LTE Live in San Antonio

[amnchode]

LTE Lit up in San Antonio...attached speed test while at Port San Antonio. Bear in mind, I usually have a weak signal out here.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[sonarchist]

YAY!!!!!!
This means our geographic 2nd WAVE area is Next.
Getting closer to LTE all the time!

 

[epic210]

I work by the jail and on the Speedtest.com app I got 11.4 mbps on 3 bars which ain't too bad. I wanna run a test on a full 6 bars.

 

[amnchode]

You and me both....I pulled 1.8mb on 3g at Ingram Park Mall couple of days ago and it blew my mind...bet it would be a good spot to test

 

[Scotlac]

Hmmmmmmmmmmm, I'm not seeing it yet.

I'm in north central SA near 281 and 1604. I've seen no sign of LTE (and yes, I do have it turned on) and I'm still getting about 500kbps on my 3G connection.

They must just have it on downtown......

 

[epic210]

Here's a screenshot of the Speedtest.com before I left work, not sure why it says Houston though? Once I hit Culebra by Zarmamora I lost signal and gained it again by Crossroads mall. I wonder if its fully working or just testing certain locations out.

 

[Scotlac]

Here's a screenshot of the Speedtest.com before I left work, not sure why it says Houston though? Once I hit Culebra by Zarmamora I lost signal and gained it again by Crossroads mall. I wonder if its fully working or just testing certain locations out.

Houston is where the server is that SpeedTest is using. I think they must be testing towers and turning things on and off. I got two results in a row that were in the 1200-1500 kbps range and then it dropped back down to below 500.

 

[Disturbd1]

Those speeds are disappointing, IMO. I'm from Oregon, and we have the old WiMax network here still. We're on the 2nd phase for the LTE rollout, so it'll be awhile, but back when I had my OG Evo, I would get as high as 6-8mbps. I would think LTE would far more than double that speed. Especially considering AT&T gets ~10mbps with HSPA+ and Verizon can get into the teens.

I do hope weak signal is to blame.

 

[Scotlac]

Those speeds are disappointing, IMO. I'm from Oregon, and we have the old WiMax network here still. We're on the 2nd phase for the LTE rollout, so it'll be awhile, but back when I had my OG Evo, I would get as high as 6-8mbps. I would think LTE would far more than double that speed. Especially considering AT&T gets ~10mbps with HSPA+ and Verizon can get into the teens.

I do hope weak signal is to blame.

I'm with ya!

I was hoping for 15-20 and I've seen far greater than that from some people reporting in from around the country. I've seen a couple of screen shots of 35+ so I'm hoping that the speeds we've seen here so far are due to weak signal. LTE is not scheduled to turn on here until Sunday.

Unfortunately, Saturday will be day 14 for me. I'm really struggling with the decision of whether to hang in there with Sprint or jump ship to AT&T......:-\

 

[Disturbd1]

I'm with ya!

I was hoping for 15-20 and I've seen far greater than that from some people reporting in from around the country. I've seen a couple of screen shots of 35+ so I'm hoping that the speeds we've seen here so far are due to weak signal. LTE is not scheduled to turn on here until Sunday.

Unfortunately, Saturday will be day 14 for me. I'm really struggling with the decision of whether to hang in there with Sprint or jump ship to AT&T......:-\

Funny story - I just went back to BB yesterday to switch to AT&T because of the abysmal 3G speeds on this network, and I apparently still owed them from my previous stint. So (sigh), Sprint it will be for another 2 years. I actually have no problem with the company itself, but holy hell 3G is like molasses.

 

[amnchode]

Maybe this can ease some of yalls concerns....this is what I took right before I left the port....

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Scotlac]

Now we're talking!!!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Android Central Forums

 

[boomerbubba]

Those speeds are disappointing, IMO. I'm from Oregon, and we have the old WiMax network here still. We're on the 2nd phase for the LTE rollout, so it'll be awhile, but back when I had my OG Evo, I would get as high as 6-8mbps. I would think LTE would far more than double that speed. Especially considering AT&T gets ~10mbps with HSPA+ and Verizon can get into the teens.

I do hope weak signal is to blame.

LTE speeds will certainly vary a lot with signal strength. But I think you need to adjust your general expectations about the new Sprint network. As I understand it, the LTE network is not being built with a primary goal of peak speeds for the sake of bragging rights on techie user forums, but rather moderately fast speeds consistently scalable anywhere that legacy 3G coverage now reaches. For my purposes, that suits me fine, especially when coupled with unlimited data plans. (My car can reach 120 mph easily, but I am happy to cruise the interstate at 80ish. Same with data. I can think of few real-world applications that demand 30 Mbps on a smartphone, although I have seen isolated peak speeds like that reported with Sprint LTE today.)

I have Wimax today in certain locations, but the technology is just not scalable to reach Sprint's whole coverage map. That is one reason LTE is a far superior platform. The other is a better future roadmap.

For example, I can't get Wimax inside my home today. (No big deal because I have WiFi, but the same problem obtains in lots of other places where I don't.) Inside such a building with no Wimax 4G, I typically get 1-2 bars of 3G service (between -101 dBm and -96 dBm of RSSI). As I understand it, a location with only about -100 dBm of CDMA/3G signal today might expect to experience 1-2 Mbps of LTE data service. That would, of course, go up with higher signal strength. Overall, if typical Sprint users everywhere are averaging 5-6 Mbps, I think that will be considered a big success.

 

[epic210]

Those speeds are disappointing, IMO. I'm from Oregon, and we have the old WiMax network here still. We're on the 2nd phase for the LTE rollout, so it'll be awhile, but back when I had my OG Evo, I would get as high as 6-8mbps. I would think LTE would far more than double that speed. Especially considering AT&T gets ~10mbps with HSPA+ and Verizon can get into the teens.

I do hope weak signal is to blame.

DAMN, I think this is the speeds we are wanting to see. Ran this test with 6 bars at the Best Buy on Sw Military and Ih35. Too bad I don't get nothing at my house.

 

[Ngmasterj]

DAMN, I think this is the speeds we are wanting to see. Ran this test with 6 bars at the Best Buy on Sw Military and Ih35. Too bad I don't get nothing at my house.

Good lord

 

[Disturbd1]

LTE speeds will certainly vary a lot with signal strength. But I think you need to adjust your general expectations about the new Sprint network. As I understand it, the LTE network is not being built with a primary goal of peak speeds for the sake of bragging rights on techie user forums, but rather moderately fast speeds consistently scalable anywhere that legacy 3G coverage now reaches. For my purposes, that suits me fine, especially when coupled with unlimited data plans. (My car can reach 120 mph easily, but I am happy to cruise the interstate at 80ish. Same with data. I can think of few real-world applications that demand 30 Mbps on a smartphone, although I have seen isolated peak speeds like that reported with Sprint LTE today.)

I have Wimax today in certain locations, but the technology is just not scalable to reach Sprint's whole coverage map. That is one reason LTE is a far superior platform. The other is a better future roadmap.

For example, I can't get Wimax inside my home today. (No big deal because I have WiFi, but the same problem obtains in lots of other places where I don't.) Inside such a building with no Wimax 4G, I typically get 1-2 bars of 3G service (between -101 dBm and -96 dBm of RSSI). As I understand it, a location with only about -100 dBm of CDMA/3G signal today might expect to experience 1-2 Mbps of LTE data service. That would, of course, go up with higher signal strength. Overall, if typical Sprint users everywhere are averaging 5-6 Mbps, I think that will be considered a big success.

That's all well and groovy, but I think I speak for 90% of the Sprint populous when I say that 5-6mbps down on LTE isn't acceptable. Is it usable? Yes. That wasn't the only basis for mine (and others') complaints here. My whole point was comparing the 10-ish mbps down that were being reported here to the 15-25 or more reported elsewhere. I think you kinda took what I said and ran with it.

Also, we can all agree that signal strength can make or break speeds, but what it all boils down to is how well the network is built in the first place. The fact that I have to wait until potentially the end of this year for, as you might say, "5-6mbps" of speeds that you consider to be adequate should in no way be an opinion shared by all. If it were, technology would only ever be as good as it has to be; not as good as it can be. That said, it sounds like you've done your homework, and so you know how pathetic 5-6 down would be in comparison to ANY other 4G network (LTE or otherwise).

Personally, I'd feel comfortable at 15 average with full signal strength, peaking at the 25-30+ that's been reported elsewhere. Especially given that WiMax was previously giving me 4-8 on average.

 

[boomerbubba]

Personally, I'd feel comfortable at 15 average with full signal strength, peaking at the 25-30+ that's been reported elsewhere. Especially given that WiMax was previously giving me 4-8 on average.

Ah, but you introduce a new definition: "average with full strength." I just said "average." The fact is that many users at many times are not at full strength, but in areas with lesser, even marginal coverage. That is in the nature of a mobile network, and it brings the overall network average down. If I also stipulate "at full strength" (what most would see as "full bars," when they are much nearer than average to a tower) then I would expect LTE speeds much higher than the 5-6 Mbps overall average I cited.

On the techie forums, where everyone posts SpeedTest results for bragging rights, they tend to select their best scores. I have seen several Sprint LTE speeds above 30 Mbps posted online. (I must add that I have also seen peak speeds posted for other carriers that are more than double that, which is not surprising given that at least one of the other big carriers configures its bandwidth per connection at twice what Sprint does.) But my point is that peak speeds are not representative of how well distributed the coverage is for most users in real life use, rather than SpeedTest screenshot. That is another variable not being captured at all by these anecdotal threads. I do understand that Sprint is optimizing to deliver moderately fast speeds most everywhere, not to deliver the fastest peak speed.

For most users, I think that is what counts in daily use. But that is not what these peak-speed threads tell us. If peak speeds are what are most important to you, you might be better off choosing another carrier in the long run. But you also have to factor in price, data caps, etc.

I think Sprint will be very competitive at the end of this project, which is rebuilding its entire network on a rolling local basis, finishing in late 2013 or early 2014. The real problem is timing of the buildout. If I lived in an area not slated to get LTE until the end of that period, it would be hard for me to hang with Sprint in the interim because the 3G speeds of the legacy network have suffered so much. In fact, I expect to get LTE in my area in a month or so, and in the meantime I still have Wimax. So I am keeping my old Epic 4G until then.