• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Would you give up Quad Core CPU For LTE "or" LTE for Quad Core???

DarkSky

DarkSky

Well-Known Member
I do believe I'm the only one who believes this...

Why do companies focus on things like LTE for cell phones? They're pointless to most consumers!

Am I the only person who does not have an unlimited data plan?

Am I the only one that doesn't download massive multi-gig files on my cell phone?

5Mbps is more than enough to stream HD content off YouTube.

Cell phone carriers boast stuff like 150Mbps LTE! What use is that when their data plans go from 100MB to 5GB? Yay!! I can hit my monthly 5GB limit in only 1minute now instead of 5 minutes!

The Samsung Galaxy S3 will not have a quad-core processor apparently so it can have LTE.

I don't know about everyone else, but I do all my heavy downloading on my PC. My PC has terabytes of HDD space to PUT all that downloading. My PC has a 24" monitor to WATCH all that HD stuff, and right next to it is a 58" big screen to further watch it.

The average web page is about what.. A MEG in size? A hell of a lot less for text pages like forums. So with LTE I guess I can have pages load in 1/100th of a second instead of 1/100th. Wow. Useless.

What the heck is the point of 40/50/150/etc Mbps speeds on a frickin cell phone!? Especially when most mobile plans offer STINGY data limits!

!!!!????????? :confused:

Sorry.. just had to get that off my chest. It'd been bugging me for years.

ADD/EDIT: If you're on an unlimited data plan, please do not even reply because obviously the higher the speed the better for you, as you can download as much as you like.
 
So you wouldnt mind still having dial-up 56k I guess right?

I average 20-25mbps down on LTE and maybe 5mbps on 3G.
Do I need it to be faster? No. Do I like that it's faster? You bet your bottom dollar.
 
I feel you, OP. After getting use to LTE speeds, it's hard to go back, IMO. I agree, that most people probably won't need LTE and the tiered data plans do put a damper on having LTE. That's why I was so against tiered data plans but that's a different issue. I wouldn't go as far as calling it a waste. If the technology is there, why not use it on a mobile phone.

Edit- I'm going to move this to the Lounge area since it's not technically an Android discussion...but it's definitely a good discussion though.
 
Yeah the real vexation here seems to be the tiered data plans. They have indeed made LTE less awesome for those who stand to hit their caps each month. Speed doesn't do you much good if you're maxed out on your data allowance but yet technology can't just stop in its tracks either. A rather unfortunate dichotomy.
 
Cell phones are like most gadgets we own. It comes down to want vs need. Do we NEED the gadgets we own, no. Do we WANT the gadgets we own yes.

When I was in R&D we were told people who buy gadgets want three things. They want it smaller, faster, cheaper. Oh yeah, they also wanted it yesterday.

So, do most people need LTE, no. Do they want LTE, yes.
 
One thing to throw out for perspective is once LTE (Verizon is my only experience) is more saturated, speeds will come down considerably. When I got my Bionic in September, it was blazing fast internet, now with my Nexus in May, it's a bit slower.
But like others have said, it's the same with any tech. Do we need it better/faster? Probably not, but it never hurts.
 
valorian said:
So, do most people need LTE, no. Do they want LTE, yes.
Click to expand...

At the cost of a slower less efficient phone? No way! The N.American Galaxy S3 will be dual core, in order to support LTE (dunno the specifics as to WHY). The quad-core has proven to be more energy efficient than the dual core, and is faster.

So I get LTE, which I don't need, and in order to get something I don't need, I miss out on the quad-core processor. Yep, that makes sense. :o

I think most people on a data plan that has a traffic cap would prefer a quad-core processor and be stuck on their 'slow' 21Mbps HSPA speeds.
 
DarkSky said:
Why do companies focus on things like LTE for cell phones? They're pointless to most consumers!

5Mbps is more than enough to stream HD content off YouTube.
Click to expand...
For Verizon, LTE is a big deal because their version of 3G typically tops out at around 1Mbps. Yeah, theoretical for EV-DO is 2.5~5Mbps but I've never been able to get those speeds. For GSM, it's not as big an issue.

Another thing, the quicker carriers are able move folks to LTE phones (ergo networks), the quicker they can switch their existing 3G infrastructure to LTE.
 
DarkSky, what 150 or 300mbps LTE are you seeing? Verizon's LTE can theoretically hit 73mbps currently. In reality it hits 5-12 down and 2-5up advertised. In actual testing nationwide the average is maybe 7-8mbps down and 5-6 up. That upload may be excessive, but the download isn't. Especially when EVDO 3G is only 3mbps max and averages 700kbps nationwide. I can't even stream video on verizon's 3g. On LTE even 720p video streaming is doable. However 1080p or anything higher isn't. One day 1080p or more would be nice though. What if I want my phone to stream netflix onto someone's tv or something in the future?

Sadly phones can't even play 720p yet, let alone 1080p. At least not normal 720p and 1080p files encoded for PC's. They do fine with files specially encoded for phones, but who wants that.

Anyway I don't see these insane LTE speeds you are making up. Nor do I see how LTE is anything other than necessary for most carriers except maybe tmobile. However even tmobile needs hspa+
 
Hi guys! Let's keep rude and combative comments out of Android Forums. There were no warnings or infractions, I just deleted posts. Let's keep it nice below this post. If you find that you can't, we'll just shut this conversation down for you. :)

Steven
 
Slug said:
A couple of points:

1. Please keep responses civil.

2. More throughput = faster downloading of ALL data. It's a fallacy to assume that the only use for faster connections is to consume more.
Click to expand...

True, but even at 5Mbit, that's good enough for streaming video or viewing web pages.

As to the comment 2 up ^^ about speeds, I'm just quoting LTE speeds that are given.

4G - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

.. and Rogers quoted "150Mbps" on their pages.

But that's not the point I was trying to make. I was trying to state that having to give up a quad-core phone in favor of a dual core, just to have LTE, is really a backwards way of doing things.

Fast downloading speeds on cell phones are great for those that have unlimited plans (am I repeating myself???) but for those of us that can't download much anyway due to traffic caps, more speed doesn't do much except hinder the phone when you have to cut out some OTHER feature (like quad core) to get it.

Anyway, this discussion has turned pointless. I'm removing it from my notifications. I just thought it's a bit stupid of Samsung to stay dual-core (which I already have on the S2) just to give me LTE (which I don't need).
 
ben7337 said:
In reality it hits 5-12 down and 2-5up advertised. In actual testing nationwide the average is maybe 7-8mbps down and 5-6 up. That upload may be excessive, but the download isn't. Especially when EVDO 3G is only 3mbps max and averages 700kbps nationwide.
Click to expand...
I'm hitting 15~18Mbps down and 15Mbps up with Verizon LTE. Alas, I foresee those speeds dropping significantly if/when a 4G LTE iPhone is released. :)

DarkSky said:
But that's not the point I was trying to make. I was trying to state that having to give up a quad-core phone in favor of a dual core, just to have LTE, is really a backwards way of doing things.
Click to expand...
This is from your point of view. If you look at the issue from the carrier's perspective, they probably couldn't care less if you have a single-core, dual-core or quad-core phone. I think they're more concerned about moving people to technology which makes more efficient use of the limited spectrum available to them. Sure, you might be seeing 5Mbps now but when more and more people switch to smartphones and start using data making the 3G network more congested, that 5Mbps you're seeing now will probably dwindle down to just 1~2Mbps, perhaps even lower.
 
rui-no-onna said:
This is from your point of view. If you look at the issue from the carrier's perspective, they probably couldn't care less if you have a single-core, dual-core or quad-core phone. I think they're more concerned about moving people to technology which makes more efficient use of the limited spectrum available to them. Sure, you might be seeing 5Mbps now but when more and more people switch to smartphones and start using data making the 3G network more congested, that 5Mbps you're seeing now will probably dwindle down to just 1~2Mbps, perhaps even lower.
Click to expand...

^This. There's is more to LTE than just speed. You have to look at it from a carrier's perspective. LTE is more efficient at using spectrum than 3g. It's only wise for carriers to move to LTE to meet the increasing demands of mobile users.
 
Yes, 3G may be all fine and dandy for you GSM users on HSPA, but EVDO is torture for doing anything more than loading simple webpages. I'm serious, EVDO here is more along the lines of EDGE for you GSM users speedwise. I know its technically faster but I don't often see anything higher than 500 kbps.

4G is a real treat since it finally makes downloading data over a cellular network bareable.

Besides, the unlimited data thing is a pretty pointless argument. You dont use less data over 3G. You use the exact same amount of data...just much slower.
 
Demache said:
Yes, 3G may be all fine and dandy for you GSM users on HSPA, but EVDO is torture for doing anything more than loading simple webpages. I'm serious, EVDO here is more along the lines of EDGE for you GSM users speedwise. I know its technically faster but I don't often see anything higher than 500 kbps.
Click to expand...
500Kbps? Ouch. And here, I thought the 1Mbps I was getting on my Verizon 3G MiFi was bad.

I have HSPA with AT&T and it's become pretty slow as of late. Before, I used to get speeds of 3-5Mbps down and 1-2Mbps up. Nowadays, I'm down to just 1.5Mbps down and 512Kbps up with high latency. T-Mobile, I still get 5-6Mbps down (in areas with good coverage). Probably because they don't have a lot of users so their network isn't as congested.

As for using the same amount of data, regardless of connection speed, not necessarily. With faster speeds, folks may be more inclined to use their phones for more web browsing and the like now that they don't have to wait a long time for pages to load. Perhaps watch more YouTube clips now that it doesn't need to constantly buffer and doesn't just look like a bunch of blocks jumbled together. Perhaps even do Skype video calls, etc over the cellular network.
 
rui-no-onna said:
As for using the same amount of data, regardless of connection speed, not necessarily. With faster speeds, folks may be more inclined to use their phones for more web browsing and the like now that they don't have to wait a long time for pages to load. Perhaps watch more YouTube clips now that it doesn't need to constantly buffer and doesn't just look like a bunch of blocks jumbled together. Perhaps even do Skype video calls, etc over the cellular network.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to say something is wrong with that?
 
I just thought it's a bit stupid of Samsung to stay dual-core (which I already have on the S2) just to give me LTE (which I don't need).
Click to expand...

I believe Samsung build handsets for more than just you, though. ;)

I suspect that the choice of dual vs quad is purely down to which SOC supports the required radio bands and LTE, similar to how the T-Mobile GS2 uses a Qualcomm SOC rather than Exynos in order to support 42Mbps HSPDA+.

Btw, it's a bit ill-mannered to describe a discussion that you yourself opened as "pointless" just because people disagree with you.
 
so you would rather have the 1910 model t versus the new model year lambo right? it gets you from point a to point b right? just a little slower. in order to grow technologically we need things like lte. lte sells. just remember bill gates was the one who said 64mb should be good enough for anyone. now look at it i have 32 times that in ram alone...
 
Nope, 640 - I had to play enough system configuration games to run different apps that that number is seared into my memory! :(

Though to be fair, I also believe that BillG denies saying that.
 
Adauth said:
Are you trying to say something is wrong with that?
Click to expand...
I never said there was something wrong with using more data compared to before. I do all those stuff I've mentioned on my smartphone (including the occasional Skype video call - funnily enough, 3G is faster than Wi-Fi in parts of the house that are far from the router). Back when I only had EDGE, my smartphone use was limited to reading text-only websites and downloading 300~500KB ebooks.
 
Although i agree that LTE is more than most users need, (talk, text, maps, apps) i still like it.

Being a truck driver, im away from home 5-6 weeks at a time. Internet, online gaming, youtube, and android apps are all downloaded from my 3g/4g. Note that i use Hotspot feature to use data on my laptop.

In 3G, i can usually watch youtube videos without pauses. In some areas i cant. In some populated areas, on friday/saturday night, i find my speed too slow to watch youtube videos. Im sure its because the tower is running at max bandwidth. I generally have 120-160ms ping on 3G.

On 4G, i smile. I am happy. Not only can i watch youtube videos, i can line multiple videos up ready to be watched. Even if i have poor reception (1-2 bars, inside a large building), its still blazing fast. I generally have 70-90ms ping on 4G.

I play a first person shooter online in my truck on down-time. When im on 4G, i get super fast ping. I always do well on the game on 3G, but on 4G? I usually come out in first or second. At home i have 40ms ping on DSL. Im almost always in first place at home. Network speed ping makes a huge difference when it comes to gaming, and 4G offers it.

The biggest thing about 4G for me is talk/data simultaneously, as i have Razr Maxx which does not support both on 3G. On 3G, if i am on youtube or playing my online game, and i get a call i need to take, the video pauses, and my game loses connection. On 4G, i can be playing my game and talking to a family member at the same time. If my mom wants me to research something for her, on 3G, ill have to hang up and call her back. On 4G, i can find it and stay on the call.

So lets recap on 4G:
Faster ping times (useful for online games)
Faster download times (useful for downloading files)
Talk/Data simultaneously
Higher bandwidth for all users on tower

A downfall is battery life. But you can switch to 3G if thats an issue.
And a some people use a mobile hotspot as their internet connectivity at home, instead of DSL. 4G makes it worth it, if you dont use tons of data.
 
Some have touched on it, but I do prefer to have LTE and the higher speeds. Not every area has solid 3G data. While in my previous hometown I was getting 1 to 3 Mbps on 3G in my current location I am lucky to get 0.75 Mbps most of the time on 3G. Downloading an image via email or even getting this site to load was horrible unless I was on Wifi. With LTE I am able to do things in a reasonable amount of time so the things I want to do I can actually do. It has given me my phone back and made it useful again.

While I can agree that anything beyond 10 Mbps is kind of a waste, I'd prefer the carriers push the limits as much as they can. The more people on the network in a specific area the slower things go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom