Slashdot Mirror
2013 U.S. Wireless Network Tests: AT&T Fastest, Verizon Most Reliable
adeelarshad82 writes "For the fourth year running, PCMag sent drivers out on U.S. roads to test the nation's Fastest Mobile Networks. Using eight identical Samsung phones, the drivers tested out eight separate networks for four major carriers across 30 cities evenly spread across six regions. Using Sensorly's 2013 software, a broad suite of tests were conducted every three minutes: a 'ping' to test network latency, multi-threaded HTTP upload and download tests including separate 'time to first byte' measures, a 4MB single-threaded file download, a 2MB single-threaded file upload, the download of a 1MB Web page with 70 elements, and 100kbps and 500kbps UDP streams designed to simulate streaming media. Nearly 90,000 data cycles later, the data not only revealed the fastest networks (AT&T) and the most consistent (Verizon), but also other interesting points. The tests recorded the fastest download speed (66.11 Mbits/sec) in New Orleans and the best average in Austin (27.25 Mbits/sec), both for AT&T's LTE network. The tests also found T-Mobile's HSPA network to have the worst Average-Time-To-First-Byte, even when compared with AT&T HSPA network. Also according to the tests, Sprint's LTE network didn't even come close to competing with other LTE networks, to the point that in some cities its LTE network speed averaged less than T-Mobile's HSPA network speed."
In light of recent leaks..
I don't like their service, pricing models or willingness to disclose my information to the prying eyes of the government, but in terms of mobile coverage, I guess you get what you pay for. And, I almost never drop a call.
I did read the article.
I'm surprised part of the rankings didn't address this.
I have Sprint and I have used upwards of 8GB in a month, something prohibitive with another carrier.
Seriously Verizon, $120+ for a basic data/voice plan?
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
is still the only major carrier with a true Unlimited Data plan.
AT&T - Fastest
Verizon - Reliable
TMobile - Cheapest
Sprint - Service
I use Straight Talk / Net 10 for $45 a month unlimited everything. I also regularly tether my devices to my phone and haven't had any issues. I've heard this service piggybacks on the major network's hardware , but I can't understand why the major networks would allow this - does anyone know?
The drivers weren't running the tests. Software ran the tests while the drivers drove the cars.
T-Mobile's LTE roll-out is about to get serious, and they claim they'll have around 200 million people in the U.S. covered by the end of the year (with rumors of my beloved Seattle area getting it by the end of this month). Sprint's LTE roll-out is also chugging along.
The landscape will look very different by year's end.
Seriously Verizon, $120+ for a basic data/voice plan?
Absent my equipment loans (ie, what a carrier subsidy should be - ie, limited duration, can pay of early to unlock completely, etc), I pay $110 for 5 lines. Each with it's own 500MB+tethering.
I get HD Voice on my iPhone5s (great for me and the wife to actually hear each other on the commute home), and unlike AT&T customers, I had Facetime over cellular for the past 2 months.
I used to pay around $100 for a single line on Verizon (wife paid same for AT&T).
The *only* downside is that data in very large buildings (museum, costco) can be literally zero. If you work in a large shielded building and don't have internal wifi, then you might want to reconsider - but that's what the test drive period is for. For all other things, tmobile has been about as reliable as either AT&T or VZ for a whole lot less and with better voice.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Sprint is the only cellphone company that has treated me like a person. But -- here in Washington DC -- their service is garbage. It's so bad that I have to constantly ask voice callers to repeat themselves because of dropped frames. At home I have to pick up the phone with "Let me call you back on skype".
There is LTE service randomly in random places, but never consistently or predictably.
Yeah, I was going to post the same thing, more or less. We've got four lines - we're paying $110 for that because I added 2GB/month to one of them.
AND if you happen to go over your bandwidth quota, you just get dropped to EDGE - it's slow, but you still have data access.
#DeleteChrome
... The speed test is NOT YOUTUBE!!!
I get HD Voice on my iPhone5s
Wow, you got an iPhone 5s? Did you steal a prototype from Apple?
It's EDGE transfer speed, but you still connect through the HSPA network so the ping times are still the same... MUCH better IMO
As a long time Verizon Wireless customer I would have to agree. However, their hiring practices are illegal based upon what a friend's experience. I would not want to work for such an unenlightened and short-sighted company.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
I have Verizon (I have had T-mobile and various rebranded AT&Ts over the years as well) and have found the Big Red to be the best overall for a few reasons:
- Coverage
- Data sharing
- Cost
I think my wife and I pay about $150 for our two lines which include unlimited voice and text with 4GB of data shared between us and our chosen devices.
AT&T was less money (about $130/month) however we had 450 anytime minutes/1000 night/weekend with rollover and no SMS plan. Being that my wife is using around 1000 SMSs a month, the cost savings from that alone is worth it.
Now, Verizon's 3G is noticeably slower than AT&T and while that doesn't matter much in the metro area where our primary residence is located as there is LTE, at our lake home (which has LTE about 500 feet outside of the cabin) we are stuck w/pokey 3G service that is comparable to the 1300/700 DSL service we get there.
For me I dropped more calls in dead zones with both T-mobile and AT&T than I have noticed w/VZW but the single biggest advantage Verizon has over any other carriers is coverage. I should NEVER, EVER, EVER have No Service show up along major interstates yet with both T-mobile and AT&T I did. I have never been w/o VZW service in the last year I've had it.
To me the $150/month is well worth it. YMMV.
Well, it depends upon what you want. I pay $50/month for unlimited voice/data/text with Verizon... but I don't use a smartphone. I use a plain ordinary Samsung pay-as-you-go phone at Target for $20 which included a $10 credit. It depends upon what you really need a phone for. I need a phone for voice stuff. When I want the Internet I use my MacBook. Who needs a smartphone or a pad when you have a portable REAL computer.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
I pay $50/month for unlimited voice/data/text with T-Mobile... for a smartphone. And I can use it as a mobile hotspot for my REAL computer. The only catch is it gets slow after the first 500 MiB, and having to change the user agent string to use hotspot from the computer.
...if you don't have a connection? I'd rather sacrifice some speed for reliability.
Wow, you got an iPhone 5s?
How to get iPhone 5s (fivez, not five ess):
1. Buy iPhone 5 for self
2. Buy iPhone 5 for spouse
3. Activate both on a single family plan
Seriously Verizon, $120+ for a basic data/voice plan?
I'm on Verizon and I pay $100 a month for grandfathered unlimited data and a subsidized phone. I have enough minutes that I don't bother keeping track. I find it reasonable.
If you can even get a signal, you might get a couple of mbit on LTE or HSPA from either carrier. My county has onerous zoning restrictions on "commercial communications towers" that makes it nearly impossible to place them.
The top of the tower and highest antenna element cannot exceed HAAT, meaning towers can only be used to overcome being in a landscape depression. They are not allowed to be visible, yet they must be lighted 24/7 (strobes during day, red slow blink at night) to avoid being a hazard to the sleepy county airport that has at most one flight per day from the local crop duster. Communications antenna arrays CAN be placed on existing utility towers and water towers, but only if they do not cause the entire structure to be taller, and only if the arrays are not visible.
It's insane. The NIMBY busy-bodies that run this county have destroyed any possibility of getting decent cell service here in the name of beautification. Utility companies are not even allowed to place any new overhead wiring for new communities, or repair existing overhead wiring - as it must be replaced with underground wiring.
Most cell towers still have a bunch of t1 if they are lucky all the t1 will work but most don't. Very few actually have a 0c-8 or something that can handle it because the CO doesn't have room for the equipment or the main trunks are all full. We might have made leaps and bounds in tech over the last 20 years but the phone lines that connects it has not been changed and fiber just cost too much to replace copper.
Doesn't most reliable make your network the fastest? What's the point of having 20% extra speed if you lose 50% of the packets?
On AT&T, the reports of poor signal reception, dropped calls, and other service issues from iPhone users outnumber those from users of other phones by a clear order of magnitude, if not a greater amount. It's common to hear "AT&T sucks! Ever since I got the iPhone X, I can't make calls and I don't get voicemails!" People never seem to catch on to the fact that when three people in their hme have Android, Windows, BlackBerry, or other phones, and do not have service issues, and their iPhone does, it's probably the phone. Alas, this lesson must be learned one person at a time. When the iPhones first launched on Verizon, and people were unsurprisingly having service problems with them, Apple was dumping their calls onto AT&T support, claiming that it was AT&T's fault that iPhones made for Verizon were dropping calls and failing to establish data connections on Verizon's network. And people believed that.
I've even heard a live call where an Apple representative said, and I quote:
"Thank you for calling Apple, where we believe you should throw (your iPhone) in the garbage and get an Android!", after which he had hung up immediately. Alas, I was not permitted to make a copy of the recording for comedic use on the public internet.
Yeah, I'm getting close to switching. With 3 smartphones on AT&T's old 200MB-per-month-per-line plan (and $15 each time you go over), 550 shared minutes, and unlimited texting, we're at about $155/mo. The T-Mo plan you describe (unlimited everything, 500 MB of 3G data+tethering, followed by EDGE speeds/no tethering when you pass that) is $50 for the first line, $30 for the second, and $10 for each additional. Plus some taxes and fees, and minus a discount for belonging to AAA, we could have all 3 lines for under $100/mo. The only downside: I'm testing them this month with an old iPhone 3G and I'm seeing EDGE as often as not. :-(
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
My ass. I have dropped calls all the fucking time on my S3 with AT&T.
Sadly, I'm under contract.
I haven't had a dropped call with my iPhone 5 on Verizon since the day I got it; November, I think.
The only downside: I'm testing them this month with an old iPhone 3G and I'm seeing EDGE as often as not. :-(
I'm surprised that an iPhone 3G can connect to T-Mobile as anything BUT EDGE. ATT and T-Mobile use different frequencies for 3G (maybe that started to change when T-Mobile got all that spectrum as part of the failed merger). For the most part you'll need T-Mobile hardware to get 3G on T-Mobile. I think HSPA is more compatible between the two, and LTE might be as well once T-Mobile rolls that out. So you might be able to get 2G and 4G on both networks with the same hardware, but generally not 3G.
In any fairly populated area on T-Mobile you should get 4G coverage these days (and 3G as well if that is all your device handles). However, hardware designed for ATT might not fare as well. My stepdaughter has an iPhone 4 and I think she is basically on EDGE for the most part.
Rich
For two lines on T-Mobile WITH data (which will never cost you more regardless of how much you use) and unlimited voice you could be around $80/mo these days I think. T-Mobile is significantly cheaper. The last time I switched contracts I found that going to ATT would have doubled my costs to start, and would have put me at risk of overage costs depending on usage. Only catch with that is that if you want a new flagship smartphone you'll be paying an extra $20/month or so for 18 months. I just paid $350 cash for a Nexus 4 (no other phone comes close to that as far as value goes).
Sure, I'd be willing to believe that Verizon has better coverage. However, you really can't compare them to T-Mobile on cost.
Fast.
Reliable.
Cheap.
Pick two.
I dont care if they are twice as fast as everyone else on their worst day.
T-mobile is refarming their 3G network to the same frequency as AT&T
SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
I don't post network tests of my country on /. either so stfu.
As a long time Sprint customer who uses them strictly for their lower prices, I can tell you that Sprint's 'network' is imaginary. It does not exist. There is no data network. In fact it's so pathetic that there are hundreds of blogs and forums dedicated solely to identifying the tiny random pockets of signal in 'rolled out' markets. Here in Raleigh NC for instance not only is there no LTE and they're closing down WiMax, the phone voice service is slowly coming apart as well. If you see someone standing outside their house talking on the phone, the odds are they're a Sprint customer.
The best thing that Sprint can do at this point is to close down their retail operations, stop selling Sprint branded service and become the bulk minutes carrier (there's an acronym for that I forget what it is) for brands like Virgin and Boost. Those brands get BETTER Sprint service than Sprint's own retail subscribers because those brands have negotiated SLAs with Sprint and they get priority over the retail customers.
In fact once they stop fighting over which foreign company gets to buy Sprint, pay off their stockholders and take the firm semi-private that's more than likely what they will do.
It stopped being interesting or funny YEARS ago when Sprint year after year after year after year was the worst of the worst of the phone companies - with 1/10th the feeds and speeds and a quarter of the coverage of anyone else. When you're a Sprint customer you're basically using a ghetto burner phone with a subscriber contract. And data is imaginary. But - the upside is that you never really have to worry about smartphones or apps at all since they're useless and pointless. Just get a free phone a la 2001 flip phone. You can save yourself the $10/month 'surcharge' they assess you for owning a smartphone.
Not when AT&T is throttling me. Seriously, they are luck I'm too lazy to change providers and they'll cut a month's bill when they irritate the shit out of me to make up for it so I stay on their network. Thank god I live in the city now, living on the edge to the sticks or in the sticks sux. AT&T had zero coverage in BFE.
Wouldn't it be better for testing to use different phones to test. It may be that one phone works better on one network while the other works better on the other. With DSL this is certainly the case.
I'm on Verizon and I pay $100 a month for grandfathered unlimited data and a subsidized phone.
Yeah, just wait until you try to upgrade. You're in for some serious sticker shock.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
I'd like to see their data charges for each network while running these tests.
Also, I'd like them to come up here to Canada and re-run the tests. No, wait, I'd dread them doing that, it would show how awful our cellular networks really are...
- chrish
Yeah, my wife was paying the "data overage" every other month. Insane, $30 for 400MB of data, where it's essentially free for her now.
I put our old AT&T iPhone4 to use as my mom's daily driver and it's doing fine (San Jose) for getting 3G (which tmo/att call 4G) speeds. Hopefully when t-mobile moves over it's spectrum to use more of the 1900 PCS for 4G, coverage will get better. This doesn't help older devices like the iPhone OG/3G/3GS which were pretty much stuck on using AT&T frequencies - only HSPA+ supporting devices like the iPhone4 and later will benefit from t-mobile's rollout/refarm (IIRC, someone please correct me if I'm wrong on this).
A 4/4S (or equivalently radio-specced Android if that's your preference) would be decent, and an LTE iPhone5 gets me very very good coverage (again, outdoors - in larger buildings the higher frequency used by tmobile data fares poorer than ATT/VZ - not sure about sprint)
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
I think HSPA is more compatible between the two, and LTE might be as well once T-Mobile rolls that out. So you might be able to get 2G and 4G on both networks with the same hardware, but generally not 3G.
I'm on TMO with an iPhone5 and I see LTE, 4G, 3G and very occasionally, (E)dge on my top ribbon. However, this is with a model A1428 that's been retooled to work with TMO's 4G network (ie, bought after APR12).
I also have an unlocked ATT iPhone4 that gets 3G where we live. Haven't tested speeds - mom is using it and she hardly needs to mobile usage.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Rogers (way up North here in Canada) ran a contest a year or so ago asking people to post their fastest LTE downloads. A lot of them were over 90 Mbps (Rogers theoretical LTE limit is 150 Mbps). Granted, that was all in the Toronto, ON area, but it was consistent.
Out here in the West, I got a consistent 50 Mbps in the Vancouver area. And co-workers get 70-odd Mbps on Bell in Kamloops.