5G launches in the US – Here are the speeds users can get

Bryn

Doubleplusgood
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
15,629
Latency is a much bigger deal than throughput, which 4G seldom had issues with.

The 5G standard is supposed to have a max latency of 4ms. I need to see that in practice to believe it.
 

Dan C

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
26,366
Going to take years to get affordable devices that can make use of this.
 

ProAsm

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Messages
2,178
Going to take years to get affordable devices that can make use of this.
I'm inclined to agree with you Dan C as while we play with 3 to 6 Ghz (or lower) this will be the case as the greedy providers and green idiots will not allow 5G to be extended by allowing the opening of the 28 Ghz band where 5G can only display it's true potential.
If you look at the price of 4G atm, imagine what an entry level of 200 Mbps is gonna cost :)
 

Wasabee!

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
5,268
Would 5g better better than fibre wrt to ping?
No commercially feasible technology has a better latency than fibre. If it is, it's something stupid like diamond or graphene or something not practical.
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
25,260
No commercially feasible technology has a better latency than fibre. If it is, it's something stupid like diamond or graphene or something not practical.
Not entirely true. Fibre gives you a transmission speed of 0.6x the speed of light in a lot of places. Wireless is near 100%. So good old air still wins.
 

Wasabee!

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
5,268
Not entirely true. Fibre gives you a transmission speed of 0.6x the speed of light in a lot of places. Wireless is near 100%. So good old air still wins.
Then why isn't the latency over wireless better? Is it because the spectrum is limited?
 

genetic

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
32,505
Not entirely true. Fibre gives you a transmission speed of 0.6x the speed of light in a lot of places. Wireless is near 100%. So good old air still wins.
Source?
 

Thor

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 5, 2014
Messages
40,095
Bottom line we don't have the infrastructure to support true 5G.

Won't be the case for years to come.

I would appreciate it if we can atleast get 99% coverage on LTE, we have not maxed out the throughput on that even remotely, which in our current given our current situation would make a bigger difference to have everyone connected to fast internet at near free rates (data caps must fall.)
 

DTBA

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2011
Messages
4,261
Latency is a much bigger deal than throughput, which 4G seldom had issues with.

The 5G standard is supposed to have a max latency of 4ms. I need to see that in practice to believe it.
Is that from phone to base station?
 

genetic

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
32,505
Light travels slower in fibre its about 30 to 35% slower.

Is it slower then radio waves aka wireless
But wireless' data throughput isn't 100%. Packet loss, SNR etc slow down the processing of the signal. That's why fibre has a far lower latency than that of wireless.
 

DTBA

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2011
Messages
4,261
But wireless' data throughput isn't 100%. Packet loss, SNR etc slow down the processing of the signal. That's why fibre has a far lower latency than that of wireless.
That agree with. At the moment fibre is the best option. Bang for your buck

Higher end equipment then wireless shine, it works fine and that's why we seeing big improvements with stuff like 5G.
 

Bryn

Doubleplusgood
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
15,629
Is that from phone to base station?
It has to be. Impossible for the 5G specs to demand anything else considering the wide variety of use cases and technical and geographical considerations. But even then, that's supposed to be the worst case of the last mile. If any given urban area has the recommended quantity of 5G towers in its proximity and can function as intended, that latency could be 1 or 2ms.
 

genetic

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
32,505
It has to be. Impossible for the 5G specs to demand anything else considering the wide variety of use cases and technical and geographical considerations. But even then, that's supposed to be the worst case of the last mile. If any given urban area has the recommended quantity of 5G towers in its proximity and can function as intended, that latency could be 1 or 2ms.
Which is pretty much on par with fibre, but that's, 5G's best case scenario.
 
Top