PCWorld: AT&T 3G 67% Faster Than Competitors
AT&T customers are no strangers to spotty coverage and slow 3G, and it's something competitors have had no problems pointing out in the past. However, in a recent series of tests by PCWorld, AT&T has come out on top for 3G speeds.
PCWorld today reports that after generating disappointing results in last year's tests, AT&T's 3G download speeds are 84 percent better than the numbers from eight months ago. In fact, AT&T has come out on top in the site's tests. With download speeds 67 percent faster than its competitors', AT&T is ahead of Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon.
According to PCW, AT&T last year posted speeds of 818 kbps across 13 cities. Tests conducted in December 2009 and January 2010 show the network's average download speed has increased to 1410 kbps.
Verizon came first last year and this year, was a close second to AT&T. The network's download speeds increased by 8 percent over last year's numbers. Sprint was found to be "upgrading its network capacity fast enough to meet the demand" being presented by smartphone users and PCWorld reports that T-Mobile's speeds are competitive with what Sprint and Verizon offers in most of the test cities. In fact, in one city (New York) T-Mobile’s network delivered download speeds that are usually associated with 4G networks.
Click here to read the full report.
- Capcom COO Mark Beaumont Dies Suddenly
- Doritos to Give You a Chance to be a Pro Gamer
- Game Retailers Not Liking EA's Project $10 Tactics
- Sony Patents Universal Game Controller
- Microsoft and Amazon Sign Kindle, Linux Deal
- Weird LED Disco Shoes Come with Attached Floor
- Apple Responds to Recent App Banning
- Shanzai Creating PSP Phone Clone
- Natal to Launch in October with Lag Time of 1/10s
- ''Explicit'' Section Hidden in Apple's App Store
- Best Buy, Other Retailers Will Sell iPad
- Sony Silently Squeezed Out 70MB More PS3 RAM
- Developer: Current FPS Games Are "Boring"
- Guild Wars Novel Coming Q1/Q2 2010
- Report: FBI Raids 3 Toyota Plants in Detroit
- YouTube Removes Original RickRoll Video
- Yahoo Integrating Twitter into Global Network
- Nintendo DSi XL Priced, Dated for North America
- ''Super Mario Galaxy 2,'' ''Metroid: Other M'' Dated
Having the fastest network with the poorest coverage, is like having a car with its wheels missing..............utterly pointless and a waste of space.......
the test wasnt done on identical hardware. so this is a moot point.
I'm not buying it. You don't go from last to first place overnight. AT&T's reliability percentage looks particularly suspicious. Although, it does say in the notes that
"Reliability is expressed as the percentage of our one-minute performance tests during which the service was available, uninterrupted, and faster than dial-up speed. "
In other words, they threw out all the data that made AT&T look bad.
speed is not every thing, I see no mention of ping or packet loss. That's all we need is another luke wilson commercial, Im sure they are working on one as we speak,
I don't even have a phone that connects to the internet.
What about network latency???!!!! Download speed does not mean crap. I would rather have 877 kbps with low latency over 1410 kbps with high latency
Probably PCWorld gets $$ from AT&T.
Sorry, I don't buy it. ATT is the Worst ever and i will never deal with their Horrible Customer service ever again.
Oh, PCWorld... I do hope you're enjoying that fat AT&T check...
Well if PCWorld didn't screw up the tests and kept the same exact testing environment as they did during the last test, and that is a big IF. I say that this is a good thing. Competition helps and that is what Verizon likely did for AT&T, now it's Verizon's turn. CDMA needs to step up to 4G soon. It's getting to be very slow considering current bandwidth requirements.
What about network latency???!!!! Download speed does not mean crap. I would rather have 877 kbps with low latency over 1410 kbps with high latency
Ditto! Don't forget an available, uninterrupted, and faster than dial-up speed connection too.
Seriously, those are some warped results.
It's like giving me a map of the ground, telling me "this spot here would give you the best landline speeds in the country" and me going "but there is no house here..."
I'd have to see where these tests were conducted before the data means anything. If it's the results of one test done in a city where AT&T has unusually good coverage, it's meaningless, when their performance elsewhere is far worse or non-existant.
How will I find out the capital of Peru without a 1.4 megabit connection on my cellphone? Never mind that I paid attention in my highschool-level world studies classes. HOW!!!!!111one
I like how people are quick to talk crap about AT&T, if you don't have it why are you talking crap about, if you do have it and hate it drop it and move on, you can keep cellphone numbers between providers.
People were also quick to point out that these test can be misleading and indeed they can be, but the same can be said about Verizon, There is no regulation on speeds for 3g it simply the technology use to provide it.
BTW anything worth doing on the internet should be done on a real connection with a real computer/laptop. Why would I want to download anything on a 1.5mbit connection when I could download it on my home pc at 15mbit.
Ditto Glorian
Instead of making "ass umptions" go read the PCWorld article.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/189 [...] _test.html
I'm going to make an "assumption" that everyone can read.
Glorian:
1. The reason people jump on AT&T is because of their history of bombarding us with misleading ads & having poor customer service.
2. Verizon may have a slower average connection speed, but at least I can access it at 95% of the places I frequent at greater than dialup speeds.
3. Do you expect me to whip out my landline and desktop when I'm in a store browsing for reviews on a product that I may buy? Or how about when using GPS for navigation? Or even... while browsing Youtube while waiting in the car for a pizza to get done? You have a point, but it does not always apply.
i'm too lazy to read the article...but given at&t's dirty track records this is hard to believe.
I'm located in sort of a dead spot. Service is spotty at best. Doesn't matter who the service provider is.
Having the fastest network with the poorest coverage, is like having a car with its wheels missing..............utterly pointless and a waste of space.......
It's more like having the fastest car that you can only drive on one road.
What about network latency???!!!! Download speed does not mean crap. I would rather have 877 kbps with low latency over 1410 kbps with high latency
Umm...if you have 877kbps on, say, 10ms latency, and you have 1410kbps with 20ms latency, I'd take the latter. It's still faster. Look at what you're saying. Your throughput is still higher. For raw data, who cares what the latency is. Unless you're playing the market or ebaying, latency from a mobile perspective 1) is going to suck anyway and 2) isn't that important.
wow look at all the verzion fanboys in here that cant help but wine. As long as you dont live in the boonies or NYC att has great relibility and speed, my girls storm is slow and has worse coverage everywhere we go around STL.
Maurath55 is talking out his backside, please forgive him for being stupid.............
Driving from Miami to Boston I only encountered a few pockets where it wasn't 3G. And even then it wasn't a big deal since I was using it for the maps with traffic. Around town in Boston, Miami, Gainesville, and Raleigh I have had no problem with connection.
I don't believe that chart is right. I've been using Sprint for the last 2.5 years, and it's definitely faster than 1410 kbps. Plus I would like to mention the coverage with them has been way better than tmobile's 3G.
People with Verizon service have terrible AT&T network coverage (It's like they have almost no coverage at all!)
thats wierd i run speed tests on my motorola droid all the time on my verizon network. im always pulling between 1.3 to 2.3 mbps down
I don't know about you all but i travel all over Texas in some very very remote areas. I have AT&T and I ALWAYS have service everywhere i go. I have not had a single dropped call in over 3 years and have not seen my phone without service in years. I have been in the middle of no where over 30 miles from the closest town and i still had full service.
As for AT&T speeds, they really are very fast. I have an iphone with tethering enabled, when i hook my phone up to my laptop, webpages load very quickly. Rather if I'm driving down the road in my truck, sitting my a camp fire in the middle of no where, or at my house in Houston, AT&T speeds are great and the network coverage in Texas is AMAZING. Everyone i know who doesn't have AT&T complains all the time, friends with AT&T, i never hear complaints.
I guess AT&T just hasn't covered every state yet as well as they have in Texas. If you're in Texas, AT&T is definitely the way to go.
funny. i was just testing my speed via the blackberry tour on vzw a few days ago.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/723249349.png
I was on AT&T, but even though I was in a supposed 3G coverage area, the signal was so weak it would continue to drop regular cell phone calls. My daughter had the same problem with her AT&T service (in a different part of the state - she is going to college) - she had to go outside her house to make phone calls (in the middle of a town of 60,000 population that also supposedly had 3G coverage).
We dumped AT&T for Verizon - now we both have perfect 3G coverage - internet, phone calls not a problem any more. AT&T sucks (unless you are lucky enough to live in the microscopic areas that they actually provide the advertised coverage.
i think all you at&t haters should seriously just go swallow a dick. nobody ask you to post your bullshit statments on here. in the summer when verizon was number ya'll would have been like "yes yes PC World never lies" but the minute at&t comes out on top in 3g network on test done by PC World, it's like PC world is a horrible and unreliable site. get over your fucking selves. most of you people that talk shit about at&t prolli havent even had the service and are just goin' by verizon's comercials. seriously stop hating on at&t cause they are making more money and doing better than verizon. jeezh...the company is atleast puttin in some work on their network and its like all you verizon fan bitches still have some slick shit to say about them.
Sprint is EVDO not 3G