Samsung Achieves Outdoor 5G Mobile Broadband Speed of 7.5Gbps 36
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.
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.
Data caps (Score:5, Funny)
Cool, I can burn through my data for the month in...5 seconds. That's useful.
Re:Data caps (Score:4, Informative)
That's measured in gigabytes. It'd actually take you 40 seconds.
Data caps (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Data caps (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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.
As a good Slashdotter I didn't RTFA (Score:2)
Re: (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 a
Re:As a good Slashdotter I didn't RTFA (Score:4, Informative)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
"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
Re: (Score:2)
The point is valid, but two [slashdot.org] other [slashdot.org] ACs have already made it.
Or maybe they're all you, who can say.
Re: (Score:2)
Wide coverage and wall penetration? (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 spot
Re: (Score:2)
"Wide coverage and wall penetration?" Dude, I think the fetish chat room is over there --->
Walls are stationary (Score:2)
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.
3840x2160x24x30 (Score:2)
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 [wikipedia.org])
Stole it from Future Apple (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Sprint managed 0.0001kb (Score:1)
But they're 'improving' service so just stay tuned.
Who cares whats the speed, whats the range? (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