Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Samsung Achieves Outdoor 5G Mobile Broadband Speed of 7.5Gbps

Posted by Soulskill on from the who-needs-landlines dept.

Mark.JUK writes: Samsung has become the first to successfully demonstrate a future 5G mobile network running at speeds of 7.5Gbps in a stationary outdoor environment. They also managed 1.2Gbps while using the same technology and driving around a 4.3km-long race track at speeds of up to 110kph.

Crucially, the test was run using the 28GHz radio spectrum band, which ordinarily wouldn't be much good for mobile networks where wide coverage and wall penetration is an important requirement. But Samsung claims it can mitigate at least some of that by harnessing the latest Hybrid Adaptive Array Technology (HAAT), which uses millimeter wave frequency bands to enable the use of higher frequencies over greater distances. Several companies are competing to develop the first 5G technologies, although consumers aren't expected to see related services until 2020 at the earliest.

36 comments

  1. Data caps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Cool, I can burn through my data for the month in...5 seconds. That's useful.

    1. Re:Data caps by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's measured in gigabytes. It'd actually take you 40 seconds.

    2. Re:Data caps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I have a 5GB plan.

    3. Re:Data caps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gigabits != gigabytes

    4. Re:Data caps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poor soul... At least I'd last a minute and a half... >:-D

    5. Re:Data caps by bn-7bc · · Score: 0

      Well you wold get more minutes of surfing but you will just spend those minutes wating. I keep bringing up this point: 3G/LTE etc. Is not a replacement for fixed broadband (dsl/cable) but wery handy when you are on the move, but everything has its use if you need to move large amonts of data (4k straming, full backups etc) mobile broadband is not for you, however I agree

    6. Re:Data caps by bn-7bc · · Score: 0

      Ok slashdot (for some unknown reson) decided to chop my comment of..... However I agree that 3g/LTE data alovences in yourube at generaly to small

    7. Re:Data caps by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      I wonder, what about band use? If the new standards use the band more efficiently, then what you're proposing, while momentarily personally sound, would be a douche move society-wise. But the modern standards are sufficiently complex that I have no idea how many people and how much data rate can be accommodated in a given band by the various protocols.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    8. Re:Data caps by gshegosh · · Score: 1

      A douche move? Why do OPERATORS charge less for bigger band use?

    9. Re: Data caps by CPUmonster · · Score: 1

      I wonder if my grandfathered Unlimited Plan will still be in effect when 5g hits? For some reason I am thinking not. Thanks Verizon!

  2. We can run through our datacaps in two seconds! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All the speed in the world but can't afford to use it.

    1. Re:We can run through our datacaps in two seconds! by alen · · Score: 1

      the goal is not speed, although the ideal max speed for one device is a nice marketing gimmick and side effect

      the goal of these new technologies is to squeeze more users onto the same number of towers or less towers to save the carriers money

    2. Re:We can run through our datacaps in two seconds! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So then why develop at 5G? We should concentrate on 11G right now!

    3. Re:We can run through our datacaps in two seconds! by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Oh they are already working on it.

      They just have all this sunk cost involved with 5-10 already and need to justify their raises.

  3. As a good Slashdotter I didn't RTFA by what2123 · · Score: 1

    So tell me, is the LTE standard which still has 2 or 3 more phases done? Or is this a super-early legit 5G standard? I don't remember all the specs behind LTE but I thought it went beyond the posted bandwidth of this 5G rate. Or is 5G a subset of LTE? Thanks, Did not RTFA.

    1. Re:As a good Slashdotter I didn't RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not clear what the link layer is even if you RTFA. These are puff pieces to show off their antenna tech.

    2. Re:As a good Slashdotter I didn't RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      [1-9]+G is just a marketing term. Read 5G as 'fifth generation' and it makes more sense. While each generation has some performance minimums (in lab tests, real world results never have to match up), it's become a sales term to manipulate people into replacing whatever they're using every couple of years.

      LTE is just as vague a term, but it refers to a long-term (LT) advancement scheme (evolution, E), as long as the expected technology refinements stay on schedule.

      To answer your question, LTE was defined as a 4G candidate because eventually, the LTE process would've possibly fit the 4G standards. Then every cell service provider banded together and redefined 4G, which incidentally meant that LTE at its initial performance was above the 4G threshold. Now, I anticipate 8G will have the original 4G performance standards, and LTE will get there eventually.

    3. Re:As a good Slashdotter I didn't RTFA by YoopDaDum · · Score: 3, Informative

      LTE is not done and is continuing its evolution. To give a rough idea recent products are LTE "release 10" (R10), and standard work will start in a few months on R13 that will not cover anything 5G yet. R13 should arrive in the field in ~2017. This Samsung demo is not a standard yet, it's more a technology evaluation / advanced work that will only land in real products in a few years.

      It's likely that a real production 5G will come from within 3GPP, the organization that standardize 2G/3G/4G. At every big transition some people try to go for it with a completely different standard (for 4G: Qualcom UMD, WiMAX) and it may not be different with 5G, but it would be very unlikely to succeed IMHO. The technology demonstrated here is not universal: it can only work in very dense area. Which is fine, that's also where we need added capacity. But it means that whereas in time LTE can fully replace 2G and 3G, 5G will be designed to coexist with 4G and will never replace it. At best, you'll have LTE in low-density areas, and 5G in dense areas. And even in dense areas there may be a 4G coverage umbrella to provide service continuity.

      There's a lot of hype and BS in wireless, so take all throughput / generation targets with a big grain of salt... LTE Advanced defines a "category 8" that goes up to 3 Gbps for example, but it's a joke to get the IMT 4G stamp. Already the initial LTE defined a category 5 that no product ever implemented. It was just there to match the WiMAX 2 peak target rate. It was bollocks and unpractical and nobody cared once WiMAX 2 died. Similarly, the people at IMT got over-excited and stuck in a hype loop, and defined real 4G has the ability to support 1 Gbps. It was nonsense at the time and still above what's practical. So what did LTE-A did? It introduced realistic new categories 6 and 7 with 300 Mbps down, and a BS category 8 at 3 Gbps. So on paper LTE-A is 4G, because of a category 8 that nobody will implement anytime soon if ever. I've seen pedants saying LTE is no real 4G but LTE-A is because only LTE-A makes the 1 Gbps IMT target: what a joke!

      The high rates of 5G as demoed by Samsung use a very different approach. Much higher frequency allowing larger channels and data rates. Also the size of the antennas shrinks with a higher frequency, so it becomes possible to use many small antennas in a device. Each receive path is quite poor compared to LTE to keep the cost down, but it's compensated by a lot of them. These many antennas are not used for massive spatial multiplexing (SM) MIMO, which would be too computationally expensive, but for a few SM layers as today and beamforming as beamforming is cheap. It's a bit early to say it will work well in real life, but it looks promising and worth pursuing.

    4. Re:As a good Slashdotter I didn't RTFA by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      "These many antennas are not used for massive spatial multiplexing (SM) MIMO, which would be too computationally expensive, but for a few SM layers as today and beamforming as beamforming is cheap."

      Eventually, cell phone antennas will start looking more like phased array radars. :-D

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  4. Need for Speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All that speed. *drools* I can finally hit my monthly data cap in 64 seconds!

    1. Re:Need for Speed by Wootery · · Score: 1

      The point is valid, but two other ACs have already made it.

      Or maybe they're all you, who can say.

    2. Re:Need for Speed by organgtool · · Score: 1

      Or maybe he just has a 2G phone plan.

  5. Wide coverage and wall penetration? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Never mind 28 GHz. 75% of the I can't get a good 3G signal on my 1.9 GHz Virgin Mobile phone in Washington, D.C when I am inside. Phone just looses the signal inside the office and federal buildings; no roaming, no emergency calls possible. I keep seeing 1xrrt (forgot the exact spelling) on the signal diagnostic app that I downloaded. Calls sometimes drop when I outside on the sidewalk. Guess the bus drives between my phone and the cell tower too. Arrg! Even outside the call drops. I even have spotty reception in old town Alexandria, Virginia. Funny thing is that the phone works better on the suburbs outside of the beltway. Must be the tall buildings in the city blocking the tower's signals.

    I guess wall penetration isn't a requirement for Virgin Mobile on 1.9 GHz.

    Yes, I tried multiple phones from their cheap $50 Samsung Galaxy to the $300 Samsung Galaxy to see if my reception would improve. It didn't. Maybe I'll just switch to AT&T Wireless. Have to decide whether to get a new number or port the current number. Then I'll have to buy a new phone at full price. Yuck

    Sorry for the long post but had to get that off my chest.

    1. Re:Wide coverage and wall penetration? by Morpeth · · Score: 1

      "Wide coverage and wall penetration?" Dude, I think the fetish chat room is over there --->

      --

      'The unexamined life is not worth living' - Socrates
    2. Re: Wide coverage and wall penetration? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spread some butter on that ass.

  6. Walls are stationary by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 1

    Walls are stationary objects, other objects that horribly impact 28 GHz frequencies in performance ruining ways are raindrops, mist, tree leaves, and so on.

    I guess these will be designed to work in fairly small cells, which would in theory reduce that sort of interference, but I'm not particularly convinced by that fluff piece.

    --


    He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    1. Re:Walls are stationary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup, moving up from microwave towards infra-red, the signals start to behave more like IR from a remote control, good for line-of-sight but opaque to thermal mass.

  7. Data caps by linuxguy · · Score: 1

    If you switched off LTE and 3G connectivity and only used EDGE or slower, you would get a lot more mileage out of your data caps. It is not entirely clear to me why people use 3G or LTE.

  8. 5G by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    5G is 49 metres per second per second
    so 0 to 60 (MPH) in less than a second
    That would give you whiplash if sustained for a significant time.

  9. Re:Wut? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol, if X-rays couldn't be stopped by bone then it wouldn't be much use for medical imaging, would it?

  10. 3840x2160x24x30 by almitydave · · Score: 1

    Did they demonstrate it by transmitting an uncompressed 2160p/30 video stream in real time to Apple? It's fast enough for that. (throwback to the first cell phone call)

    --
    my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
    I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
  11. Stole it from Future Apple by i.kazmi · · Score: 1

    Everyone knows that Samsung never innovates, they just steal Apple's ideas and innovations. Since Apple haven't yet innovated this, one can only assume that Samsung have stolen this from Future Apple...

    1. Re:Stole it from Future Apple by Gliscameria · · Score: 1

      Apple 7s with 5G confirmed! YAY!

      --
      X
  12. Sprint managed 0.0001kb by gelfling · · Score: 1

    But they're 'improving' service so just stay tuned.

  13. Who cares whats the speed, whats the range? by nhat11 · · Score: 1

    Most times I only get 3g where I live and drive around, figure out how to get 4G or higher and more reliable in remote places before figuring out how to make things faster