-and-ultra-mobile
    • https://www.t-mobile.com/2023-annual-report Most items s4gru members will be aware of, but an interesting read.
    • I've now seen 100 MHz n77 from SoftBank and 100 MHz n78 from NTT. NTT seems to be a bit better south of Osaka, though in some cases it drops down to B19 LTE as some areas around here are pretty rural. SoftBank has n77 around, but it's flakey enough that I switched eSIMs earlier this morning.
    • I'm currently typing this from a bullet train headed from Tokyo to Osaka. Using a roaming eSIM rather than T-Mobile as it's a lot cheaper, but I'll start with T-Mobile's roaming experience. Since I have a business line, I can't add data packs online, so I'm just using the 256 kbps baseline service you get by default. That service runs on Softank 4G. SoftBank has a well-built-out LTE network though, with plenty of B41, falling back to B1/3/8 as needed. 5G roaming from T-Mobile doesn't appear to exist though. I've seen 20+10 MHz B41 when I've looked, generally speaking. WiFi calling works well, and voice calls over LTE work fine too (I forgot to turn WiFi back on after doing some testing, so I expect my bill to be a dollar more next month). I want to say I even got HD voice over the cell network for the VoLTE call I did. I have a bunch of eSIMs and a couple of physical SIMs to try out. I've gotten the eSIMs up and running, but last I checked the physical SIM wasn't working even after activation so I'll run through eSIMs for the moment and update this thread with pSIM info and details on not-Tokyo in the coming days. First off, there's US Mobile's complimentary East Asia eSIM (5GB) that I grabbed before my unlimited plan Stateside expired. That SIM uses SIM Club, routing through Singapore, running on SoftBank LTE and 5G. I've seen 40 MHz n77, as well as 10x10 n28, and have seen download speeds in excess of 200 Mbps with uploads of more than 50 Mbps, though typical speeds are slower. Routing is via Equinix/Packet.net. 5G coverage is rather spotty, but LTE is plenty fast enough; either my phone doesn't want to use the 5G band combos that have more coverage or 5G coverage is just spottier here than in the US (at least on T-Mibile). Latency is as low as 95ms to sites in Singapore (usually closer to 120ms), which is pretty great considering the 3300 mi between Tokyo and Singapore. Next there's Ubigi. It also routes through Singapore via Transatel (despite being owned by NTT), and sites on top of NTT docomo's network. I didn't see NTT 5G in Tokyo when I tested it, but since then I've seen 10x10 n28, and have seen B1/B3/B19 on the LTE side. So far it's not the fastest thing out there, but I'm guessing coverage will be a little better...or maybe not. This was $17 for 10GB. Latency is a bit higher to Singapore, but still under 150ms it seems. Then there's Airalo, which was the cheapest when I bought it at $9 for 10GB. It also routes through Singapore (on Singtel), but on my S24 I have my pick of KDDI (au) or SoftBank. KDDI has extensive B41 coverage and I've seen 20+20 with UL CA. While waiting for the train at HND Terminal 3 (Keikyu line) I hit 250+ Mbps down and 10+ Mbps up...over LTE...with pretty respectable latency numbers (not much above 100ms). This is in adition to supporting SoftBank, also on LTE (my S24 defaulted to KDDI, while my wife's Pixel 8 defaulted to SoftBank and didn't seem to want to connect to KDDI). Of the various carriers mentioned, I'd say this was the best pick, though prices have bumped back up to $18 for the 10GB plan...but it's probably still what I'd pick if I had to pick just one carrier. Then there's Saily, which uses Truphone out of Hong Kong. I haven't used this as much, as I only grabbed 3GB for $7. It runs on NTT but doesn't seem to have 5G access and doesn't seem to have as good speeds. Yes, Hong Kong is way closer to Japan, but latency didn't seem to be any better, at ~150ms. In all cases, I've had reception even in train tunnels and even at high speed on the bullet train, on all three carriers I've tried (I don't think I'll be able to play with a Rakuten SIM, which is rather disappointing). There have been cases where service has degraded, but it looks like you'd have reasonable cell service no matter which of the big three carriers you picked...and since T-Mobile roams on one of them, that's good enough if you're content to buy day passes.
  • Recently Browsing

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