I just found a tower a few days ago I posted a video on where CBRS and mmwave was at the same tower. The CBRS was amazing and I was able to get 600+ down. And on a mmwave test I got over 200 Mbps on the up!
Verizon finally putting some of their fiber backbone to actual work. Still should be symmetrical on the mmWave. Not a bad upload speed, but VZW needs to desperately work on upload speeds on mmWave. Makes one wonder what the backhaul to each of these sites is... likely all run out of the same building or PoP nearby. Would be interesting to know if private 10Gbps ETH or actual fiber. Each should still have symmetrical upload on mmWave. ??
@@deepspacecow2644 Then they need to upgrade their baseband units at the towers, not just upgrade the tower antennas themselves and half-a** it. Whole-A** it if you're going to do it. Ugh. lol
Sad that Apple and stock Android don't give more options like the Samsung service mode to view and select or disable network bands. Interesting that the Pixel did well vs the iPhone...sure the Pixel doesn't get the fastest speeds..."fast enough" was plenty in th Pixel both ways.
Cool channel. I am a new subscriber, could you elaborate on signal check Pro a little bit? I downloaded it and would like to know what it could do for me? I like cool stuff and thought this could be some kind of a new toy for me. Thanks in advance.
There is a diferrence between panels. The more you are to the side the less signal you get the best signal is at the front of the panel the signal at the sides are more easy to block than on the middle, the 120" pannels could travel a little further than the 180". Capacity doesn't matter is the same.
Interesting. I'm a tech nerd and familiar with antenna design. I have 180 degree and 90 degree panels that I use for the 2200-2700MHz range mainly for WiFi....while the designs are different the 90 degree panels have wayyy more gain at a bout 13+dbi while the 180 degree panels are only 6 dBi. Higher gain antennas allow better reception without the need for amplifiers on either end. Reception is one thing but if the tower/eNodeB antenna is too weak and the users are at a distance the phone has to up its power amps and this can drain battery. Dual 180 degree antennas can have some nasty null zones but with cellular there is always gonna be another cell site to hand over to. I think 120x3 or rarely 90x4 is the best deployment strategy but for mmWave probably 120 or 180 just aimed in the direction you need capacity
@@realsmt That's the mind set of tech ignorant Marketing at Verizon when they went all-in on UWB. That turned out to be a very bad ROI. Sounds like you need to read some articles, get prospective beyond an end-user point of view...
Oh wait I though mmwave couldn't pass through a piece of paper let alone car widow glass AND a case? Like to point out that mmwave was 39 GHz because T-Mobile owns almost all the 28 GHz in Ohio. Verizon get get some 24 GHz but not much. It's only 200 MHz and only 10 MHz in Columbus and some parts don't have any. Sad that T-Mobile owns all that 28 GHz and is just basically going to sit on it. Also the deference in performance could be due to antenna location on the phones
@@realsmt It's merely signal propagation/attenuation over distance. All the network providers need marketing phrases. Verizon made its claims about UWB, and have admitted they won't re-coup their initial investment in it now. The hardware's expensive, and so are the poles, permits.
My LTE speed is terrible! Like maybe I can get 30-50 mbps on my iPhone but everyone on Android can get way faster. I am thinking about switching to a Linux phone.
No CBRS is the shared spectrum in the FCC C-band designation. Verizon UWB is way up at 28/39Ghz, coined Millimeter Wave Band or High-band. Hope that made sense.
That density is incredible . Great video dude
Verizon is just amazing
I just found a tower a few days ago I posted a video on where CBRS and mmwave was at the same tower. The CBRS was amazing and I was able to get 600+ down. And on a mmwave test I got over 200 Mbps on the up!
Verizon finally putting some of their fiber backbone to actual work. Still should be symmetrical on the mmWave. Not a bad upload speed, but VZW needs to desperately work on upload speeds on mmWave. Makes one wonder what the backhaul to each of these sites is... likely all run out of the same building or PoP nearby. Would be interesting to know if private 10Gbps ETH or actual fiber. Each should still have symmetrical upload on mmWave. ??
@@jaywhite15_AL Maybe CPRI back to some massive BBU.
@@deepspacecow2644 Then they need to upgrade their baseband units at the towers, not just upgrade the tower antennas themselves and half-a** it. Whole-A** it if you're going to do it. Ugh. lol
Nice Verizon is king !!!!
Damn I’m jealous great performance can’t wait to see the results after stand-alone launch and CA.
Good content, I build both CBRS and 5G mm wave small-cell. Many areas are still tearing down Nokia to replace Samsung, especially on the east coast
Let's go!!!!!
With T-Mobile 5G ultra capacity here in Odessa Texas I get about 800 Mbs down and 100 up
Att has some major catching up to do
Software buggy asf but the hardware is good. Expect to get the full mmwave speed in the next update when it finally comes out.
Density baby !!!!!!
That's awesome fast
2160p HDR. 😉
Great video. Can't wait for C band to launch
When I'm on lte sometimes it'll be around 300
Sad that Apple and stock Android don't give more options like the Samsung service mode to view and select or disable network bands.
Interesting that the Pixel did well vs the iPhone...sure the Pixel doesn't get the fastest speeds..."fast enough" was plenty in th Pixel both ways.
there are apps for Android to select or disable bands.
Or buy unlocked phones
Band 48 yea it's 5G UC ! Lmao 🤣 🤣 that's what t mobile calls it 🤣
n41
No I was joking about t mobile said they would
You need to band lock the UE before testing.
My iPhone never pick up CBRS
With LTE only my iPhone loves cbrs. Even with 5G on it still connects it just doesn't connect to all the channels on the site.
Why Verizon went all in on the UWB in CLEVELAND and in NYC I never ever seen one of those UWB nodes 🧐🧐🧐🧐🤨🤨🤨. I’m confused 🤔
Permitting. Our city wants good cellular connectivity. NYC is a political dump.
@@realsmt 🤣🤣🤣 definitely is a political dump.
Verizon went all in on UWB as that was all they had available at the time.
Cool channel. I am a new subscriber, could you elaborate on signal check Pro a little bit? I downloaded it and would like to know what it could do for me? I like cool stuff and thought this could be some kind of a new toy for me. Thanks in advance.
So verizon uses 3 120° panels for mmwave and ATT uses 2 180° panels. Is there a difference with capacity and signal Or does It matter?
There is a diferrence between panels. The more you are to the side the less signal you get the best signal is at the front of the panel the signal at the sides are more easy to block than on the middle, the 120" pannels could travel a little further than the 180". Capacity doesn't matter is the same.
@@activeplaying7978 Perhaps that will all change with Beamforming. We shall see.
Interesting. I'm a tech nerd and familiar with antenna design. I have 180 degree and 90 degree panels that I use for the 2200-2700MHz range mainly for WiFi....while the designs are different the 90 degree panels have wayyy more gain at a bout 13+dbi while the 180 degree panels are only 6 dBi. Higher gain antennas allow better reception without the need for amplifiers on either end. Reception is one thing but if the tower/eNodeB antenna is too weak and the users are at a distance the phone has to up its power amps and this can drain battery. Dual 180 degree antennas can have some nasty null zones but with cellular there is always gonna be another cell site to hand over to. I think 120x3 or rarely 90x4 is the best deployment strategy but for mmWave probably 120 or 180 just aimed in the direction you need capacity
T mobile can’t touch Verizon
But T-mobile's implementation of 600Mhz band travels farther with less attenuation from vegetation, or buildings.
With better tower density, why bother focusing on lower frequencies when the endgame is more sites more sites more sites????
@@realsmt Lower frequencies work for rural areas where it's not cost efficient to deploy C-Band or Millimeter Wave.
Not cost effective? Old fashioned thinking, new tech and gear will change everything.
@@realsmt That's the mind set of tech ignorant Marketing at Verizon when they went all-in on UWB. That turned out to be a very bad ROI. Sounds like you need to read some articles, get prospective beyond an end-user point of view...
The pixel 6 pro will have a UW switch when they finally release the Jan update
Oh wait I though mmwave couldn't pass through a piece of paper let alone car widow glass AND a case? Like to point out that mmwave was 39 GHz because T-Mobile owns almost all the 28 GHz in Ohio. Verizon get get some 24 GHz but not much. It's only 200 MHz and only 10 MHz in Columbus and some parts don't have any. Sad that T-Mobile owns all that 28 GHz and is just basically going to sit on it. Also the deference in performance could be due to antenna location on the phones
It needs to be tinted to attenuate 28/39Ghz. T-Mobile did a test showing this epic fail as a 600Mhz proof of concept over Millimeter wave technology.
600 mhz vs mmwave? 🤣 Apples vs oranges
Only tmobile would do something like that. Trying to confuse people and make them "pick" a technology.
@@realsmt It's merely signal propagation/attenuation over distance. All the network providers need marketing phrases. Verizon made its claims about UWB, and have admitted they won't re-coup their initial investment in it now. The hardware's expensive, and so are the poles, permits.
Why would they be putting up LTE sites?
Hey where is CBRS at?
It wasn't pure cbrs. There was carrier aggregation for those speeds pure cbrs only is limited to 300 because of frequency availability.
They can configure 80 mhz bandwidth b48. When have you tested and in which market?
Wow that is a fat piece of spectrum@@realsmt
Sneed great video like always but super dirty car screen lol
Sorry bro. I work at a bakery 😆
Whats the latency??
My LTE speed is terrible! Like maybe I can get 30-50 mbps on my iPhone but everyone on Android can get way faster. I am thinking about switching to a Linux phone.
Is CBRS considered Verizon UWB? Would you get the 4k streaming option over that medium? Or is that inclusive to mmwave/C-Band?
Cbrs is lte currently. I think 4K is only on the uw connections. Cbrs will eventually move to 5G as well.
No CBRS is the shared spectrum in the FCC C-band designation. Verizon UWB is way up at 28/39Ghz, coined Millimeter Wave Band or High-band. Hope that made sense.