In reply to a post by nellisere:

Wow I didn't know that! I haven't used it in so long, I was checking it daily when we were finally getting FTTC back in 2013! It says the work is commencing on the 9th April, so I guess I'll have a drive over to see if it is them putting a mast up! If it is 5G then that would be great as it's only a 3 minute drive away so I'll be in range!

It's not quite as simple as that. Remember that 5G signals do not travel as far as earlier generations of mobile signals. The technology is always improving but currently about one minute's driving at 20mph will take you to the limit of a full-on 5G signal although low-band 5G signals will propagate further at reduced transfer speeds

However, AIUI the current UK rollout of 5G requires a 4G mast. So the poster looking forward to it may find they get excellent 4G.

It is now well over two years since I ditched first AAISP broadband then a month later my landline, for just 4G. Saving £49pm.

(Since when I have installed cloud-based security cameras so added a mobile broadband router. Still saving £29pm).

A recently purchased Sony "Smart" TV is now also connected to the router and Formula 1 races on Now TV plus the live timing feed on iPad is no problem.

Phone on unlimited everything, router on unlimited data.

(See my sig for speedtest results).

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

However, AIUI the current UK rollout of 5G requires a 4G mast.

As ever, pertinent advice from Bob. Looking forward it could be a two-stage improvement for the OP.

From the government Mobile Technology Guide (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/...):

"Small cells

"At the moment, 5G equipment is generally being added to existing mobile phone masts. However, over time, more smaller transmitters (known as “small cells”) may be used to provide capacity in specific locations."


Reading that, it looks like "requires" is probably a technical rather than a legislative imperative at the moment.

Hopefully the OP may see improved 4G service but presumably the implication is that full-on 5G will initially only be received within the putative 500m. range of the existing masts while the coverage for the full-on service will increase as small cells are added.

The crux of it, is that current 5G deployments here in the UK and elsewhere are underpinned by 4G as operators are deploying 5G service using NSA (Non-Stand Alone) architecture - which is really 4G+

As a user you can see that less so in the range of the cell, but more obviously in the attainable download and upload speeds. As an example 500 to 600 Mbps is quite typically attainable on download but the upload is about 1/10th of that speed. It’s not “true” 5G in other words.

Eventually the operators will migrate to SA (Stand Alone) architecture which will provide end to end 5G speed, rather than partially as we have now.

Here’s a good link briefly explaining:
https://www.affirmednetworks.com/sa-and-nsa-5g-archi...

It’s really a commercial / technical decision by the mobile operators, both to leverage and extend the operational life of their 4G investment but also as a means of deploying 5G without having to build a brand new network from scratch.

In reply to a post by GonePostal:

Remember that 5G signals do not travel as far as earlier generations of mobile signals.

That's not caused by the 5G NR protocol, but because of the current frequency in use (3.4 to 3.6 GHz) which is the highest so far used for mobile communications. The only limitation on using lower frequencies for 5G NR is that they are all busy serving customers with LTE (4G) capable devices. 5G NR will roll out on 700 MHz later this year, which will be lower than any mobile transmission in use. All four network operators use 800 MHz for LTE.

The technology is always improving but currently about one minute's driving at 20mph will take you to the limit of a full-on 5G signal although low-band 5G signals will propagate further at reduced transfer speeds

There is no reason to think that for the same allocated spectrum capacity that 5G and 4G wouldn't cover the same area and 5G provide more throughput.

Once we are able to compare pears with pears, rather than comparing pears with carrots, things will be clearer.

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

The crux of it, is that current 5G deployments here in the UK and elsewhere are underpinned by 4G as operators are deploying 5G service using NSA (Non-Stand Alone) architecture - which is really 4G+

I'd call it 4G++++ given some of the speeds seen. I have read others describe it as adding an 8 lane motorway from the mast to the phone, but keeping the rural track from the phone to the mast.

As a user you can see that less so in the range of the cell, but more obviously in the attainable download and upload speeds. As an example 500 to 600 Mbps is quite typically attainable on download but the upload is about 1/10th of that speed.

Speeds that high only possible in really good reception, 250 to 350 seems more typical today, and I put that down to the n78 band.

Eventually the operators will migrate to SA (Stand Alone) architecture which will provide end to end 5G speed, rather than partially as we have now.

T-Mobile USA claim to have done this already. I've not seen any statistics on latency, which should have been improved.
https://www.t-mobile.com/news/network/standalone-5g-...

I think there's only about six or seven mobile operators worldwide currently that have rolled out and are operating a "full" SA 5G network. A couple in China, one in South Africa (fixed wireless), T-Mobile USA as you say, I think Telstra in Oz have built the network core and enabled masts but not rolled out the service.

Agreed. I'm hoping one of the UK networks enables SA when they go live with the 700 MHz band, but that's probably ambitious

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

However, AIUI the current UK rollout of 5G requires a 4G mast. So the poster looking forward to it may find they get excellent 4G.

But there is no requirement that the 4G and 5G come from the same mast, can get 4G from a local street pole and 5G from a large macro site.

Always happy to defer to those with greater knowledge and experience (and who carry credibility on these pages).