3G Network Speed Test Show Verizon as Fastest

[Terry Olaes]

Wired ran a 3G speed test with their readers and built a list of results from about 12,000 valid responses. What they found was that Verizon’s network was the fastest, followed by T-Mobile, Sprint, and finally AT&T. VZW’s speed was more than twice that of AT&T. Yowtch!

Verizon came in first place with an average download speed of 1,940 Kbps, as reported by 856 participants. T-Mobile’s average rate was 1,793 Kbps with 1,189 reported T-Mobile users. Third was Sprint with 1,598 Kbps, based on data from 1,570 users. In dead last was AT&T with an average of 901 Kbps — but an overwhelmingly large user sample of 8,153 test takers.

 

[SockMan!]

Maybe Verizon's lack of iPhones and Pres has something to do with it.

 

[SirKronan]

I'm surprised T-Mobile beat Sprint. Around here Verizon, which I have, is quite good. But Sprint is also rockin' it in this area with great 3G speeds.

AT&T is the worst here by far. Sometimes the 3G still just disappears for no apparent reason.

 

[himmy]

Maybe Verizon's lack of iPhones and Pres has something to do with it.

Why would the lack of these 2 devices make them faster?

Verizon is geared for business, they have always gone for speed and coverage. They got both down in spades. this is why none of their phones have wifi built into them, it isn't needed.

For all of our road warriors at work, we have cut using internet connections at hotels and airports that charge and added the tethered modem feature on their blackberries. speed is perfectly fine for VPN/email connections.

 

[himmy]

I'm surprised T-Mobile beat Sprint. Around here Verizon, which I have, is quite good. But Sprint is also rockin' it in this area with great 3G speeds.

AT&T is the worst here by far. Sometimes the 3G still just disappears for no apparent reason.

Look at sprint's coverage, it is minimal accorss the US. Where it may be good in a big city/urban area, going out of it you will be roaming/barely have a signal. When you add in the slower speeds in those areas, their over all speed will drop.

 

[phide]

Why would the lack of these 2 devices make them faster?

Network strain. AT&T's 3G speeds took a nosedive once consumers started buying iPhone 3Gs en masse.

 

[Aku12]

Why would the lack of these 2 devices make them faster?.

not so much as the devices making the network slower, but uneducated people buying them beause they are cool. Where I live no GSM carrier has 3g towers yet I live in a college town and see tons of iphones. I'm guessing those people reported their data to the contest and it bogged down ATT's results.

im perfectly happy with my verizon windows mobile phone. Though I honestly dont care about the speeds as i only use it to download email and check movie times.

 

[Trimlock]

I stopped caring about the download speeds a while ago, I bought an ENVY because its super nice for texting (which I do alot), has a good viewing screen and I can check simple articles/email with ease.

 

[InorganicMatter]

They are also the most "oppressive" with their device and contract strong-arming tactics that a CDMA network gives the carrier.

 

[prtzlboy]

Look at sprint's coverage, it is minimal accorss the US. Where it may be good in a big city/urban area, going out of it you will be roaming/barely have a signal. When you add in the slower speeds in those areas, their over all speed will drop.

I have sprint, and I roam for free on verizon's network. In other words, I have NEVER been without a signal and have NEVER "roamed". I drive around a lot in the rural midwest.

 

[prtzlboy]

never "roamed for extra money" is what I meant to say there

 

[himmy]

Network strain. AT&T's 3G speeds took a nosedive once consumers started buying iPhone 3Gs en masse.

None of VZ's phones have wifi, they ALL go over their network. iphones easily hook up into wifi networks. The majority of people with one at home, or locations they freguent, are getting their data from wifi.

 

[note235]

i get a good signal here...hmm weird

 

[Grentz]

In a few tests I did around here my AT&T 3G was faster than the Verizon 3G and when I went to new york I was getting about the same on AT&T and Verizon.

This was before the iPhone explosion though.

None of VZ's phones have wifi, they ALL go over their network. iphones easily hook up into wifi networks. The majority of people with one at home, or locations they freguent, are getting their data from wifi.

I would not say the "majority" at all. I see people with iPhones all the time not using Wifi and none of my friends switch their devices over to Wifi. Regular people just leave them on 3G almost all the time.

iPhones also use a lot more data than pretty much any other phone out there. Even blackberrys.

 

[note235]

yeah the iphone was faster at the interval after the few months the first came out

 

[note235]

yeah the iphone was faster at the interval after the few months the first came out

and true to using more data
i use around 400mb download a day

 

[Nemesis999]

Network strain. AT&T's 3G speeds took a nosedive once consumers started buying iPhone 3Gs en masse.

And not upgrading your network is a valid reason for slow speeds? They're getting the revenue/profit from all those contracts, not serviceing them for free. That's like saying "My Internet used to be fast, but now it sucks. Don't blame my ISP though, it's those millions of new users they signed up that are causing the problem."

Being slow because your network is overloaded really is the main reason that networks slow down. It's hardly a valid excuse for poor performance.

 

[jpcahn]

Sprint is rolling 6-12 Megabit Sprint 4G in the next few months including to Atlanta next month for sure. They are also rolling out Honolulu, Charlotte, Las Vegas, Chicago, Philadelphia, Dallas Fort Worth, Portland and Seattle. I saw some tests of it and they were getting 7Mb driving around Baltimore in the back of a car.

 

[Peteman100]

T-Mobile has good speeds because no one uses their 3G services (compared to other carriers anyway)

 

[Grentz]

And not upgrading your network is a valid reason for slow speeds? They're getting the revenue/profit from all those contracts, not serviceing them for free. That's like saying "My Internet used to be fast, but now it sucks. Don't blame my ISP though, it's those millions of new users they signed up that are causing the problem."

Being slow because your network is overloaded really is the main reason that networks slow down. It's hardly a valid excuse for poor performance.

They are upgrading their network. It takes awhile to be done and remember there is a HUGE area they are having to cover and upgrade.

Things take time though, not within a few days like how fast the millions of iphones were sold.

 

[jjager85]

They are upgrading their network. It takes awhile to be done and remember there is a HUGE area they are having to cover and upgrade.

Things take time though, not within a few days like how fast the millions of iphones were sold.

true, its just like my internet/tv company, Cox Communications, they seem to upgrade just about every year now, plus they dont put a bandwith cap. when i first signed up, i was getting up to 12 Mbps, now they offer up to 25 Mbps. to bad i dont actually get to use all that speed.

 

[Nemesis999]

They are upgrading their network. It takes awhile to be done and remember there is a HUGE area they are having to cover and upgrade.

Things take time though, not within a few days like how fast the millions of iphones were sold.

There was no surprise, nor were those few days anywhere in recent history. The iPhone came out over 2 years ago, and AT&T knew well before then that they would need network upgrades if they wanted to maintain service levels.

 

[Grentz]

There was no surprise, nor were those few days anywhere in recent history. The iPhone came out over 2 years ago, and AT&T knew well before then that they would need network upgrades if they wanted to maintain service levels.

Yes, but then again, do you have any idea of what an undertaking it is upgrading a network? Look at tmobiles 3G rollout...it has taken years and the coverage is still pitiful. It is not just like flipping on a light switch and there are a lot of hurdles to leap through in many cases as well. I think they should have done something quicker, yes, but at the same time who knows exactly what is going on behind the scenes.

The iPhone is a data hound and Verizon, Sprint, nor TMobile really have anything that compare. Maybe ATT underestimated its impact or something?

The other fact is that some areas are much worse than others. As I said ATT is very fast around where I am.

 

[Grentz]

T-Mobile has good speeds because no one uses their 3G services (compared to other carriers anyway)

Exactly, they have barely any phones that support 3G as of yet, and the 3G coverage is very limited and new.

 

[SirKronan]

None of VZ's phones have wifi, they ALL go over their network...

What??

 

[Grentz]

What??

Ya, thats not true. Some of Verizon's phones do have Wifi. Off the top of my head, the Touch Pro does.

 

[Vashypooh]

true, its just like my internet/tv company, Cox Communications, they seem to upgrade just about every year now, plus they dont put a bandwith cap. when i first signed up, i was getting up to 12 Mbps, now they offer up to 25 Mbps. to bad i dont actually get to use all that speed.

Cox most CERTAINLY has a bandwith cap. You are misinformed:

http://support.cox.com/sdccommon/asp/contentredirect.asp
Googleing returns a lot of the 60gb number for limit.

 

[SirKronan]

Ya, thats not true. Some of Verizon's phones do have Wifi. Off the top of my head, the Touch Pro does.

My Omnia does. Works great. You can even hack it to make into a miny wireless router. That works great, too.

 

[SirKronan]

*mini* ... what the heck....

 

[computerpro3]

LOL Verizon phones have had wifi for years. Omnia, touch pro, touch diamond, the XV6800 and XV6900, etc.

 

[trinibwoy]

Yeah while AT&T has admitted to sub-par network implementation you can't deny they have to support significantly more 3G clients than anyone else. iPhones are everywhere, at least here in NY.

 

[maddude]

I don't know, I've worked for a few large companies and all field reps had Verizon internet cards for their laptops. I don't know if the numbers are out there, but it'd be interesting to see how many internet cards Verizon has out there compared to iPhones sold.

 

[UnlimitedMP]

Does Sprint still advertise the "fastest 3G network in America" deal?

If they saw this they'd probably complain that it wasn't an official sprint test and other factors could have skewed the data =P

 

[Arkanian]

It really depends on where you live. In NorthWest Arkasnas I get 2.2 Mbit on AT&T 3G and 271 Kbits on Verizon 1xEV. I wonder if most of the testers were on the East Coast in which Verizon has a better footprint.

 

[Grentz]

I don't know, I've worked for a few large companies and all field reps had Verizon internet cards for their laptops. I don't know if the numbers are out there, but it'd be interesting to see how many internet cards Verizon has out there compared to iPhones sold.

ATT has a lot of data cards out there too. Plus they run backend services for many large companies as well (so does Verizon). ATT for example is what BMW Assist uses (like OnStar but uses more data and such as it delivers a lot more info).

 

[Ashton]

Keep in mind ALSO that Verizon is _THE_ most expensive carrier in the USA...

Also if you want to talk about network hogs, remember a LOT of people (me included) got in on Sprint's SERO plans which make data basically free (compare cost of an average phone plan, eihtout data, to a SERO cost of $35 _with_ data) so there is a large difference there.

Where I live I get around 800kbps on my Sprint phone with 1mbps spikes, highest I've ever gotten was 1.2mbps with a singel spike.

My verizon phone used to be around 400kbps but has since rises to what seems to be on-par with sprint (iirc I tested some months ago and verizon was just a *hair* faster, like 800 vs 875 or something --- I have both Vzw and Sprint accounts W data) This also applied to roaming onto verizon from sprint. (though it should be noted I used Bluetooth for both of these tests and that could have bottle-necked them)

Also remember that CDMA has a higher potential bandwidth than GSM, so it's (supposedly) a lot easier for V or Sprint to improve data rates than ATT. Though WiMax (Sprints 4G) will make CDMA look like 1200baud...

I acctually know several people on sprint/verizon that have SPs or tethered laptops and dont ever bother to look for Wifi. I rarely do unless I have a massive update to download because I get such good speeds with Sprint

Moral of the story:
Dont go ATT just because if the iPhone

 

[InorganicMatter]

<snip>

Your SERO example was really bad. SERO was an experimental plan that Sprint lost an extraordinary amount of money on, and is forcing everyone out of. Hardly a realistic example, and totally crazy to think that $35/month is actually enough money to cover the kind of costs associated with wireless technology.

However, your point of Verizon being the most expensive is very true. Data plan for my Palm was $50 extra when I left them. Plus $40 for talking and texting. Total was $90/month for a really crappy phone.

What does AT&T's "expensive" iPhone service cost? $120/month for a family plan that four people use, plus $30/month for the device's data. So right at $60/month total for this phone. Still pricey, but nothing like what Verizon was charging.

 

[Ashton]

Your SERO example was really bad. SERO was an experimental plan that Sprint lost an extraordinary amount of money on, and is forcing everyone out of. Hardly a realistic example, and totally crazy to think that $35/month is actually enough money to cover the kind of costs associated with wireless technology.

lol, the way I understand it, SERO was for when Sprint really pissed off a customer and it was a way of glossing over it to keep buisiness. It got out of paw one day and suddenly everyone was snatching up SERO plans. Some of us have had no real trouble (once I got rid of my MotoQ) and not only have tehy not tried to get me off the plan, but they let me renew my contract for another 2 years!

I agree though, it's insanely low, the only thing close to it is T-mobile's sidekick plan ($1/day for unlimited Data) but that is ONLY data/sms @ 2G speed. Sprint shot themselves int he foot, but tehy have since ended the SERO plans and unless you have one you cant get it.

 

[Grentz]

and with the SERO plans when you go to upgrade to a newer phone, many times they will require you to move to their new Friends and Family plan which is not nearly as cheap.

 

[Ashton]

and with the SERO plans when you go to upgrade to a newer phone, many times they will require you to move to their new Friends and Family plan which is not nearly as cheap.

So far I'm safe. When I upgrade to the Touch Pro next year or the next I dont know... if all else fails I will keep my Sph-A900 and Axim x51v (or side-grade to a HP 210(?) with the same specs) I have a second A900 from a friend who canceled their Sprint plan in near-perfect condition should I have to not upgrade. Worth the extra hastle to save that $35/month off a data+phone+SMS plan!