Jump to content
Nextel49

Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Thomas L. said:

So does anyone know when we might get access to T-Mobile spectrum more regularly? T-Mobile roaming is disabled in my market.

As soon as the merger closes.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, S4GRU said:

Here in Western Washington the 3x3 B26 LTE carrier works better than Sprint's 5x5 in most markets.  The key is having a robust network on other bands, good density and aggressive band switching when other bands are available.  Samsung and Sprint have nailed it here.  One of the best markets in the country.

Robert

I strongly agree with Robert. Good equipment (high gain antennas/high quality diplexers), good band management, good density and good network config can make a 3x3 carrier perform better than a 5x5 or even 10x10 carrier. I would take Sprint's 3x3 L800 in Seattle over Verizon's 10x10 L750 or T-Mobile's 5x5 L700 any day of the week. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I strongly agree with Robert. Good equipment (high gain antennas/high quality diplexers), good band management, good density and good network config can make a 3x3 carrier perform better than a 5x5 or even 10x10 carrier. I would take Sprint's 3x3 L800 in Seattle over Verizon's 10x10 L750 or T-Mobile's 5x5 L700 any day of the week. 


Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I strongly agree with Robert. Good equipment (high gain antennas/high quality diplexers), good band management, good density and good network config can make a 3x3 carrier perform better than a 5x5 or even 10x10 carrier. I would take Sprint's 3x3 L800 in Seattle over Verizon's 10x10 L750 or T-Mobile's 5x5 L700 any day of the week. 
He is right with that. But that doesn't mean 3x3 is better. 10x10 with always be best on low-band. Unlike Sprint VZW also aggregates B13 or 5 with other bands

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, S4GRU said:

Here in Western Washington the 3x3 B26 LTE carrier works better than Sprint's 5x5 in most markets.  The key is having a robust network on other bands, good density and aggressive band switching when other bands are available.  Samsung and Sprint have nailed it here.  One of the best markets in the country.

Robert

Are you back on Sprint now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here in Western Washington the 3x3 B26 LTE carrier works better than Sprint's 5x5 in most markets.  The key is having a robust network on other bands, good density and aggressive band switching when other bands are available.  Samsung and Sprint have nailed it here.  One of the best markets in the country.
Robert
What does B25 have for Bandwidth there?

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Tengen31 said:

What does B25 have for Bandwidth there?

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
 

It's 5x5, 10x10 or 15x15, depending on county.

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dro1984 said:

Are you back on Sprint now?

Between me personally and work phones, I have an active line on Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile (and access to USCC via Google Fi).  Just currently no AT&T lines.

Robert

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, RAvirani said:

I strongly agree with Robert. Good equipment (high gain antennas/high quality diplexers), good band management, good density and good network config can make a 3x3 carrier perform better than a 5x5 or even 10x10 carrier. I would take Sprint's 3x3 L800 in Seattle over Verizon's 10x10 L750 or T-Mobile's 5x5 L700 any day of the week. 

Yeah, the worst I have seen the 3x3 perform was 2-3Mbps, and that was in early deployment when sites were islands.  Now that there is good density with 3x3, it's typically 5-15Mbps in most places.  Whereas Tmo's 5x5 L700 is 0-5Mbps in most places I travel (especially in Mason and Thurston counties). 

The South Mountain site in Mason County (my home site) is worthless from Tmo.  Speed tests time out most of the time.  If I can get any throughput, it's like 200-300kbps.  From a -95dBm signal.  Also from home, I can get Sprint on 3x3 with Sprint on a -115dBm signal and get about 5Mbps.  But I also get a 10x10 on a -118dBm signal that pushes 20Mbps.  I can't get the Tmo 10x10 on B4 at all from my house.  Unless I go outside.  And then it still performs slightly worse than the Sprint 3x3.

To all you doubters about 3x3, RAvirani and I can attest to Sprint being a great network in Western Washington.  Even with 3x3 on Band 26.  And it's probably because they feel they have to manage it aggressively.  And they should.  They probably should do the same nationwide.

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, the worst I have seen the 3x3 perform was 2-3Mbps, and that was in early deployment when sites were islands.  Now that there is good density with 3x3, it's typically 5-15Mbps in most places.  Whereas Tmo's 5x5 L700 is 0-5Mbps in most places I travel (especially in Mason and Thurston counties). 
The South Mountain site in Mason County (my home site) is worthless from Tmo.  Speed tests time out most of the time.  If I can get any throughput, it's like 200-300kbps.  From a -95dBm signal.  Also from home, I can get Sprint on 3x3 with Sprint on a -115dBm signal and get about 5Mbps.  But I also get a 10x10 on a -118dBm signal that pushes 20Mbps.  I can't get the Tmo 10x10 on B4 at all from my house.  Unless I go outside.  And then it still performs slightly worse than the Sprint 3x3.
To all you doubters about 3x3, RAvirani and I can attest to Sprint being a great network in Western Washington.  Even with 3x3 on Band 26.  And it's probably because they feel they have to manage it aggressively.  And they should.  They probably should do the same nationwide.
Robert
I feel the pain of being on 5x5 b26 and having a bad experience. Granted it did get better for uploads now that b25 and b41 are the more primary bands. B26, B25, B41. The difference is so drastic and B25 slows down even worse in peak hours to levels of b26. Making b41 the only usable solution. Why don't they start using interband CA nationwide quickly?50d45a5db27334a23d4221321977bc31.jpg8fc945ccdff284e674a7e6b11d72bd21.jpg4cf48c5df4236a1377c04650f8ce2793.jpg

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/26/2019 at 8:09 PM, Brad The Beast said:

TBH at this point, I am sick and tired of Sprint's worthless 3x3 band 26. I want the 10x10 band 71 T-Mobile has. I don't care anymore. I'm going mad!

Even in 5x5 areas like Texas, the extra bandwidth doesn't help with low band congestion. 

If you need relief now, then switch carriers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, greenbastard said:

Even in 5x5 areas like Texas, the extra bandwidth doesn't help with low band congestion. 

If you need relief now, then switch carriers.

No one else to switch to that's good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No one else to switch to that's good. 
How about Verizon?

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about Verizon?

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk


Verizon has terrible congestion issues if you aren’t on a small cell or mini macro. If you’re on a small cell or mini macro it’s great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, the worst I have seen the 3x3 perform was 2-3Mbps, and that was in early deployment when sites were islands.  Now that there is good density with 3x3, it's typically 5-15Mbps in most places.

How is this possible?! My band 26 only works some of the time. When it does work it’s usually 200Kbps download or less which is too slow to be useful. If you’re lucky you might break 1Mbps at 4AM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Brad The Beast said:


How is this possible?! My band 26 only works some of the time. When it does work it’s usually 200Kbps download or less which is too slow to be useful. If you’re lucky you might break 1Mbps at 4AM.

What is Sprint's site density like near you? And what kind of RSRP, RSRQ, and SNR are you seeing on B26? Even around me where Sprint is much more spread out than the other carriers B26 (5x5) performs well. Like Robert reported in his area around here the network is well optimized so that I am not on B26 unless necessary. Also, what does Sprint have deployed for B25 around you? If they are having to use B26 for capacity instead of coverage that could be contributing to the slowness. 

And another thing I just thought of, I'm not sure which modem your iPhone has, but I recall seeing several complaints on HoFo in the AT&T threads about how subpar the Intel (I think) modem was at lower signal levels compared to a phone with the latest Qualcomm hardware. The differences really seemed to show at weaker and dirtier signals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Verizon has terrible congestion issues if you aren’t on a small cell or mini macro. If you’re on a small cell or mini macro it’s great.
Ok then at&t?

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mdob07 said:

What is Sprint's site density like near you? And what kind of RSRP, RSRQ, and SNR are you seeing on B26? 

It's meh. SNR usually sits in the negatives. RSRQ is usually -30dB or worse. I've been reporting it for over a year. I've had tickets put in. 

9 hours ago, mdob07 said:

Also, what does Sprint have deployed for B25 around you?

Two 5x5 carriers. They do have downlink intraband CA enabled so it's 10x5. 

9 hours ago, mdob07 said:

And another thing I just thought of, I'm not sure which modem your iPhone has, but I recall seeing several complaints on HoFo in the AT&T threads about how subpar the Intel (I think) modem was at lower signal levels compared to a phone with the latest Qualcomm hardware.

iPhone XS which has the shoddy Intel XMM7560. Cellular does randomly disconnect but it doesn't do it enough for me to replace it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tengen31 said:

Ok then at&t?

Too many lawsuits for my liking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brad The Beast said:

It's meh. SNR usually sits in the negatives. RSRQ is usually -30dB or worse. I've been reporting it for over a year. I've had tickets put in. 

Two 5x5 carriers. They do have downlink intraband CA enabled so it's 10x5. 

iPhone XS which has the shoddy Intel XMM7560. Cellular does randomly disconnect but it doesn't do it enough for me to replace it.  

I didn't know SNR could go negative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, clbowens said:

I didn't know SNR could go negative.

A SNR of 0 indicates a 1:1 ratio between signal power and noise power. Anytime there is more background noise than signal, the SNR is negative.

Negative SNRs are very common in areas of high congestion/usage. LTE can be and often is usable with a SNR below 0, although it isn't going to be a stellar experience. By comparison, CDMA does a lot better than LTE below the noise floor (relatively, of course). 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, RAvirani said:

A SNR of 0 indicates a 1:1 ratio between signal power and noise power. Anytime there is more background noise than signal, the SNR is negative.

Negative SNRs are very common in areas of high congestion/usage. LTE can be and often is usable with a SNR below 0, although it isn't going to be a stellar experience. By comparison, CDMA does a lot better than LTE below the noise floor (relatively, of course). 

Good to know, thx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CDMA's ability to pull usable data from below the noise floor is pretty impressive.  I remember in one of my college classes, we did the math to derive it, and sure enough, the math says it should be theoretically possible to retrieve the signal from below the noise floor, and the real world bears it out.  (We also retrieved messages out of an example CDMA signal by hand.  Very neat stuff.)

I wish I had a good example to share; Wikipedia is very opaque and I'm not finding anything else helpful with a fast search. 

- Trip

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Trip said:

CDMA's ability to pull usable data from below the noise floor is pretty impressive.  I remember in one of my college classes, we did the math to derive it, and sure enough, the math says it should be theoretically possible to retrieve the signal from below the noise floor, and the real world bears it out.  (We also retrieved messages out of an example CDMA signal by hand.  Very neat stuff.)

I wish I had a good example to share; Wikipedia is very opaque and I'm not finding anything else helpful with a fast search. 

- Trip

I'm going to miss CDMA whenever it sunsets. 1xRTT is a very reliable voice airlink that provides high reliability and coverage. I don't think any technology will ever come close to matching the robustness that CDMA offered us.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, greenbastard said:

I'm going to miss CDMA whenever it sunsets. 1xRTT is a very reliable voice airlink that provides high reliability and coverage. I don't think any technology will ever come close to matching the robustness that CDMA offered us.

I've never had good voice quality on CDMA.  With every CDMA phone i've had, voice calls have been a little muffled and/or choppy.

VoLTE has not been choppy.  But it is still muffled, if it's not HD.

Share this post


Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...