AT&T's 3G Network Gets Top Ranks

[MacRumors]

AT&T's 3G network beat out Verizon and Sprint's competing networks in testing done by ComputerWorld.

To gauge the speed and reliability of these three wireless data networks, I used my ThinkPad X300 to collect nearly 500 data points at eight different places in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, within a 50-mile radius of midtown Manhattan's urban canyons.

I timed how long it took to establish a connection with each network, followed by speed tests. Using Alken's bandwidth meter, I was able to gauge download and upload speeds as well as how long it took to load that vendor's home page. Finally, I ran an Internet radio station and timed how long it took to drain the battery. I then compared it to running the battery down using the notebook's Wi-Fi radio.

All speed readings -- connection time, the Alken speed tests and page loading times -- were repeated five times and averaged.

The result placed AT&T as the leader with consistently faster download and upload speeds and shorter connection and page load times. The author notes that individual results may vary based on location.

As readers are probably aware, Apple is widely expected to announce a 3G iPhone by June's Worldwide Developers Conference.

Article Link

[jazzkids]

Is it fair to say that Apple is probably been the best thing for AT&T?

I realize that they were probably doing fine before Apple, but I think that relationship has been more of a benefit to AT&T than the reverse.

I'm glad to see that my switch from Sprint was a good move!

[longofest]

I've actually been very pleasantly surprised with AT&T. I was nervous switching from Verizon, but I've had nothing but good cell service, not to mention I get to use the iPhone.

But really... haven't had the bad network coverage issues that Cingular used to have. They've done a good job of solidifying their network.

[liberty4all]

Now just post a Clearwire WiMax (4G) datapoint for comparison purposes...

http://clearwire.com

[longofest]

Originally Posted by liberty4all

Now just post a Clearwire WiMax (4G) datapoint for comparison purposes...

http://clearwire.com

This was a 3G comparison. 4G is still a ways off for being really viable for consumers. See how limited the coverage map is for one. Also, the speeds aren't that much better than 3G (peak 3G speeds in this test were 1.6 Mbps, whereas clearwire peak is 2Mbps according to their website).

[amac4me]

Bring on the 3G iPhone! Nice to see these results. I'll be switching from Verizon once the new model is released. Looking forward to finally owning an iPhone.

[Rocketman]

Originally Posted by jazzkids

Is it fair to say that Apple is probably been the best thing for AT&T?

I agree. I hope ATT is sourcing UNIX boxes for nodes from Apple!

Blackberry is an ATT friendly thing as well, but they have back end services to compliment the palmtop and network front end.

Oh, wait, Apple owns the former Worldcom telco center. THEY could offer Blackberry (crackberry) like back end services too.

Hmmm. iPod dock connector keyboard dongle anyone?

Rocketman

[SirOmega]

I have a hard time believing this. Or at least, thinking that this would apply nationwide.

I have both Verizon Rev A EVDO and AT&T HSDPA modems at work, and I find that the EVDO modems perform better than the HSDPA modem. Rev A EVDO is slightly faster - 1Mb/s-800kb/s vs 900-750kb/s - and has lower ping times (120ms vs 350ms) than HSDPA modems.

[Rocketman]

Originally Posted by liberty4all

Now just post a Clearwire WiMax (4G) datapoint for comparison purposes...

http://clearwire.com

I am as strong of a Wimax advocate as anyone on this site, but it has latency issues and is not deployed yet of course, and hogs power. The Verizon vision of high bandwidth cellular wireless seems more compatible with the installed base of handsets and the installed base of handset and chip manufacturing for device action time intensive applications. Maybe for laptops or devices with double or quadruple sized batteries.

Once Wimax becomes dense it is better, but for rural and national coverages, cellular is still the thing.

Heck, iPhone EDGE (2.75G) is pervasive in this country and I tested that on a cross-country trip with almost no dead spots. That amazed me. Thank you NSA!

Rocketman

[stagi]

Very nice, bring on the 3g iPhone

[Diode]

Originally Posted by longofest

This was a 3G comparison. 4G is still a ways off for being really viable for consumers. See how limited the coverage map is for one. Also, the speeds aren't that much better than 3G (peak 3G speeds in this test were 1.6 Mbps, whereas clearwire peak is 2Mbps according to their website).

Don't forget that Clearwire is capped at 256k upload.

They were getting 484Kbit/sec on AT&T's 3G ... which will make emailing photo's much much better.

[megfilmworks]

Bad news for all the haters.

[winterspan]

Hey, sorry If people already saw this, I'm not trying to paste it everywhere, I just thought it was definitely relevant here. AT&T may have great service 3G service where you can get it, but Verizon's network also gets fairly high marks and is available in many more suburban/rural places.

This is from another thread:

note: the map is certainly NOT PERFECT. There were many elements on the original maps that had to be removed to overlay them together such as other services coverage areas with different colors, differing state and city label locations, etc. In the areas where extraneous text labels were removed on the Verizon coverage, I did the best I could to extrapolate the coverage boundaries based on the surrounding area. That being said, DO NOT RELY on this map to insure you have 3G service in your area -- it is only intended to be used for a quick comparison of national coverage. To check your local area for coverage, please visit http://www.att.com or http://www.verizonwireless.com.


The Image below is an Gif animation. You need to let the frames load to see the comparison data...

[Peel]

Finally, I ran an Internet radio station and timed how long it took to drain the battery.

Why would one company's 3G connection drain your battery faster than another? If you're streaming internet radio over both, the connection will be open the same, no? I wouldn't think it would matter that one had more bad packets, or faster throughput, etc. if the channel on the testing (receiving) device were simply pulling down data as fast as it was being served up.

[megfilmworks]

Have you ever been in a flakey edge area? Your battery meter will shrink before your eyes and your phone will get warm. Slower connections take longer to move data and during that time the battery is working hard for a longer time. You may not notice it with internet radio as a large buffer will try to keep the stream consistent at playback.

[autumn]

Originally Posted by winterspan

Hey, sorry If people already saw this, I'm not trying to paste it everywhere, I just thought it was definitely relevant here. AT&T may have great service 3G service where you can get it, but Verizon's network also gets fairly high marks and is available in many more suburban/rural places.

This is from another thread:

note: the map is certainly NOT PERFECT. There were many elements on the original maps that had to be removed to overlay them together such as other services coverage areas with different colors, differing state and city label locations, etc. In the areas where extraneous text labels were removed on the Verizon coverage, I did the best I could to extrapolate the coverage boundaries based on the surrounding area. That being said, DO NOT RELY on this map to insure you have 3G service in your area -- it is only intended to be used for a quick comparison of national coverage. To check your local area for coverage, please visit http://www.att.com or http://www.verizonwireless.com.


The Image below is an Gif animation. You need to let the frames load to see the comparison data...

VZW and Sprint does lead at&t over in 3G coverage area for now. FYI, that at&t 3G coverage map is not most updated one. There are quite a few markets with 3G that are not marked in the map.

Nonetheless, at&t is working very hard to push 80 more markets of 3G this year.

Also, at&t's 3G upgrade path is easier than VZW and Sprint. They have HSDPA 1.8Mbit/s now, some markets have 3.6Mbit/s. Then they can go to 7.3, 10.2, 14.4. They use simultaneous voice and data which means you can browse the web, check your email, or anything data related while you are on the phone.

Even with Rev. A, VZW and Sprint are still not simultaneous voice/data network. They'll have to wait til Rev. B which is a pretty major ordeal to upgrade to as I understand.

Anyway, if you live in a major city and usually travel to other major cities like me, then you'll have no problem with at&t's 3G coverage. If not, at&t is catching up fast so hopefully your area will be covered soon.

[lax15]

Can't wait for the new 3g phone. Here in Atlanta, we get great 3g coverage so i'll be upgrading my 16 gig real soon.

[Analog Kid]

Certainly good news, I just wonder how it will handle the sudden rush of a couple million iPhone users...

Originally Posted by SirOmega

I have a hard time believing this. Or at least, thinking that this would apply nationwide.

I have both Verizon Rev A EVDO and AT&T HSDPA modems at work, and I find that the EVDO modems perform better than the HSDPA modem. Rev A EVDO is slightly faster - 1Mb/s-800kb/s vs 900-750kb/s - and has lower ping times (120ms vs 350ms) than HSDPA modems.

Radio flies at the same speed for all these technologies, so I have to guess that those ping time differences must be indicating something that isn't spectrum or protocol related. What ever is causing that is probably also responsible for some of the speed difference.

Originally Posted by megfilmworks

Have you ever been in a flakey edge area? Your battery meter will shrink before your eyes and your phone will get warm. Slower connections take longer to move data and during that time the battery is working hard for a longer time.

The battery isn't trading electricity to heat because of slow data rates in that case, it's doing it to drive up the transmit amp. Depending on the phone, it could be pumping out as much as a Watt of radio power, which is easily a couple watts internally.

The slower connection might exacerbate this, but the real source of the power drain is distance to the tower.

[Poudresteve]

Originally Posted by autumn

VZW and Sprint does lead at&t over in 3G coverage area for now. FYI, that at&t 3G coverage map is not most updated one. There are quite a few markets with 3G that are not marked in the map.

Nonetheless, at&t is working very hard to push 80 more markets of 3G this year.

I live in one of those places where at&t is certainly lacking in comparison with Verizon (Champaign, IL). Just happens to be location of the #5 engineering university in the world and one of the innovation hubs of the Midwest (the University of Illinois) - but not that at&t would notice - they have already upgraded Bloomington (home of State Farm Insurance) and Springfield (home of the corrupt politicians of Illinois) to 3G, and we're still sitting at EDGE speeds. So you can see where at&t figures their bottom line is at.

So I think that this article certainly figures out that at&t favors the big markets (it's pretty sad that 3G and not 4G or better is still the standard in NY metro, arguably the richest place on the planet). As an aside, all of these corporations have let our nation down so badly in terms of putting in place a consistent high speed standard that soon places like China and India (what we think of as the third world) will soon have faster nation wide wireless data access than the good ol' USA.

It's time that the government stepped in and made some policy decisions as for what is best for our economy - as a faculty member at a major university, I find it so wasteful that we leave it up to these corporations where our economy develops in terms of the data backbone compared to where it is not. I certainly encourage competition in terms of devices (like the iPhone), but in a small market place like where I do "business" so much is left to the infrastructure in place that it doesn't seem like competition is a factor, whereas corporate greed is the driver.

[cheekybobcat]

Originally Posted by jazzkids

Is it fair to say that Apple is probably been the best thing for AT&T?

I realize that they were probably doing fine before Apple, but I think that relationship has been more of a benefit to AT&T than the reverse.

I'm glad to see that my switch from Sprint was a good move!

I'd say AT&T has been happy with the contract with Apple. It sure as heck didn't hurt them

[winterspan]

Originally Posted by Peel

Why would one company's 3G connection drain your battery faster than another? If you're streaming internet radio over both, the connection will be open the same, no?

It's far more complex than that.

1) AT&T and Verizon/Sprint do not share the same 3G technologies. AT&T's UMTS (W-CDMA) uses a different air interface and multiplexing technology than Verizon/Sprint's EV-DO (CDMA). This means they may have different signal processing and power transmission requirements for the mobile phone.

2) Your phone does not use a constant amount of transmission power. It varies considerably depending on how well the signal is traveling between it and the cellular tower. There are many elements that affect the signal transmission, including the type of network technology, the radio frequency that the network is on running on, the density and location of the tower placements, and the obstacles between you and the tower. A good rule of thumb is that the lower the frequency of the radio wave (and thus the higher the wavelength), the farther the signal will travel. This is because lower frequency (higher wavelength) signals have less attenuation from weather and other obstacles (like walls) and thus go farther with less transmission power. This is why over-the-air analog TV that transmits on 700mhz works so well in homes, and so many miles from the transmission station. This is why the FCC's auction for the rights to this very same 700mhz frequency was such a bid deal (in the USA) since current cellular networks run on frequencies between 800 and 2400mhz.

I don't personally know whether CDMA EV-DO technology or AT&T's UMTS/W-CDMA competitor is more efficient with regards to transmission power and signal processing power. I also don't know whose network is built better, but, judging by reports and coverage maps, it appears to almost exclusively depend on your local area. for 3G specifically, it appears Verizon has a larger coverage area for suburban/rural America, but AT&T is gaining fast and apparently has a better 3G network in the areas that is does service.

Originally Posted by megfilmworks

Have you ever been in a flakey edge area? Your battery meter will shrink before your eyes and your phone will get warm. Slower connections take longer to move data and during that time the battery is working hard for a longer time. You may not notice it with internet radio as a large buffer will try to keep the stream consistent at playback.

Yep, it's all about the signal strength and how much transmission power the phone has to use. I guess an analogy might be... the farther away your buddy is from you in a field or the more obstructions there is between you and him, the louder you have to yell and thus the more energy you use communicating. Is that terrible? lol

Originally Posted by autumn

VZW and Sprint does lead at&t over in 3G coverage area for now. FYI, that at&t 3G coverage map is not most updated one. There are quite a few markets with 3G that are not marked in the map.

Nonetheless, at&t is working very hard to push 80 more markets of 3G this year.

Also, at&t's 3G upgrade path is easier than VZW and Sprint. They have HSDPA 1.8Mbit/s now, some markets have 3.6Mbit/s. Then they can go to 7.3, 10.2, 14.4. They use simultaneous voice and data which means you can browse the web, check your email, or anything data related while you are on the phone.

Even with Rev. A, VZW and Sprint are still not simultaneous voice/data network. They'll have to wait til Rev. B which is a pretty major ordeal to upgrade to as I understand.

Anyway, if you live in a major city and usually travel to other major cities like me, then you'll have no problem with at&t's 3G coverage. If not, at&t is catching up fast so hopefully your area will be covered soon.

Well, I used the map from their website and that was put together 2 days ago... I'm sure they don't update it as often as they should though. Also, you did make a really good point about simultaneous voice and data use. I knew GSM/EDGE couldn't do it, but I thought both EV-DO and UMTS could.

FOR EVERYONE WHO IS THAT NOT EXCITED ABOUT A 3G iPHONE ---- IT WILL ALLOW YOU TO RECEIVE PHONE CALLS WHILE YOUR DATA CONNECTION IS ACTIVE, UNLIKE THE CURRENT iPHONE.

[kingtj]

What happens when a number of users try to do 3G data transfers from the same tower, simultaneously?

I'm told that at least in some other countries, this is the downfall of 3G, in "real world" use. As more phones start supporting the standard, more people try to use it at the same time, on a given cell tower - and those towers have pretty limited total bandwidth. If you're the only one downloading some media on a specific tower, your 3G transfer speeds look great. But if 10 people do it at once, you get 1/10th. that speed, because by yourself, your 3G phone is capable of nearly saturating the TOTAL bandwidth provided to that one tower!

[Julien]

AT&T is planing to upgrade 3G to 20Mbps.

Unbelevable

[kjs862]

I still think if Apple had the option to go with verizon they should have taken that path... on complains with att though

[SirOmega]

Originally Posted by Julien

AT&T is planing to upgrade 3G to 20Mbps.

Unbelevable

Increase the speed all you want between the tower and the phone, but as long as the bandwidth between the towers and the network is a few bonded T1s then it wont do much good.