Apple to Use Intel Modems in AT&T iPhone 7, Qualcomm Modems for Verizon and China

[tmiw]

For what it's worth, I get close to 100mbps consistently on T-Mobile here with my 6S right now--and that's with only two channels aggregated. 300 would definitely be within reach with these new modems depending on where one lives and if T-Mobile shuts off their HSPA network altogether. Sprint, if they can densify enough, can probably take advantage of 600mbps right now thanks to their crazy amounts of band 41 spectrum.

Whether people really need it though is another question. I'd say ~10mbps is more than enough to browse the web and play YouTube videos but maybe some people actually feel the need to torrent from their phones or something.

 

[citysnaps]

Oh man... This will be Samsung or TSMC all over again in the forums

Only by forum keyboard warriors who do not understand the underlying technology. Just like before.

 

[milan03]

This assumes Apple will enable all the additional features in Qualcomm's modem. They might only enable an equivalent feature-set to avoid this controversy. It might simplify their testing and certification as well.

But that would be much worse. Neutering X12's user experience enhancing features like EVS and Advanced Wi-Fi Calling algorithms, plus capacity enablers like 256 QAM and 4x4 MIMO, all in the name of equality?

That's like the opposite of innovating.

 

[macsba]

Okay, my BIG question is this: Will the Intel modems have the same LTE bands as the ones in the iPhone 6s models A1633 and A1634?

 

[kevink2]

I'm more worried about supported bands rather than potential speed that likely be of little realistic impact. If the difference between the 2 in real world usage is 45 vs 60, or 90 vs 120, then it really only matters if tethering.

Since I bought my ATT iPhone 6, I've used it on ATT (where there have been additional bands deployed since purchase), T-Mobile (where the lack of band 12 didn't impact me since it wasn't available where I live), and not Verizon. But would the Verizon model of this year's phone be at a major disadvantage if I go to ATT again in the future? Or on my planned vacations during the following 2 years overseas?

 

[itr81]

Recently, AT&T has partnered with Intel for it's new drone and car technology so it's not out of question that AT&T maybe requesting this modem.

 

[jlc1978]

Wrong

While one may have better specs, I think it's safe to say most users will never notice the difference in performance, given real world use patterns and network capabilities; so for them there s no real difference and all the arguments over which is better have no bearing on them.

 

[HDFan]

I guess no modem for T-mobile.

T-Mobile and AT&T share the same GSM iPhone 6 models (6 and 6+).

 

[lukeja]

What is with all the people who buy their phones in an apple store or online. What LTE modem will they get?

Hopefully Qualcomm
[doublepost=1465646404][/doublepost]

Lol, ok- PLEASE put me in my place!!!
Show a market that exceeds 450mbps LTE speeds & would benefit from a peak of 600.
Oh, you can't because Singapore tops the list with a whopping 38mbps? Ok, then...
I guess I'll stick with "technologically inept" as a descriptor, then bite my tongue with regards to my further opinion of you, based on your willingness to storm out, guns blazing- devoid of information on the topic, running on sheer ego, cocksuredness, & braggadocio.

Just providing some real speed facts.

2015 Speedtest Awards (Average speeds across the whole country)

1. Australia - Telstra - 37.58 / 16.48 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/au
2. UK - EE - 33.03 / 13.81 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/gb
3. Canada - Rogers - 31.6 / 10.94 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/ca
3. US - T-Mobile - 19.62 / 9.9 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/us

 

[Tycho24]

Hopefully Qualcomm
[doublepost=1465646404][/doublepost]

Just providing some real speed facts.

2015 Speedtest Awards (Average speeds across the whole country)

1. Australia - Telstra - 37.58 / 16.48 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/au
2. UK - EE - 33.03 / 13.81 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/gb
3. Canada - Rogers - 31.6 / 10.94 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/ca
3. US - T-Mobile - 19.62 / 9.9 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/us

Thank you!
Yes... that's the exact data I uncovered as well.
Genuinely appreciate you backing me up!
Obviously, as we have both now shown- there is nowhere in the world even remotely approaching a cap of 450mbps, so having 600 vs 450 is inconsequential.

 

[jlc1978]

OK are you ready for my next counter-argument?

Again, keeping in mind that this is *not* about peak speeds, but rather about the relative gains in real world performance...

Let's say you're in a very crowded environment. Like, super crowded. Airport. Baseball game. Mall. You have great signal but damn there's a whole bunch of people trying to download or watch a video or video chat a the same time. It's so bad that you're barely getting 3-6 Mbps.

The difference between 450 Mbps and 600 Mbps is how many bits of data the tower can cram into the same amount of MHz of bandwidth. If you have many people sharing the tower at the same time, each phone gets only a small slice of spectrum (quite literally by the way). If you have a phone that supports 600 mbps, the tower could give you higher speed out of a smaller amount of spectrum, because it can pack 33% more bits into every LTE signal it sends you. So in a crowded place, your speed goes from 6 mbps to 8 Mbps...you go from not being able to stream a high quality video to being able to do it.

The problem is that if the tower doesn't have a 600mbps capability your modem's extra capacity is useless; so you're going to be stuck at the same speed as everyone else. That is the crux of the argument; since most carriers don't have the capability to deliver data at the higher speed users will see no difference in how their phone works.

Is it possible that one modem is inferior to the other across all speeds? Sure, but that is a different issue than if a 450mbps modem is automatically worse than a 600mbps one in real world conditions.

 

[maxsix]

Only by forum keyboard warriors who do not understand the underlying technology. Just like before.

Precisely.

Apple's target market doesn't even know, nor do they care about components. In fact only those that follow a typical two year upgrade cycle, will be buying iPhone 7.

Then there's the Apple Devotees, followed by random enthusiasts who aren't jaded yet. Hardcore iPhone lovers may wait for what seems to be a far better model... iPhone 8.

 

[SactoGuy18]

I think T-Mobile USA will also get this Intel modem on their iPhone 7's, but will likely be a slightly different version that also adds LTE Band 12 support. After all, T-Mobile, like AT&T, runs on GSM, not Verizon's CDMA.

 

[Juan007]

While one may have better specs, I think it's safe to say most users will never notice the difference in performance, given real world use patterns and network capabilities; so for them there s no real difference and all the arguments over which is better have no bearing on them.

That argument may work fine when you're selling $3 hamburgers or $10 t-shirts, but when you're charging $650+++ for a phone, don't be surprised when you majorly PISS OFF your educated customer base by giving them inferior goods. It's a good way to majorly destroy any goodwill you have created among your customers in a very short time.

After getting stuck with a Samsung 6+ and having to sell it on Ebay because Apple wouldn't allow a return, I WILL NEVER buy an Apple product until I see the reviews and find out what the "real" SKU is and which is the inferior product.

 

[name99]

That argument may work fine when you're selling $3 hamburgers or $10 t-shirts, but when you're charging $650+++ for a phone, don't be surprised when you majorly PISS OFF your educated customer base by giving them inferior goods. It's a good way to majorly destroy any goodwill you have created among your customers in a very short time.

After getting stuck with a Samsung 6+ and having to sell it on Ebay because Apple wouldn't allow a return, I WILL NEVER buy an Apple product until I see the reviews and find out what the "real" SKU is and which is the inferior product.

WTF are you talking about?

(a) Less than 1% of current iPhone buyers (and Android buyers) have a CLUE as to any details of exactly what specs and bands their cell phones support.

(b) You bought a Samsung phone and Apple would not allow a return? ??? ????????

(c) Assuming you meant you actually bought an iPhone, I call BS. Apple stores (physical Apple stores) have a two week no questions asked return policy, one that I have actually used.

 

[citysnaps]

Precisely.

Apple's target market doesn't even know, nor do they care about components. In fact only those that follow a typical two year upgrade cycle, will be buying iPhone 7.

Then there's the Apple Devotees, followed by random enthusiasts who aren't jaded yet. Hardcore iPhone lovers may wait for what seems to be a far better model... iPhone 8.

Nope. Not that at all...

Outside of a tiny fraction of a fraction of 1% of the people you characterize (keyboard warriors on tech forums and high school students), and insignificant in Apple's plans, a lot of people will simply wait another year because their current iPhone 5/6/s simply meets their needs and still works great.

Having the latest and greatest phone to show off to their "tech bros" is something that doesn't even enter their mind. For most a phone is just a tool that needs to have good utility and work well. It's not something to covet.

The market is saturated. What many people have now is good enough. All phone manufacturers are experiencing saturation.

As a photographer I'm interested in better cameras and displays, which the iPhone 7 will likely have, especially if the display uses the same tech as the latest 9.7" iPad Pro (rated best by DisplayMate). Still, my iPhone 6+ works fine as a camera and photo editing platform and still has excellent overall performance and battery life. I'll likely keep it another year. No need to upgrade unless the iPhone 7 has some extraordinary feature, which will likely not be the case.

Again, market saturation...

 

[malexandria]

I would be interested in an iPhone 7 if they:

1. Upgraded the Camera - especially the zoom function (since I use it primarily as a Camcorder)
2. Changed the audio chips and improved the sound - both music playback and call quality (It's a lousy phone)
3. And this - replacing the current networking chips is a must, I've never had an iPhone that had decent, reliable LTE and Wifi service. I don't know if it's ATT or the Phone.

I've outright owned my phone since the 4s. But managed to crack my screen and got upgraded to the 6s and I don't see a compelling reason to upgrade. Especially if they change the connectors and get rid of the headphone jack. That's a deal breaker for me, I don't want to have to worry about keeping yet ONE MORE thing charged, especially not a stupid headphone.

 

[sherifhanna]

2015 Speedtest Awards (Average speeds across the whole country)

1. Australia - Telstra - 37.58 / 16.48 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/au
2. UK - EE - 33.03 / 13.81 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/gb
3. Canada - Rogers - 31.6 / 10.94 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/ca
3. US - T-Mobile - 19.62 / 9.9 http://www.speedtest.net/awards/us

Thank you!
Yes... that's the exact data I uncovered as well.
Genuinely appreciate you backing me up!
Obviously, as we have both now shown- there is nowhere in the world even remotely approaching a cap of 450mbps, so having 600 vs 450 is inconsequential.

Actually, in trying to provide data to disprove my point, you inadvertently ended up proving it very elegantly. Thanks!

Here's why.

As of 2015, Cat 6 networks (up to 300 Mbps) and devices were widespread in Australia. Meanwhile in the US in 2015, the fastest networks and devices were only up to Cat 4 (up to 150 Mbps) [that is until very late in 2015]. So the peak theoretical speeds in Australia were double those of US networks.

Now according to you, that wouldn't make any difference to end users, since they would never see the peak theoretical speeds.

But what the Ookla data proves is that the average user experience in Australia is approximately double that of users in the US. ~38 Mbps vs. ~20 Mbps. So the *relative gain* between the peak speeds holds true for the average user experience.

QED.

 

[AFDoc]

What's the point of faster LTE when it just means your data cap runs out sooner?

Not for those that have unlimited data! Woot...... got rid of it years ago but got it back on our family plan.

 

[mikecorp]

wonder why Apple doesn't use QC. QuickCharge? any idea about this. QC 3.0 is out and would be great to charge iphone fast. Especially if battery bank supports it.

 

[recoil80]

Oh man... This will be Samsung or TSMC all over again in the forums

But this time it will be easy to pick the model you want, while TSMC vs Samsung is a lottery

 

[BuffaloTF]

wonder why Apple doesn't use QC. QuickCharge? any idea about this. QC 3.0 is out and would be great to charge iphone fast. Especially if battery bank supports it.

I think it's important to note here that Quick Charge is a brand name/certification process for chargers with higher amperage and/or wattage and phones with qualcomm chips. It essentially says two things; 1, your phone can take more watts in to charge a battery quicker without cooking it, and; 2, the converter in the wall provides the higher amperage needed to output higher watts.

So, if you want the same style of service, you can use any 2.1 amp charger with a 6 or 6S and get much quicker charging as it draws the full 12 watts - you'll see people mostly talking about using the iPad wall brick for this.

Version 3.0 for the Quick Charge looks to make the old 1A chargers laying around more efficient, and I believe (if I read this stuff correctly back then) have them draw 10 watts through it instead of 6.5. This is theoretically possible for Apple to do, without needing to license Quick Charge.

 

[mountain]

Does this mean not iphone 7 is not a world phone?

 

[mikecorp]

thanks for explanation. It looks nice in paper, but I did not have opportunity to check real performance. I would love to have a power bank if it would Qc 3.0 itself. sometimes 7 hours to charge is quite a long time.

 

[jpn]

hi

sorry. i have a question that might be ok to ask in this thread.

LTE Advanced and 4G:
without getting into the marketing naming of these two, does current iPhone 6s has LTE Advanced modem? or just LTE?

And, now you read frequently about LTE A (cat 11) or (cat 9) modems: Is cat 11 the most advanced right now?

thanks