So clearly we can get 1GPS from sub-6? If that’s the case i see no current need for mmWave at all.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
mmWave vs. Sub-6GHz 5G iPhones: What's the Difference?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So clearly we can get 1GPS from sub-6? If that’s the case i see no current need for mmWave at all.
I’d like to know a bit more about this, so I’m going to do my research. Very interested in high quality voice calls. Thank you for bringing it up! And yes I’m hoping for the X60 modem to be in the iPhone 12, otherwise maybe it is better to wait one more year or two.Thank you. This is a good article on mmWave and sub-6GHz.
I have a 3G bar phone and I do not use data. I feel that I am being forced to upgrade. My understanding is that after January 1, 2021, 3G phones may no longer work. The 3G spectrum is being re-purposed to expand 5G coverage. It seems like no one is talking about this.
Yes, I am shopping for a new phone; however, I am not concerned about mmWave and download speeds. I am looking for voice over new radio support (VoNR). I want a 5G phone that can make and receive calls without relying on a 4G LTE connection. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X55 modem does not support this out-of-the-box, it requires a software update. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X60 modem has native support for VoNR. I will be disappointed if the iPhone12 uses the X55 modems.
Qualcomm Introduces Snapdragon X60, Smaller 5G Modem Suitable for 2021 iPhones
Qualcomm this week introduced the Snapdragon X60, its third-generation 5G modem for mobile devices. The company says the first 5G smartphones...www.macrumors.com
I remember 4 years ago when the 2G networks got shut down. I worked at a target mobile store and had to explain to older guests that their tracphone would no longer work and tracphone sent you a notice about it and would send you a new phone for free. I had a dozen older guests that they can no longer use their old phone and tracphone has a new unit on 3G 
Some like their old phone, but time changes and phones do also. We are very close to the end of 3G wireless service.
I had one customer that had a cabin in the middle of nowhere in UP Michigan and was mad that even his 3G service did not work well. Had to explain that his closest cell tower is 250 miles away. So told him he had three choices, get an old AT&T copper line run to his new cabin, which was pretty much impossible at that point, erect a tower and put a cell repeater on top of it or get a satellite bag phone. He was not happy with any of those, I aways think it is funny how people think that wired and wireless communication should be everywhere and is easy to do.
Some like their old phone, but time changes and phones do also. We are very close to the end of 3G wireless service. I had one customer that had a cabin in the middle of nowhere in UP Michigan and was mad that even his 3G service did not work well. Had to explain that his closest cell tower is 250 miles away. So told him he had three choices, get an old AT&T copper line run to his new cabin, which was pretty much impossible at that point, erect a tower and put a cell repeater on top of it or get a satellite bag phone. He was not happy with any of those, I aways think it is funny how people think that wired and wireless communication should be everywhere and is easy to do.
One of the improvements that I am actually excited for is improvements to latency.
mmWave is pretty worthless in my opinion (as an Electronic & Electrical Engineer), sub-6GHz isn't going to light the world on fire but it does bring decent small gains. LTE is something that really grew and developed over time into a strong networking stack that brought big improvements, integrating VoLTE and WiFi Calling brought big quality of life improvements.
mmWave is pretty worthless in my opinion (as an Electronic & Electrical Engineer), sub-6GHz isn't going to light the world on fire but it does bring decent small gains. LTE is something that really grew and developed over time into a strong networking stack that brought big improvements, integrating VoLTE and WiFi Calling brought big quality of life improvements.
I'm an EEE and have done quite a lot of research into this. VoNR is part of 5G SA, everything from the X55 modem (which is very likely going to be the chip in this years iPhones) and up will support VoNR. I highly doubt they will include the X60 modem, not enough time for taping out, testing, and validation. The real area of improvement that the X60 offers is the ability to use different standards and frequencies at once, but it's not necessarily the big jump between the half baked X50 and the fully baked X55.
I've got T-Mobile and an iPhone XR and live in the suburbs where Fort Worth is transitioning into a semi-rural area, but I’m still in the more populated region of that transitional area. I generally get around 7-12 Mbps maximum download speed with 4G. First, that is typically more than I need as I rarely even use cellular to get on the internet because I’m mostly around WiFi and use that. Second, if you have T-Mobile then you are well aware that they don't have the best coverage, especially when you travel through rural areas. That is okay with me because I know what my bill will be each month because T-Mobile doesn’t have surprises built into their billing system, I pay much less than AT&T and Verizon, and I’m immensely satisfied with my T-Mobile service whereas I was mostly dissatisfied when I had the other two blood sucking companies's services. So since I’m not glued to my iPhone XR 24x7, nor need high speed internet on it, I’m not really interested in 5G or all the BS these various companies claim it will do. I'm an Extra Class amateur radio operator (ham) so I’m very well aware that the tiny little wavelengths of even the sub-6 GHz or going to be extremely short range, and the mmWave will be so short-ranged that you will need to build a birds nest on the tower and live therein to use it.
Bottomline, unless you live in a large city within the highest population areas don’t expect much. And don’t believe a word of the promises and claims these companies make.It is mostly BS.
Remember more people live in big cites than rural areas of the United States, so it comes down to economy of scale. If you have more people in a large condensed city you have more traffic and more users which require more bandwidth and faster throughput with lower latency of network traffic. As you get away from the city you need bigger antenna's on taller towers, with more power to increase speed and bandwidth.
Do I rely on 4G LTE for my home bandwidth? No I have AT&T u-verse with 100mbps. Next year they are replacing the old copper ADSL with fiber so 1gbps and up will be available. Wireless networks can have more congestion and they give you lower data cap so it is not ideal for a huge amount end user data needs but they let you be mobile and move around.
in short mmWave is waste of money at the moment. By investing on high end iPhone 12 we will be investing in the R&D of mmWave. Good to know.
Sub-6 alone can provide peak data rates of 2 Gbps.
mmWave can provide up to 20 Gbps.
I’d be mad if I bought the unlimited plan from ATT just to get 5G then read this article...
Faster data doesn't necessarily mean we get more data. Sure, mmWave is much faster. But with great power comes great responsibility. You might be able to stream movies and download large files with mmWave, but you can also use up your monthly data limit in the blink of an eye.
I still don't see how ATT is getting away with this. It's blatant false advertising, especially on a handset that doesn't even have 5G hardware.
Having spent a week in northern Wisconsin for vacation this summer, I was reminded that there are people who still have to live with limited to no cell service. I had to drive 30 minutes (at 60mph+) just to get cell service. I’m sure that for many 2nd home owners in the area, they have less desire to push for improvements, as it does allow for getting away that is almost impossible to do otherwise. It was tough for me, as I really can’t go on a vacation without working every day, and the place we stayed couldn’t even get a stable internet connection via satellite.
I understand that the population density makes it much more difficult for telcos to justify adding towers in rural areas, but it is furthering a digital divide that isn’t improving as technology improves. Imagine schools not opening because of COVID-19, but not being able to do online classes, because there just isn’t viable service for every child, or teacher for that matter.
I understand that the population density makes it much more difficult for telcos to justify adding towers in rural areas, but it is furthering a digital divide that isn’t improving as technology improves. Imagine schools not opening because of COVID-19, but not being able to do online classes, because there just isn’t viable service for every child, or teacher for that matter.
I should’ve added the caveat, it depends on what country you’re in. If it’s the US, yeah they’re falling behind and you’d be lucky to get double the speeds as 4G. But if you’re in a European country, good chance you’ll have 5x faster speeds.
The reason is because the advancement of technology has slowed with time, and we're beginning to slowly plateau in terms of how much data there is in any bit of content - whether it's a webpage, video, etc. It's my belief that we will eventually reach thresholds where we no longer seek further advancement; such an example might be video resolution, as 8K's optimal viewing distance is a ridiculous 2' on a 65" display - even if you bump up to an abusrd 150", it's less than 5' away. A use case here may be with VR where resolutions are much different but comparatively dense, but streaming something VR-based over 5G seems like it would be rare, unless traditional ISPs just disappeared altogether and everything was wireless over 5G. Point is, it seems that we will eventually reach a plateau in terms of how "large" content will be in the future - at least traditional content such as webpages and videos. Perhaps something else will come along that will be a more viable use case, but the bandwidth 5G offers on sub-6Ghz alone seems as if it will be more than enough for at least the decade, if not further.
Apple could have easily skipped 5G in this and next years iPhone and it would not matter. Personally, I think 2024 is likely when some mainstream excitement will start. If you bought a 5G capable smartphone this year and kept it that long, you will then be able to say you are one of the first.
As for me, I am going to push my iPhone X for as long as Apple will support it with updates then get on this 5G bandwagon when the carrier rates are affordable and I will actually see some benefit.
As for me, I am going to push my iPhone X for as long as Apple will support it with updates then get on this 5G bandwagon when the carrier rates are affordable and I will actually see some benefit.
Why do people keep saying this?
There are over 100 million 5G subscribers in China and Korea. Plans start as low as $10/month for 30GB.
With the current Covid-19 health crisis, I don’t think congestion at mass gatherings for concerts, sporting events etc will be much of a problem for the foreseeable future. I’ll take a safe and effect vaccine over 5G.
Correct. I have measured 500-800 MBit/s on T-Mobile midband 5G (3.5 GHz) in Berlin with an inexpensive Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5G.
Upload speed was around 150 MBit/s.
I'd call that a pretty substantial improvement. 4G Download speed in the same locations is 100 MBit/s if you are lucky.
Last edited:
I too would prefer increased LTE coverage and that's why mmWave 5G won't help us. It's designed for high density open areas such as sports and concert venues. It will have no use in any urban or suburban environment because the frequencies being used can't penetrate buildings or travel down long streets.
Technically, that's why Verizon has "better" coverage in most places, because the LTE frequencies they use are lower, which allow building penetration and longer range. Like someone else mentioned, it's like comparing 2.4Ghz to 5Ghz wifi.
It isn't so much the band, but the channel width. That's what these things seem to neglect to mention. When you're on lower bands, you're looking at a maximum of 20 mhz. Mid-band, like T-Mobile's n41 (from Sprint) allows for 100 mhz. Then up in mmWave, the frequency bands are gigantic 3-4000 mhz wide... and allow for a maximum bandwidth of 400 mhz.
But the biggest gains is the number of users it can support off one connection. It's something like a 10 fold increase. So a properly fed tower will perform far better than LTE with more people before it starts to slow down.