Please Help, Q9h 3g and internet incredibly slow.. - Page 2 - Motorola Q Forum

kareljack · 07-05-2008, 04:52 PM

No such thing as perfect 3g conditions but download speeds should be at least 800 kb/s especially since AT@T loves to flaunt 'rated to 3.2mbps'.

ninjaap · 07-05-2008, 05:08 PM

At least 800 kb/s??? Man I'm barely getting half of what should be minimum??? That really sucks. And here I was happy with the speeds. Because I thought, "it's a mobile phone, what do you expect?". Well now I know I should expect more. Is there anything we can do to increase performance? Or do we have to take it as it comes?

mexiken · 07-07-2008, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninjaap

At least 800 kb/s??? Man I'm barely getting half of what should be minimum??? That really sucks. And here I was happy with the speeds. Because I thought, "it's a mobile phone, what do you expect?". Well now I know I should expect more. Is there anything we can do to increase performance? Or do we have to take it as it comes?

Not all towers are HSDPA yet, and even if they are, some aren't upgraded to do 3.2 yet. So you've just gotta be patient. The network is ever changing, and still growing. Its faster than CDMA 3G towers, that much I can assure you.

kareljack · 07-07-2008, 11:09 AM

That makes sense, ninjaap, but with NYC being a major market there is no reason for me to be getting 400kbps average.

mexiken · 07-07-2008, 02:54 PM

So out of curiosity, I did a little testing with my internet speeds. Heres what I got. I locked in my bands so that they wouldn't switch or anything.

PIE:
EDGE:90kb/sec; .94s latency; 5.127s d/l time
3G: 645 kb/sec. FYI, the connection was so fast for smaller files, it gave me an error and said I needed to try a larger file. This was done downloading a 1mb file.

Opera:
EDGE: 98kb/sec; .865s latency; 8.998s d/l time
3G: 486 kb/sec. Again, too fast for a small connection, had to use the 1mb benchmark.

I enclosed screenshots of both 3G tests. Like I suspected, it just varies on what the network is equipped with. Here in LA, they haven't fully integrated with the 3G market, as there isn't coverage everywhere. You'll hit some dead serious dead spots if you set your phone to 3G only. But in Las Vegas for example, I can't find a place where my phone drops to EDGE only. So the good news for LA, they seem to be upgraded to HSDPA.

ninjaap · 07-07-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mexiken

So out of curiosity, I did a little testing with my internet speeds. Heres what I got. I locked in my bands so that they wouldn't switch or anything.

PIE:
EDGE:90kb/sec; .94s latency; 5.127s d/l time
3G: 645 kb/sec. FYI, the connection was so fast for smaller files, it gave me an error and said I needed to try a larger file. This was done downloading a 1mb file.

Opera:
EDGE: 98kb/sec; .865s latency; 8.998s d/l time
3G: 486 kb/sec. Again, too fast for a small connection, had to use the 1mb benchmark.

I enclosed screenshots of both 3G tests. Like I suspected, it just varies on what the network is equipped with. Here in LA, they haven't fully integrated with the 3G market, as there isn't coverage everywhere. You'll hit some dead serious dead spots if you set your phone to 3G only. But in Las Vegas for example, I can't find a place where my phone drops to EDGE only. So the good news for LA, they seem to be upgraded to HSDPA.

So, mexiken, if LA has already upgraded to HSDPA, then you're saying your 645kb/s is good? But kareljack claims we should be getting at least 800kb/s. All three of us are only averagiIng 500mb/s. You live in LA, kareljack in NYC, I'm from San Francisco Bay Area... these are all major cities. I'm sure these are where the HSDPA towers would have initially been built. Shouldn't we be swimming in 3.2mb/s HSDPA towers by now?

mexiken · 07-07-2008, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninjaap

So, mexiken, if LA has already upgraded to HSDPA, then you're saying your 645kb/s is good? But kareljack claims we should be getting at least 800kb/s. All three of us are only averagiIng 500mb/s. You live in LA, kareljack in NYC, I'm from San Francisco Bay Area... these are all major cities. I'm sure these are where the HSDPA towers would have initially been built. Shouldn't we be swimming in 3.2mb/s HSDPA towers by now?

Well, I'm not exactly sure on that. See, in LA, we were one of the LAST major markets to get 3G. Its a HUGE market (more than 5 million suscribers here), and you don't want to deploy it in such a huge market for logistical reasons. So they didn't. So who knows really. I guess it just depends really.

kareljack · 07-07-2008, 07:45 PM

Ninjaap, keep in mind that my statement is a personal and unprofessional opinion. I based it on the line that 3g is supposed to triple the speed of edge and push the 2mb barrier.
I am well aware that the 3.2mb rating is the theoretical capability achieved under optimal "lab" conditions. However, based on everything that I have read about 3g, I think it's fair and well within reason to expect 800kb/s average.

ninjaap · 07-07-2008, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kareljack

Ninjaap, keep in mind that my statement is a personal and unprofessional opinion. I based it on the line that 3g is supposed to triple the speed of edge and push the 2mb barrier.
I am well aware that the 3.2mb rating is the theoretical capability achieved under optimal "lab" conditions. However, based on everything that I have read about 3g, I think it's fair and well within reason to expect 800kb/s average.

I totally get what your saying. And I agree with everything you're saying. I'm just hoping someone out there could give us some type explanation. I mean I am with ATT because they promised HSDPA, 3g. We are paying a premium for this service, so it's only fair that we get what we pay for. If I knew what I know now, I would have just went with sprints EVDO. Shoot... their unlimted data plan is alot cheaper than ATT's. But I guess I have no choice but to wait and see if things improve as mexiken suggests.

sniffs · 07-08-2008, 04:50 PM

I have 3 data devices on my desk. I am in the middle of Irvine, CA which is a huge commercial city that has near perfect signal's for pretty much any carrier.

I have a ATT Motorola Q9h (3G), a Sprint PPC-6700 (CDMA, also 3G) and a Blackberry Curve 8310 (EDGE)

I've tested all 3 and can say without a doubt that ATT's 3G is mucho faster than Sprint's 3G.. (EDGE is obviously the slowest. I didn't necessarily test them against the other 3G devices.)

I did the 1MB tests on both the 6700 and the Q9h and average speeds on my 6700 are about 200kbps. I didn't even bother doing the tests on the BB.. Dont want to waste my time.. lol?

On the Q9h, I peak above 1.5mbps average. Definately a huge increase.

Keep in mind that GSM 3G is not offered everywhere.. Mostly in major metropolitan cities.. and even then, it may not be full speed available due to congestion.