Carriers
T-Mobile’s 3G network is faster than Sprint’s 4G network. Huh?
March 24, 2010 | by Andrew Kameka
Sprint, T-Mobile
Elementary math taught me that 4 is greater than 3, but that doesn’t seem to be the truth when looking at wireless networks. Despite Sprint touting its upcoming network as 4G – as in fourth generation – T-Mobile is set to roll-out a “3G” network that is theoretically twice as fast. Huh?
A couple of readers sent me messages asking about network speeds based on my excitement for the HTC EVO 4G, so I wanted to do a quick post discussing this issue further. Sprint WiMax has a theoretical speed of 10 Mbps, meaning that’s the maximum speed the network can support. However, actual speeds that users experience is about 3-6 Mbps. T-Mobile’s upcoming HSPA+ network has a 21 Mbps theoretical max.
This difference in speeds reflects the importance of terminology. T-Mobile’s upcoming network will be twice as fast as Sprint’s upcoming network, but not calling it 4G could potentially lead to confusion about which network is superior. My father, who is very much the “average” consumer, assumes Sprint is faster RIGHT NOW because the company advertises 4G while AT&T and Verizon talk about 3G. That’s clearly not the case, but Sprint framed the conversation in their favor, something T-Mobile isn’t doing.
HSPA+ pushes this generation of wireless networks further than WiMax, yet T-Mobile has opted not to market it as 4G. Either network will be fast enough for me, but if you want to be on the fastest network possible, T-Mobile is likely to the network that fits that bill (provided your city has an HSPA+ upgrade).
T-Mobile sent me a press release announcing that it would have the fastest wireless network in 2010. Here are some choice portions of it.
Today at International CTIA Wireless 2010, T-Mobile USA, Inc., showcased the nation’s fastest 3G wireless network on its latest mobile broadband devices. The company unveiled plans to upgrade its national high-speed 3G service to the High Speed Packet Access Plus (HSPA+) technology, which will deliver customers data speeds faster than the current 3G network technology1 . By the end of 2010, T-Mobile expects to have HSPA+ deployed across the breadth of its 3G footprint, covering more than 100 metropolitan areas and 185 million people.
T-Mobile successfully launched its HSPA+ network service in Philadelphia last fall providing customers access to one of the fastest and most modern wireless networks in the U.S. T-Mobile now has made HSPA+ commercially available in new markets including major areas of New York City, New Jersey, Long Island and suburban Washington, D.C., with deployment in Los Angeles coming very soon.
The company will continue to aggressively expand the availability of HSPA+ in additional 3G markets, putting the necessary backhaul capacity in place to support the very fast speeds. Today, its 3G high-speed data network covers more than 206 million people.
Will the new t-mobile networks work on all existing phones or will the consumers need to buy phones that will operate on the HSPA+ network.
I believe all T-Mo Androids and some T-Mo Androids support HSPA+ but all existing devices only support a max of 7.2 down, theoretically, and 3-5 down persistently. All current phones will still work, though, since HSPA+ is just an upgrade.
I meant to say T-Mo Androids and T-Mo WinMo(s).
Hi Stephanie from sprint here. Real-world HSPA speeds (once the network actually has users on it) will be around 2-3 Mbps download. Now that's very nice and fast compared to 3G, but not compared to Sprint 4G's peaks of over 10 Mbps and advertised averages of 3-6 Mbps download
Difference between HSPA and HSPA+ is what? My recent post My Shoulder = Awesome
Interesting, I get around 4 Mbits on average with my 7,2 Mbits capable phone (HTC Magic) on my European HSPA carrier.
Stephanie u fucking liar suck a fucking cock u sprint shit
Don’t hate on sprint. T-mobile is puni compared to sprint. No comparison.
And where is sprint? They don't even cover the I-5 between Oregon and California on the west coast. Why is sprint fast? They updated their 5 towers. And even then they are just on par with AT&T's 3G I get average 3.5-5.5 mbps download speeds with and iphone 4
HSPA tops out at about 7.2 Mbps while HSPA+ tops out at 21 Mpbs. HSPA+ will deliver speeds twice as fast, making T-Mobile network the fastest carrier – for the time being – in any market that it's open.
It is not called 4G as HSPA+ is not using a new radio frequency, unlike WIMAX which is, WIMAX is not exactly true Mobile technology either as it does not hand over mast to mast very well. HSPA+ can theoretically go up to 100Mbps in the not too distant future however it is the device manufacturers that are holding the technology back as they are having issues with battery power for supplying the chipsets. Australia has HSPA+ network speeds at 850mhz of over 21Mbps currently, They are currently testing LTE which is still not 4G as it is using the same radio frequencies, however it is way way faster than current speeds. My recent post Survey finds home phones vital for low income earners
These companies brag about being in 25-30 markets?What about the rest of the country? Where's the equity? It's too bad they won't spend more on making the network more robust instead of this quest for mobile computing speed supremacy.Talking about myself who cares about 3g or 4g if you can't make a call or the service is so crappy the calls are dropped. Taking a road trip on the west coast? I hope making or taking calls isn't in your plan. Even within commuting distance to Seattle the phone coverage is truly lousy.
i agree with "mobile broadband" above. i live in an area where we are JUST finally seeing 2G/EDGE towers come online, let alone 3G+. for the most part though, all you can get around here is 1G/GPRS connections which are dial-up equivalent. im happy for the <100 "markets" that can get T-mo 3G, the same ones with Fiber/cable/dsl at every door and 3G and WiMax from MULTIPLE carriers in the air…. no offense to any one but lets see T-mo AT LEAST get 95% of their towers to 2G/EDGE before they spend hundreds of millions adding the 28th choice of highspeed access to a handful of cities…
Why isn’t there been a map of coverage released, or has there been?
If I might put my 2 cent in in response to mobile broadband and 1G Customer, I think that you would find that if the carriers focused on equity rather than data speed supremacy we'd all still be using GPRS and you wouldnt be any better off. Mobile networks are expensive to build (it costs millions to put up each tower and thats before we talk about the cost of backhaul and backbone networks). Building out newer technologies in markets where there is more demand essentially allows the carriers to subsidize the cost of building out the network in areas where demand wouldnt normally support it. My recent post Psst…. hey, check out these Apps! (Part 1)
If I might put my 2 cent in in response to mobile broadband and 1G Customer, I think that you would find that if the carriers focused on equity rather than data speed supremacy we'd all still be using GPRS and you wouldnt be any better off. Mobile networks are expensive to build (it costs millions to put up each tower and thats before we talk about the cost of backhaul and backbone networks). Building out newer technologies in markets where there is more demand essentially allows the carriers to subsidize the cost of building out the network in areas where demand wouldnt normally support it. My recent post Psst…. hey, check out these Apps! (Part 1)
I live in Toledo, OH and T Mobile still does not have their shit together. The 3G network has been in place for over 8 months yet is still very patchy and slow. When I called them to find out why it does not work in my house, they told me it was because I was indoors. The map shows 3G coverage where there is none for miles. T Mobile blows!
The 3G is pretty good in the UK.
Mobile broadband use is increasing and the advantage is that most of them are plug-and-play and this makes them easy to use and after using it can be unplugged. I like it because it is easy to set up limits on your usage.
Can’t call it 4G because it’s the same ole technology. 4G is packet based so it excels in error checking and scalability. Effective throughrate is more than just theoretical bandwidth.
If this were true, why are there so many media reports that T-Mobile is in talks with Clearwire to leverage its 4G network?
There is a difference between per user and total bandwidth. Theoretically, Wimax can go up to 1GB/s, but load balancing is key factor with you have so many users. T=Mobile is hogtied to old tech with will slow down the claimed bandwidth. Furthermore, most websites you visit are not going to even keep up with 1MB/s. Here’s excerpt from Wiki on how the infrastructure plays a roll in throughput: “WiMAX is a possible replacement candidate for cellular phone technologies such as GSM and CDMA, or can be used as an overlay to increase capacity. It has also been considered as a wireless backhaul technology for 2G, 3G, and 4G networks in both developed and poor nations.[10][11] In North America, backhaul for urban cellular operations is typically provided via one or more copper wire line T1 connections, whereas remote cellular operations are sometimes backhauled via satellite. In most other regions, urban and rural backhaul is usually provided by microwave links. (The exception to this is where the network is operated by an incumbent with ready access to the copper network, in which case T1 lines may be used). WiMAX is a broadband platform and as such has much more substantial backhaul bandwidth requirements than legacy cellular applications. Therefore traditional copper wire line backhaul solutions are not appropriate. Consequently the use of wireless microwave backhaul is on the rise in North America and existing microwave backhaul links in all regions are being upgraded.[12] Capacities of between 34 Mbps and 1 Gbps[citation needed] are routinely being deployed with latencies in the order of 1ms. In many cases, operators are aggregating sites using wireless technology and then presenting traffic on to fiber networks where convenient.”
honest what does it all matter. I worked for both gte mobile now verizon and also ATT back in the 90s tdma vs cdma vs gsm was the big deal then… who cares really. just get a netbook for real if you really want a computer. its just a phone. yea i have a htc hd2 but come on i am never going to try to make my cell a rsplacemennt for my laptop.
Well looks like your stuck in the 90s because higher speed on a cell makes a world of difference. My phone is a WiFi hotspot that follows me around wherever I go. My notebook is tethered to my phone and I don't have to pay for a stupid USB aircard which also results in more fees per month. And explain to me why I am going to lug around a cheap little net-book when I can pull out my phone and do whatever I need to do when I'm on the go.
T Mobile can market it however they want but a theoretical speed is still only that. ATT is using the same upgrade technology and is claiming 7.2 mbps, how can T Mob magically achieve more? They can't but also can't ditch this old technology in favor of a true 4G like everybody else is doing because they can't afford it and decided to stick to this instead. Not to make themselves look bad or behind the other carriers they "claim" they can exceed 4G speeds but everyone knows that they don't even have a widespread enough 2G network never mind a 3G+. Currently their network is capped at 7.2 mbps for a reason and any device that goes to T mobile will be capped at the 7.2 mark just the same. It is true that in prime markets they are able to match Sprint's Wimax speeds, at best. Naturally at times they could be faster and at others Wimax will be, there is a lot of variables that go into the equation. What is not a variable is the unmatched speed rating of the EVO device itself and the Wimax network at 10+ mbps. There is your real world speed advantage potential because that is all it really ever is, only potential.
Sprint's 4G is about as available as T Mob's 3G+, so there is no real coverage advantage for either but Wimax is primed for hard data (resembling wifi) and delivers the full, real internet experience to the cellular device as opposed to the HSPA+ tech which is voice capable first and only mobile version internet second. So maybe not now but long term, Wimax will offer a richer experience and will be a more consistent service than all the other 4G technologies because of it's greater available bandwidth with less individual usage. Then you should look at what backhauls them and Sprint uses a full 3G network when not roaming and T mobile uses only 2G and covers most of the nation's area in only 2G. Unlike a 4G system, HSPA+ is not another network added to the coverage it is only an upgrade of the existing 3G. Because of this, their limited 3G coverage (like ATT) combined with too many customers in a single area trying to take advanatge of 3G, results in a very poor experience and slows down speeds to what is only in line with that of a regular 3G network that is instead more widespread like Sprint or Verizon. http://www.thebuzzmedia.com/unpredictable-3g-cove…
Thank you Mack, what people don't realize is that when you share that voice and data that is the max bandwidth of 21 mbs. LTE is building Verizon's network and they also say 21 mbs, but they will share that with AT&T and other carriers. Buy the time you get everyone sharing this bandwidth you will see it will be slower. Try this instead, if you have 3 carriers using 21 mbs that would leave 7 mbs max usage for each carrier. This would mean that the actual speed would average about 1.5 to 3 mbs and even less for carriers like verizon because of the large amount of users on their networks. They will have the same problem that Att had some time ago with the iphone. If WiMax sells their network to enough users theirs will slow way down as well unless the fcc opens more bandwidth for this new technology.
Sprint's WiMax technology is currently being upgraded to the IEEE 802.16 standard which will deliver speeds up to ONE GIGABYTE per second transfer rates in response to this LTE technology that is being launched. Sprint is constantly bashed and its very sad as CDMA2000 is actually a GREAT technology. I always wondered why Japan never had a GSM network…LOL
The publication of maps showing actual download speeds on every network should be mandatory for every supplier. Up to speeds are meaningless – in the UK OFCOM found that the vast majority delivered around 45% of their up to speeds. My recent post Landline and Broadband Pay As You Go