Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Communications Wireless Networking

World's First 5G Field Trial Delivers Speeds of 3.6Gbps Using Sub-6GHz 55

Mark.JUK writes: Global Chinese ICT firm Huawei and Japanese mobile giant NTT DOCOMO today claim to have conducted the world's first large-scale field trial of future 5th generation (5G) mobile broadband technology, which was able to deliver a peak speed of 3.6Gbps (Gigabits per second). Previous trials have used significantly higher frequency bands (e.g. 20-80GHz), which struggle with coverage and penetration through physical objects. By comparison Huawei's network operates in the sub-6GHz frequency band and made use of several new technologies, such as Multi-User MIMO (concurrent connectivity of 24 user devices in the macro-cell environment), Sparse Code Multiple Access (SCMA) and Filtered OFDM (F-OFDM). Assuming all goes well then Huawei hopes to begin a proper pilot in 2018, with interoperability testing being completed during 2019 and then a commercial launch to follow in 2020. But of course they're not the only team trying to develop a 5G solution.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

World's First 5G Field Trial Delivers Speeds of 3.6Gbps Using Sub-6GHz

Comments Filter:
  • Just like 4G isn't 4G and 3G isn't 3G. Other than corporations continuing to rip people off here, what is new?

    • G = Generation...not Ghz
  • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) <mojoNO@SPAMworld3.net> on Friday October 09, 2015 @06:04AM (#50691955) Homepage

    Japan is planning to have a 5G network operating in time for the 2020 Olympics. We are going to see a lot of new tech pushed for 2020 because of that opportunity to show it to the world. Faster trains, 8k TV broadcasts, lots of new EV and hydrogen cars...

  • by sociocapitalist ( 2471722 ) on Friday October 09, 2015 @06:39AM (#50692037)

    "Huawei's network operates in the sub-6GHz frequency band"

    Is that the unlicensed 5Ghz band?

    • Huawei? Those shape-shifting squid things with the representative on Universal Congress's tribunal?
    • I've heard that 5G was to use both the 2.4 GHz and 5GHz unlicensed bands simultaneously, to the detriment of home routers. source [unwiredinsight.com]

      Extending LTE to unlicensed spectrum at 5GHz is an enticing prospect

      Extending LTE-Advanced to unlicensed spectrum is a major feature of 3GPP Release 13, due to be frozen in March 2016. Previously this was referred to as LTE-Unlicensed (LTE-U), but 3GPP uses the name LAA to reflect the role of licensed spectrum in its operation.

      • I've heard that 5G was to use both the 2.4 GHz and 5GHz unlicensed bands simultaneously, to the detriment of home routers. source [unwiredinsight.com]

        Extending LTE to unlicensed spectrum at 5GHz is an enticing prospect

        Extending LTE-Advanced to unlicensed spectrum is a major feature of 3GPP Release 13, due to be frozen in March 2016. Previously this was referred to as LTE-Unlicensed (LTE-U), but 3GPP uses the name LAA to reflect the role of licensed spectrum in its operation.

        Yep - I think the phrase 'sub-6Ghz' was to avoid the conflict around the attack on our 5Ghz wifi

  • We are screwed. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Friday October 09, 2015 @06:54AM (#50692061) Journal
    So, 3.6 Gb/s is cool and all; but I did a quick check and Verizon is calling 18GB/month the 'XXL' plan, so this appears to be largely an exercise in accruing overage fees even faster.

    It seems like what will matter much more(unless somebody is planning to use the same tech for highly directional point-to-point wireless links, in which case raw speed is pretty useful); is how well these '5G' arrangements handle congestion; and how efficiently the amazing-fancy-theoretical-peak-throughput can be divided across a large number of users. Unless you are made of money, the problem with wireless data isn't so much how slow it is; but how costly it is(in part because of scarcity, which more efficient RF technology might actually alleviate, the 'because we can' part is a separate issue); and how it has a habit of just collapsing in a screaming heap under heavy load.

    If the impressive peak bandwidth numbers indicate a larger pool of usable transmission capacity extracted from a given chunk of spectrum, fantastic, that is progress. If they simply represent what you could do if a single client used every doesn't-play-well-with-others trick in the book to get better speeds, that's utterly useless.
    • I'm not worried. New equipment will be stamped out and installed into existing towers. Nothing new here as that's how it always happens. If the laws of physics become an impediment, so be it; the limitation will set expectation and thus the industry will adapt. Meaning, don't expect 8k or 16k video formats streaming over cellular service anytime soon.

      The new hotness will be voice over WiFi anyways. Xfinity (Comcast) already has a large WiFi router install base already, each one broadcast the same public SSI

    • My cable ISP has caps too. I really don't mind caps, provided they aren't too low. They have to find some way to give people high speeds and somehow restrict people from saturating the connection 24 hours a day.

      For me, a faster connection isn't just about more throughput, but more about having individual pages load faster, not waiting for videos to buffer, and being able to play a game on release day, rather than have to wait until the next day for the game to finish downloading.

      For a mobile connection, I

    • by swb ( 14022 )

      the problem with wireless data isn't so much how slow it is; but how costly it is(in part because of scarcity, which more efficient RF technology might actually alleviate, the 'because we can' part is a separate issue)

      I'd like to know the difference between the high costs due to real scarcity and the high costs due to profit-taking.

      I'd love to see a heat map of cell sites based on RF congestion and backhaul congestion to get an idea if the limits being imposed are really about site limits or mostly about extracting maximum profit.

  • by Chrisq ( 894406 ) on Friday October 09, 2015 @07:09AM (#50692089)
    I read somewhere that the largest initial benefit with the introduction of 4g was that 3g networks improved as the real heavy data users upgraded. I wonder if the same thing will happen to 4g when 5g is introduced. It's nice to be behind the curve but benefit anyway!
  • I have the Verizon 1GB/month plan. With these speeds, I should be able to hit the cap within 1/3 of a second. Not sure that "5G" really benefits anyone.

    • by JWW ( 79176 )

      Not exactly, its GigaBytes per month and GigaBits of speed.

      You'll have 8 times as long until you hit the plan cap, so 8/3 of a second or 2 and 2/3 seconds.

      Way better ;-)

      Again I have to say, this is like having a Ferrari that you can only drive a few minutes a month.

      The cognitive dissonance between freaking tiny bandwidth caps and huge speeds just keeps growing.

    • by rworne ( 538610 )

      That's because the 5G service isn't for you.

      It's for the carriers. Along with the added bandwidth comes added capacity - especially if it cannot be exploited by the customers due to data caps.

      Your requests just get on/off the network faster leaving space for another user to do the same.

  • Don't they basically just rip off Cisco hardware and software?

  • And don't try telling me that LTE is 4G.

  • Sub 6 Ghz .... is that better known as 5 Ghz?
    • by sjames ( 1099 )

      YUes, they will "accidentally" degrade your WiFi, but don't worry, when you lose your nearly free connectivity, they will happily $ell you $some.

  • 5G is supposed to codify a *set* of objectives that networks need to satisfy. These include: .
    • Mindnumbingly high throughput when the user is stationary or moving slowly.
    • Very high throughput even when the user is moving very fast (e.g.high speed train travel upto 300 kmph).
    • Very low latency connections (1-10 ms)
    • Support for massive city-wide or region-wide deployments of Internet of Things over low power cellular connections
    • Very high spectral efficiency leading to reliable high throughput connections in d

Bringing computers into the home won't change either one, but may revitalize the corner saloon.

Working...