T-Mobile LTE questions

viperGTS

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Nov 15, 2010
1,559
847
I'm aware that T-Mobile uses 1700/2100 Mhz AWS for LTE and AT&T uses 700 Mhz. What are the major differences between these bands? Also, would an AT&T 5 work fully on T-Mobile's LTE when unlocked?
 

osofast240sx

macrumors 68030
Mar 25, 2011
2,521
1
I'm aware that T-Mobile uses 1700/2100 Mhz AWS for LTE and AT&T uses 700 Mhz. What are the major differences between these bands? Also, would an AT&T 5 work fully on T-Mobile's LTE when unlocked?
T-Mobile will have a higher network capacity. Won't get congested like att. T-Mobile will have less dropped calls. Att has better building penetration however newer technologies have improved T-Mobile penetration issues. T-Mobile has faster 4G data.
 

AutoUnion39

macrumors 601
Jun 21, 2010
4,889
900
T-Mobile will have a higher network capacity.
T-Mobile supports about 100 million users on their network (like VZW/AT&T), correct?

T-Mobile will have less dropped calls. Att has better building penetration however newer technologies have improved T-Mobile penetration issues.
I'm curious. Elaborate.


T-Mobile has faster 4G data.
Not really no. Average 4G speeds in most major cities put AT&T/VZW well ahead of TMo.

HSPA speeds are a copout excuse, when both VZW/AT&T have as much LTE than TMo has HSPA these days and exponentially more EVDO/HSPA
 
Last edited:

AutoUnion39

macrumors 601
Jun 21, 2010
4,889
900
Try about half that.
I'm well aware of that fact. I was directing that towards the other guy who said that TMo has a larger network capacity, which is a ridiculous statement to make, especially since they cater to a much smaller user base
 

scaredpoet

macrumors 604
Apr 6, 2007
6,627
342
T-Mobile will have a higher network capacity. Won't get congested like att.
T-Mobile is using dual-carrier HSPA+, which permits more throughput PER CONNECTION, but actually the cost of overall capacity.

It IS unlikely that T-Mobile will get congested any sooner than AT&T's network, but that's more a virtue of T-Mobile having far fewer users on their networks.

And right now, and probably for some time to come, T-Mobile's major problem is LTE coverage. AT&T hasn't been very aggressive in deploying LTE, but T-Mobile is way, way behind.

T-Mobile will have less dropped calls.
There's no way to guarantee that. Dropped calls are a function of many factors, coverage among them, and T-Mobile doesn't have nearly the coverage footprint of the three larger carriers above it.

Where I live, for example, I'll get way more missed/dropped calls on T-Mobile than AT&T, and I'm not in the boondocks.

Att has better building penetration however newer technologies have improved T-Mobile penetration issues.
That's dependent on cellular density, and granted in some major cities in their core urban centers, T-Mobile has it. But it's not uniform.


Don't getme wrong: if the OP (or anyone else) lives/travels in the areas for the US where T-Mobile has decent coverage, then it's worth going there. But if you're not, you're going to be very frustrated.
 

viperGTS

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Nov 15, 2010
1,559
847
Building penetration. 700 is significantly better at it than AWS.



Yes.
Are there any benefits to T-Mobile's band? Thanks. :)

And thank you everyone else replying as well. I'm trying to understand the differences between AT&T and T-Mobile's networks (among other carriers) and it's all pretty confusing. :confused:
 

AutoUnion39

macrumors 601
Jun 21, 2010
4,889
900
AT&T hasn't been very aggressive in deploying LTE, but T-Mobile is way, way behind.
You might want to check out this thread. (updated weekly)

http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php/1757531-AT-amp-T-4G-LTE-Latest-markets-launching-and-speculation?p=15151325#post15151325

Multiple markets announced weekly on top of the 79 (37 of those are done now) they said they would be done by the end of summer.

TMo/Sprint only dream of deploying LTE as fast as VZW/AT&T.

That's dependent on cellular density, and granted in some major cities in their core urban centers, T-Mobile has it. But it's not uniform.
Good point, but TMo is forced to have a dense grid because they run on PCS and AWS. Just a downside of the band they use.

Don't getme wrong: if the OP (or anyone else) lives/travels in the areas for the US where T-Mobile has decent coverage, then it's worth going there. But if you're not, you're going to be very frustrated.
NYC seems to be a very good market for TMo.

----------

Are there any benefits to T-Mobile's band? Thanks. :)
Not really no. AWS is perfectly fine, but again, only issue is building penetration. There are tons of reports of TMo users dropping down to EDGE inside buildings, whereas VZW/Sprint/AT&T users can, at least, maintain a 3G connection.

AWS/PCS forces the carrier to space their towers closer together (which isn't a bad thing btw), whereas VZW/AT&T can get away with more spacing because they use 700 for LTE

If you're in a top metro area and don't travel often, TMo is fine, otherwise I'd look elsewhere because they just have too much EDGE out there.