Mobile data speed tests

[dmr]

59 minutes ago, GUMPY said:

The ones I looked at were 802.11b/g/n, so 2.4ghz and 5ghz hence my comment.

 

We got the lower tech Teletonika router as its "always on" and I read somewhere that the new higher spec one uses more power. We need wifi right through the boat (sofa at the frint and bed in the back cabin) so I assume that 2.4G is the better option. Maybe I should have got the better one and put the PC on 5 and the Apple stuff on 2.4 (if that is even possible).

There does appear to a bit of a pecking order when two or more devices share WiFi and the Windows PC always comes out on top., but even with the PC off the Apple stuff does not match the speed of the PC

 

[IanD]

Just now, dmr said:

 

We got the lower tech Teletonika router as its "always on" and I read somewhere that the new higher spec one uses more power. We need wifi right through the boat (sofa at the frint and bed in the back cabin) so I assume that 2.4G is the better option. Maybe I should have got the better one and put the PC on 5 and the Apple stuff on 2.4 (if that is even possible).

There does appear to a bit of a pecking order when two or more devices share WiFi and the Windows PC always comes out on top., but even with the PC off the Apple stuff does not match the speed of the PC

 

 

Most modern routers and devices switch automatically between 2.4GHz and 5GHz depending on signal strength -- 5GHz has a lot more bandwidth and channels so much higher data rates when you're nearby but signal drops off faster with distance than 2.4GHz, which gets used for devices a long way from the router. Some devices can bond both bands together for better speeds in the "in-between" ranges, but many don't bother.

 

There's no data rate prioritisation of one device over another by the router except on signal strength, ones with better signal get higher data rates. Newer devices also tend to support higher data rates, especially on 5GHz where they can bond channels together. Different devices can have better or worse RF performance as well, depending how much effort the manufacturer has put into this as opposed to appearance and flashy features... 😉 

[dmr]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

 

Most modern routers and devices switch automatically between 2.4GHz and 5GHz depending on signal strength -- 5GHz has a lot more bandwidth and channels so much higher data rates when you're nearby but signal drops off faster with distance than 2.4GHz, which gets used for devices a long way from the router. Some devices can bond both bands together for better speeds in the "in-between" ranges, but many don't bother.

 

There's no data rate prioritisation of one device over another by the router except on signal strength, ones with better signal get higher data rates. Newer devices also tend to support higher data rates, especially on 5GHz where they can bond channels together. Different devices can have better or worse RF performance as well, depending how much effort the manufacturer has put into this as opposed to appearance and flashy features... 😉 

I appreciate that 2.4 has better range but lower speed (and more prone to interference), I need the range which is why I did not choose the 5GHz router.

 

I also appreciate that the router does not prioritise any device (though my wife suspects that I have found such a setting😀) but it really does appear (from first hand experience and testing) that some devices get a lower performance when sharing the WiFi, the challenge is to understand why this is.

 

I've just had five minutes playing now and my phone is faster if there is no other active (but idle) Apple device in the boat, but I need to repeat this tests lots of times to get a statistically significant result.

 

Lebara doing 49/21 on the PC right now.

[IanD]

9 minutes ago, dmr said:

I appreciate that 2.4 has better range but lower speed (and more prone to interference), I need the range which is why I did not choose the 5GHz router.

 

I also appreciate that the router does not prioritise any device (though my wife suspects that I have found such a setting😀) but it really does appear (from first hand experience and testing) that some devices get a lower performance when sharing the WiFi, the challenge is to understand why this is.

 

I've just had five minutes playing now and my phone is faster if there is no other active (but idle) Apple device in the boat, but I need to repeat this tests lots of times to get a statistically significant result.

 

Lebara doing 49/21 on the PC right now.

It's not an either/or -- all routers that support 5GHz also support 2.4GHz. As you say there's also a lot more interference from other equipment on 2.4GHz because lots of cheap "Wi-Fi enabled" appliances also use this band. Also microwave ovens can leak out signal which interferes with data (out next-door neighbours' old one used to do this).

 

As I explained, different devices have worse or better range and data rates than others that look similar, depending on the capabilities of the internal modem and how good the antennae are -- the "why" is usually either penny-pinching, or prioritising style (small hidden antenna) over performance. There's no way to tell (or predict) whether a particular device is better or worse except by trying it.

 

If you're on 2.4G there are only 3 non-overlapping bands (1/6/11) that don't interfere with each other, so with multiple devices they inevitably end up fighting each other on the same band -- which works (they can all access it) but data rates drop, especially if one device is streaming data. There are a lot more bands and a lot fewer users on 5GHz so this is rarely a problem.

 

Some newer 5GHz routers are also *much* better than older ones -- when our IP provider sent us a new one (when we switched to full-fibre) we could suddenly get good 5GHz reception all over the house where this wasn't the case before.

Edited March 11 by IanD

[GUMPY]

My house is split into three 5ghz zones all fixed on different frequencies so they don't interfere with each other everything switches between them seamlessly. I only use 2.4ghz for service items such as Solar, Immersion heater etc, both bands have different SSID and are completely separate. I did run it combined but it's quicker and more reliable like this.

Similar in the caravan the 2.4ghz is only for control stuff and the 5ghz is for normal use.

[Ian Mac]

21 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Has it been downrated ?

It was always a '3m x 3m box' 

Got confused wrong units - 10ft box I should have said.

[Paul C]

Now in Grub Street Cutting - long story but we are moored within the cutting, after having driven some of it backwards - and the results are interesting, because we are "on the edge" of internet connectivity:

 

iPhone (Talk.home) within boat..............................no connection

iPhone outside of boat..............................................10Mbps
Mifi router, Giffgaff (vertical aerials).....................10MBps

Mifi router, Lycamobile (horizontal aerials)........no connection

Mifi router, Lycamobile (vertical aerials).............7Mbps

 

So it goes to show 1) EE isn't always the best signal, sometimes O2 or another is, 2) horizontal aerial position isn't always best, sometimes its vertical, 3) its not possible to rely on tethering to a phone within the boat. 

[Alan de Enfield]

2 hours ago, Ian Mac said:

Got confused wrong units - 10ft box I should have said.

 

10 square feet ? or

10' x 10' ? or 

5' x 2' ? 

[Higgs]

I think it's pathetic, that after all the years of mobile phones, we're still discussing coverage and strength of signal. I'm lucky, if I get a signal that is strong enough to maintain a connection for even the minimal needs of this forum. I tether, and I'm not inclined to spend hundreds on amplifiers.

 

 

[Paul C]

1 hour ago, Higgs said:

I think it's pathetic, that after all the years of mobile phones, we're still discussing coverage and strength of signal. I'm lucky, if I get a signal that is strong enough to maintain a connection for even the minimal needs of this forum. I tether, and I'm not inclined to spend hundreds on amplifiers.

 

 

 

I agree. My theory on it is, its rooted in the way the contracts for frequency spectrum are laid out. The 4 network providers each get their slice of the relevant frequencies, in return for providing (eg) 97% of coverage, based on population. So they're not going to invest in rural areas (very low density of population) and can leave "not-spots" perfectly legally and without challenge.

[Higgs]

15 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

I agree. My theory on it is, its rooted in the way the contracts for frequency spectrum are laid out. The 4 network providers each get their slice of the relevant frequencies, in return for providing (eg) 97% of coverage, based on population. So they're not going to invest in rural areas (very low density of population) and can leave "not-spots" perfectly legally and without challenge.

 

I've had a 3 mobile, unlimited everything, for four years. Due to be renewed. Thinking, maybe not. For the amounts I have been able to use, and my average needs, I might just try a Vodaphone monthy sim deal, for half of what I'm paying now. And I'm only paying £19.00 now, for 3.

 

I also have a phone on Tesco's PAYG. Too expensive to do more than texting, and the odd phone call. The good thing about it is, I put a tenner on it when it runs out of credit, no having to lose what isn't used every month. The credit rolls over, for as long as the credit lasts.

 

 

 

Edited March 12 by Higgs

[IanD]

28 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

I agree. My theory on it is, its rooted in the way the contracts for frequency spectrum are laid out. The 4 network providers each get their slice of the relevant frequencies, in return for providing (eg) 97% of coverage, based on population. So they're not going to invest in rural areas (very low density of population) and can leave "not-spots" perfectly legally and without challenge.

Of course, it's the same for any private company without a universal service obligation like the PO has -- and which it's trying to water down or get rid of. It applies to not just mobile but also wired internet, try getting that if you're right out in the sticks without Openreach wanting to charge thousands of pounds to connect you up... 😞 

 

Not blaming the private companies for wanting to make a profit, that's the job of private companies, just pointing out that for basic services -- which the internet is nowadays -- this approach has disadvantages compared to public ownership. See also water, gas, power...

12 hours ago, Paul C said:

Now in Grub Street Cutting - long story but we are moored within the cutting, after having driven some of it backwards - and the results are interesting, because we are "on the edge" of internet connectivity:

 

iPhone (Talk.home) within boat..............................no connection

iPhone outside of boat..............................................10Mbps
Mifi router, Giffgaff (vertical aerials).....................10MBps

Mifi router, Lycamobile (horizontal aerials)........no connection

Mifi router, Lycamobile (vertical aerials).............7Mbps

 

So it goes to show 1) EE isn't always the best signal, sometimes O2 or another is, 2) horizontal aerial position isn't always best, sometimes its vertical, 3) its not possible to rely on tethering to a phone within the boat. 

 

I don't think any of that should come as news to anyone, it's all been pointed out many times on many threads on CWDF... 😉 

19 hours ago, GUMPY said:

My house is split into three 5ghz zones all fixed on different frequencies so they don't interfere with each other everything switches between them seamlessly. I only use 2.4ghz for service items such as Solar, Immersion heater etc, both bands have different SSID and are completely separate. I did run it combined but it's quicker and more reliable like this.

Similar in the caravan the 2.4ghz is only for control stuff and the 5ghz is for normal use.

 

If you want devices to be able to switch quickly and seamlessly (or bond channels) between bands and transmitters as you move around to maximise coverage and data rates, it's usually better nowadays to have a common SSID between the different bands and transmitters -- with separate ones, modern handsets try to stick to the one they're connected to until it gets really bad, with common ones they'll flip much more readily.

 

This didn't always used to be the case with older gear, but it is with modern phones/tablets/laptops.

 

Keeping low-speed stuff like control on 2.4GHz is fine though -- often it doesn't support 5GHz anyway so this happens automatically, this is what things like my CH controller and alarm do.

[GUMPY]

47 minutes ago, IanD said:

If you want devices to be able to switch quickly and seamlessly (or bond channels) between bands and transmitters as you move around to maximise coverage and data rates, it's usually better nowadays to have a common SSID between the different bands and transmitters -- with separate ones, modern handsets try to stick to the one they're connected to until it gets really bad, with common ones they'll flip much more readily.

Only if the system isn't set up properly🤔

Our areas don't overlap one is upstairs at one end of the house the other downstairs at the opposite end so even with different SSID switching happens as you reach the bottom of the stairs. If I go into the garage or workshop it switches back to the upstairs network as it's immediately overhead. The third one is generally not used apart from the two smart TV.

Plus all the AP are fed with cat6, there is no WiFi back haul which speeds things up a lot. 

Using one SSID requires WiFi 6 and unless all your devices are less than 12 months old they may well nor support it.

Plus I'm not about to spend money on new tech when I have a system that works just as well.

[IanD]

53 minutes ago, GUMPY said:

Only if the system isn't set up properly🤔

Our areas don't overlap one is upstairs at one end of the house the other downstairs at the opposite end so even with different SSID switching happens as you reach the bottom of the stairs. If I go into the garage or workshop it switches back to the upstairs network as it's immediately overhead. The third one is generally not used apart from the two smart TV.

Plus all the AP are fed with cat6, there is no WiFi back haul which speeds things up a lot. 

Using one SSID requires WiFi 6 and unless all your devices are less than 12 months old they may well nor support it.

Plus I'm not about to spend money on new tech when I have a system that works just as well.

 

We're not disagreeing here -- your solution does work best with older gear, which is what you have. But it's not the best solution for newer gear, which is exactly what I said... 😉 

 

"This didn't always used to be the case with older gear, but it is with modern phones/tablets/laptops."

 

Switching bands/SSID (with an older system like yours) works, but does mean that terminals (handsets, tablets, laptops) tend to hang on to the link they have set up for longer as it gets worse, because they have to drop and re-establish the link to hop to another basestation (router/mesh terminal). With a single SSID (and one shared between 2.4G and 5G bands, like most modern routers do -- doesn't need WiFi 6 for this, my 5-year old Plusnet one did it) they're much more willing to switch over seamlessly, and may even run both links in parallel (including MIMO) -- the result is better data rates especially near the switchover point and less chance of a momentary dropout.

Edited March 12 by IanD

[cuthound]

4 hours ago, Higgs said:

 

I've had a 3 mobile, unlimited everything, for four years. Due to be renewed. Thinking, maybe not. For the amounts I have been able to use, and my average needs, I might just try a Vodaphone monthy sim deal, for half of what I'm paying now. And I'm only paying £19.00 now, for 3.

 

I also have a phone on Tesco's PAYG. Too expensive to do more than texting, and the odd phone call. The good thing about it is, I put a tenner on it when it runs out of credit, no having to lose what isn't used every month. The credit rolls over, for as long as the credit lasts.

 

 

 

 

My wife has a Tesco PAYG mobile which she only uses for emergency use. Recently it ran out of credit, despite not being used. When I queried it, Tesco said they have changed their policy and the credit is lost if the phone is unused for 90 days. I believe this brings them into line with other PAYG providers.

[Higgs]

6 minutes ago, cuthound said:

 

My wife has a Tesco PAYG mobile which she only uses for emergency use. Recently it ran out of credit, despite not being used. When I queried it, Tesco said they have changed their policy and the credit is lost if the phone is unused for 90 days. I believe this brings them into line with other PAYG providers.

 

I have heard this might be the case, but I've never put it to the test. I keep mine going, because it is the number I've used for over 20 years. I also haven't tried any other PAYG providers, but I still like the fact that credit can be used over many months, without being forced to top up each month. 

 

 

[Paul C]

Interesting one at Tyrley locks:

 

Giffgaff mifi (O2)..............................................................no connection

iPhone (Talk.Home) inside boat.................................no connection

iPhone (Talk.Home) outside boat..............................4Mbps

Lyca mifi (EE), vertical aerials......................................no connection

Lyca mifi (EE), horizontal aerials................................24Mbps

 

The conclusion for today being, sometimes you can be in a really poorly served area where one (or more) networks simply have no coverage; and that the one(s) which do, have horizontal (or vertical) polarization. Also the (I am assuming) omnidirectional aerial within an iPhone doesn't do too well in this low-signal environment.

[ditchcrawler]

Just now, Paul C said:

 Also the (I am assuming) omnidirectional aerial within an iPhone doesn't do too well in this low-signal environment.

You could always lie down and talk

 

[StephenA]

1 hour ago, Paul C said:

Interesting one at Tyrley locks:

 

Giffgaff mifi (O2)..............................................................no connection

iPhone (Talk.Home) inside boat.................................no connection

iPhone (Talk.Home) outside boat..............................4Mbps

Lyca mifi (EE), vertical aerials......................................no connection

Lyca mifi (EE), horizontal aerials................................24Mbps

 

The conclusion for today being, sometimes you can be in a really poorly served area where one (or more) networks simply have no coverage; and that the one(s) which do, have horizontal (or vertical) polarization. Also the (I am assuming) omnidirectional aerial within an iPhone doesn't do too well in this low-signal environment.

 

Mobile coverage in and around Market Drayton is very patchy.

[Paul C]

More results, this time at Audlem (nr Shroppie Fly):

 

Lyca mifi (EE) (horizontal aerials).............................................13.5Mbps

Lyca mifi (EE) (vertical aerials)....................................................8.3Mbps
Lyca mifi (EE) (internal aerial).............................................4.8Mbps

Talk.home iPhone (EE) (in boat) ........11.5Mbps

Giffgaff mifi (O2)......................................6.5Mbps

[ditchcrawler]

This is me at home through a lump of wire