2G vs. 3G
2G Advantage:
• way better battery life
3G Advantage:
• faster data connection
This is a subjective question> Is it worth it at the expense of increased battery consumption?
I have an HTC Diamond with a small 900 mAh battery. So for me, I mostly put mine into 2G and switch to 3G when I use my data connection.
Question: is 2G = 3G when it comes to voice quality? (I can't tell the difference)
...and are there any other 3G advantages that I have missed?
Technically 3G is used for voice as well, but whether you're on GPRS/EDGE/3G I don't think there's a noticeable difference. As for if 3G is worth it? Without question. I'm a huuuuge fan of Android, and I'm dying to get a phone that works with AT&T 3G... Obviously I was greatly disappointed when the Agora Pro was delayed. The G1 seems like the perfect phone for me in every way (except maybe build quality), GPS, WiFi, capacitive screen... But I refuse to buy any phone that doesn't give me 3G, EDGE is painful when you're used to HSPA.
"• can make/receive a call/txt while connected to the Internet (never miss a call)"
thats not a 3g thing thats a cell-phone operator equipment thing
i never lost a call because of grps
thats the real reason that grps was invented to replace
old cell-phone data traffic where you had to call the isp to get
Internet
I don't think it's the right question to ask.
besides the fact that it's individual, 3G and 2G are completely different.
2G provides the regular services which you don't need anything more for.
3G provides services which 2G does not and you will use only if you need them.
so the question is "what do you need?"
I have a polaris on 2G ALL the time... unless I want to connect to the internet.
(just a for instance)
btw, 3G is WAY "less healthy"
for instance, in israel, 2G broadcasts make your phone cast 0.042mW/kb
3G makes it cast 0.43mW/kb. it's like swimming in an ocean of endless EM waves.
that's of course, for an average phone, for full signal
nir36 said:
I don't think it's the right question to ask.
besides the fact that it's individual, 3G and 2G are completely different.
2G provides the regular services which you don't need anything more for.
3G provides services which 2G does not and you will use only if you need them.
so the question is "what do you need?"
I have a polaris on 2G ALL the time... unless you want to connect to the internet.
(just a for instance)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah well, 3G is a data transfer speed. If you're not using data, there's no reason to have 3G.
Ok, then should the question be.........
E vs. 3G.....regarding call quality & battery consumption
Is there a difference?
or
What radio mode will consume the least amount of battery, Edge or 3G?
Edge consumes a lot less battery than 3G.
Call quality is the same....
Ok, so I will stick with Edge as my basis and switch when I need to use my data connection.
you don't need Edge either for calls. call quality doesn't change from 2G to Edge to 3G to 10G. voice is sampled in 44kHz at best. let's say 22kHz. 22kHz is nothing compared to what 2G can transfer. even if you use Shannon's formula you still get a very high value for 2G data transfer. Edge isn't better than 2G unless you want faster data transfer rate... edge can transfer up to 237kbps per 4 time slots. you need no more than 48kbps.
btw.. just as a general remark. human speech moves between... 20hz to about 3khz. 22khz/48khz is required to transfer music through your phone.
nir36 said:
voice is sampled in 44kHz at best.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both 2(.5/.75)G and 3G uses GSM encoding (with a very low sampling frequency); that is, the audio quality is exactly the same with the two.
galaxys said:
Edge consumes a lot less battery than 3G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is particularly true when actively transferring data, and (to a much lesser degree) when just using the phone. I've measured huge (~50%) differences on contemporary handsets - see my dedicated articles if interested.
nir36 said:
3G is WAY "less healthy"
for instance, in israel, 2G broadcasts make your phone cast 0.042mW/kb
3G makes it cast 0.43mW/kb. it's like swimming in an ocean of endless EM waves.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have any links on this? This is quite big a difference and I'd say, at least under "normal" circumstances, the difference shouldn't be that big.
As CDMA is somewhat more battery-friendly than TDMA (it can transfer the same info using less power), the difference is mostly because of the difference between the carrier (850/900 MHz vs. 1700+ MHz; the higher the freuency, the more power you require to traverse the same distance with the same SNR). That is, with a GSM operator operating at much higher frequencies than 900 MHz, there shouldn't be much difference.
(And, of course, a lot of other factors should also be considered: does the operator use the same radio turn to put all their aerials on etc. If, for some reason, you have a far better 3G SNR than GSM SNR, then, your handheld should use much lower transfer power.)
This is a matter of choices
Each one of us will pick a phone (and a band and a carrier) based on our own needs
In my personal usage, I need FAST INTERNET, so I chose 3G (HSDPA)
I also chose the Xperia X1 because it has a BIG battery
Now I have 3G SPEED and 1.5 days battery life with heavy usage
Menneisyys said:
Both 2(.5/.75)G and 3G uses GSM encoding (with a very low sampling frequency); that is, the audio quality is exactly the same with the two.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's great to hear. Well to conserve power, my choice will be to disable 3G using Communication Manager. When I do this, the 3G icon in the task bar switches to E.
Will switch to 3G only when I need to use the internet.
Perfect ! Thanks for helping me with this everyone
Menneisyys said:
Do you have any links on this? This is quite big a difference and I'd say, at least under "normal" circumstances, the difference shouldn't be that big.
As CDMA is somewhat more battery-friendly than TDMA (it can transfer the same info using less power), the difference is mostly because of the difference between the carrier (850/900 MHz vs. 1700+ MHz; the higher the freuency, the more power you require to traverse the same distance with the same SNR). That is, with a GSM operator operating at much higher frequencies than 900 MHz, there shouldn't be much difference.
(And, of course, a lot of other factors should also be considered: does the operator use the same radio turn to put all their aerials on etc. If, for some reason, you have a far better 3G SNR than GSM SNR, then, your handheld should use much lower transfer power.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
first of all, let me correct my mistake. it's not 0.43 for 3G it's 0.23mW/kb. but that's still VERY high.
I'll try to look it up as i got this info from a friend who worked in orange. but this obviously depends on many factors other than your device. the more relays you have spread around your area, the less power your phone needs to retrieve a normal signal. they're not ALL arranged according to the hexagon method... or the Threeway method.
I'm talking about average power. the closer you are to the relay, the less power you need, but your brain is fried from the relay itself so you can't really run away from it.
FORTUNATELY, power dissipates by 1/r^2 so if you're about 60-70cm away from your phone the effect will be extremely minimal.
"Yeah well, 3G is a data transfer speed. If you're not using data, there's no reason to have 3G."
here we can also use it for video calls directly to another phone number as in not real internet
but nobody use it i think
maybe the problem is that females will spend ½hour freshning up before answering their phones jk
video calls are only different by requiring faster data transfer and much higher signal to noise ratio.. which 3G provides. again, it's not a consideratoin whether to use 3G or not. only if you need to use a video call should you switch to 3G
2G vs 3G......What about (Edge vs 3G)
Wow, some good feedback has been generated here.
Phone use:
• 3G.......is NOT worth it here unless you are video calling
Data Connection:
• 3G.......is worth it here (way faster) even though battery consumption increases nicely
Before concluding with the above, would like to clear up what Edge is:
EDGE can be considered a 3G radio technology and is part of ITU's 3G definition,[1] but is most frequently referred to as 2.75G
Based on the definition here, does anyone believe that using Edge is best when using the phone for the sake of decreasing battery consumption? I believe it should be. Any thoughts?
Actually, EDGE can't be considered as 3G techwise.. and it doesn't have the same data transfer rate as 3G provided by an HSDPA connection.
this is from wikipedia
High-Speed Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) is a 3G (third generation) mobile telephony communications protocol in the High-Speed Packet Access (HSPA) family, which allows networks based on Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) to have higher data transfer speeds and capacity. Current HSDPA deployments support down-link speeds of 1.8, 3.6, 7.2 and 14.4 Mbit/s. Further speed increases are available with HSPA+, which provides speeds of up to 42 Mbit/s downlink.[1]
EDGE only gets to 430kbps AT BEST. the AT BEST part NEVER comes
it's true that EDGE consumes less battery
and it's true that 3G is much faster
but it's also true that this all depends on your needs.
Orange Israel doesn't support EDGE. if they did i would be using it all the time instead of 3G when i need an internet connection.. since i don't need 1.8Mbps..
eventually, i believe there's no debate about what to use.
2G is the best way to go when you do everything but using the internet and video calls.
and then choosing between EDGE and 3G(HSDPA, UMTS.. or whatever you wanna call it) depends on how fast you want your internet connection to be while considering that EDGE consumes MUCH MUCH less battery power.
btw, if you asked me, i woldn't think twice whether you should have a 3G phone or not. having 3G support on your phone nowadays costs nothing more than having a reulgar 2G phone.. so having the option whether to use 3G or not is obviously better than not having it.
band27 said:
EDGE can be considered a 3G radio technology and is part of ITU's 3G definition,[1] but is most frequently referred to as 2.75G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
tehcnically, EDGE (which is a plain TDMA technology, as is GSM) in no way can be compared to 3G technologies, which are all CDMA.
Hello,
I'm desperately seeking an app, registry entry, or custom Raphael Radio that will allow me to *reduce* the maximum Tx (transmit) power of the main GSM/3G antenna.
My dream is to have a more safe device. I don't mind getting poor reception in concrete elevator shafts, when my phone would be transmitting at maximum power. Instead I would love a reduced maximum Tx power.
The same goes for Wifi. Nokia devices have been able to adjust their Wifi maximum Tx power for years. Even on the very first S60 3rd edition devices that came out in late 2000. 9 Years later, this option is still included with every S60 3rd/5th device out there. 4mW, 10mW and 100mW Are all options for the Wifi antenna.
I dream of the day this would come to out on the Raph. Both increased battery life (with respect to wifi) and increased safety / reduced radiation when it comes to the GSM/3G antenna.
Let's get this working.
There are anti-radiation stickers based on some magnetic technology that absorb the radiation and produce heat.Search in the online shops(I saw them in ebay) for these stickers.
Don't be pushing stickers buddy... You might as well be pushing daises.
The information concerning mobile phones and health are increasing every day. A recent study in Switzerland showed an increase of 240% of brain cancer on the same side that the phone was used on over a period of just 10 years.
A reduction in the amount of Wifi power through the registry or software is very possible, however the amount of SAR emitted from Wifi is negligible in comparison to that from the main GSM/3G antenna. For Wifi on the Raphael the SAR measurement is just 0.05, an average for many mobile phones.
However, the main antenna is a much more concerning 0.31 (850Mhz 3G) or 0.74(1900Mhz 3G) for data operations. For GPRS the Raphael has a very alarming value of 1.34. This is 84% of an already too high legal limit for radiation absorption into us.
How would one edit the radios to reduce the maximum permitted Tx (Transmit) power from the main GSM/3G antenna? It would be great if we could figure this one out!
Thank you for the information.Do you know more for these anti-radiation stickers ? I know that the sticks are based on some magnetic technology and transform the radiation into heat.
I work in a downtown Dallas office building and am running radio 12.39a.60.19u_26.06.06.30_M on AOSPX ICS rom. My signal strength is at -89 dBm 12 asu, yet I have a difficult time getting a consistent transfer rate from my phone while at my desk. The data package also switches between "3G" and "H" occasionally. My battery life is okay, but Speedtest.net is reporting a download speed of anywhere between 512 and 781 kbps and upload speed of 739 and 1038 kbps. It's very inconsistent and sporadic.
echodun said:
I work in a downtown Dallas office building and am running radio 12.39a.60.19u_26.06.06.30_M on AOSPX ICS rom. My signal strength is at -89 dBm 12 asu, yet I have a difficult time getting a consistent transfer rate from my phone while at my desk. The data package also switches between "3G" and "H" occasionally. My battery life is okay, but Speedtest.net is reporting a download speed of anywhere between 512 and 781 kbps and upload speed of 739 and 1038 kbps. It's very inconsistent and sporadic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bad signal, interference, los to tower issues, a lot of people on same tower during peak usage. Pick your poison.
How does it perform outside the building? If it performs properly then it's just any or all of the mentioned causes. If it's still bad, then we can work on that. I personally get no signal for the 9hrs im inside my building at work, walk outside, 3g with full bars lol.
There are little tweaks you can do, keep phone in upright position (creates antenna alignment'ish to the tower), you can remove the case as well, (each layer the signal has to go through reduces it's strength)
I figured as much
And it does seem to work fine outside of the bldg. The only problem is that most of my coworkers' devices work fine in the bldg. They are on different networks. I'm on AT&T.
echodun said:
And it does seem to work fine outside of the bldg. The only problem is that most of my coworkers' devices work fine in the bldg. They are on different networks. I'm on AT&T.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are comparing apples and oranges. My company has a repeater installed in it for verizon, so all the verizon people get perfect signal. Something similar may be at your place. either way, i dont see a problem that can be fixed on your end, other than switching networks :/
If my carrier has a HSPA+ 42Mb network, and I have a smartphone with a HSPA+ 42Mb radio and my speed is around 25-30 Mb for example, that means that any other smartphone with a 21, 14.4 and 7.2 HSPA radio should be surfing at their top (theoretical) speed?
HSPA an HSPA+ have inherent problems. If you are getting anywhere near 8Mbps please post a screenshot. More likely that you get between 2-6 Mbps with 170-300 latency or ping and your indoor coverage is worse. This is due to 2 reasons. One, HSPA+ is only 3G with a bit more bandwidth and two, the frequency is 1800mhz or greater which means even a simple window can worsen signal strength.
HSPA+ is not an independent technology, but is a licensed technology making it limited by regulations. Many carriers are using it until their LTE matures. LTE operates at up to 10X the speed, allows double the cells using data, half the cost to the carrier, and a latency around 100 for more responsive sessions. The major players in LTE right now is Seimens out of Germany and Lucent ehre in the states. Their test dummy is Verizon who has 64% of the wold wide LTE market and this is being passed onto Vodofone, an others. In the states ATT has now contracted Seimens and a lesser known company who supplies the core equipment to develop their network. Right now ATT stands at 7% of the world market in LTE.
boosterp said:
HSPA an HSPA+ have inherent problems. If you are getting anywhere near 8Mbps please post a screenshot. More likely that you get between 2-6 Mbps with 170-300 latency or ping and your indoor coverage is worse. This is due to 2 reasons. One, HSPA+ is only 3G with a bit more bandwidth and two, the frequency is 1800mhz or greater which means even a simple window can worsen signal strength.
HSPA+ is not an independent technology, but is a licensed technology making it limited by regulations. Many carriers are using it until their LTE matures. LTE operates at up to 10X the speed, allows double the cells using data, half the cost to the carrier, and a latency around 100 for more responsive sessions. The major players in LTE right now is Seimens out of Germany and Lucent ehre in the states. Their test dummy is Verizon who has 64% of the wold wide LTE market and this is being passed onto Vodofone, an others. In the states ATT has now contracted Seimens and a lesser known company who supplies the core equipment to develop their network. Right now ATT stands at 7% of the world market in LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very good words, very informative, I really apreciate it. But I was looking for some light about what I asked.
As You can see in my signature I got 6.67Mbps with a ping of 121, and my phone was on 3G not even on H(HSDPA), and this video shows high speed with the Huawe E372(not in my country, I just found it on youtube).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PUawx4Au_8&feature=related
here in Dominican republic Orange dominicana had a 14.4Mbps HSDPA network, and now they claim they have a 42Mbps HSPA+ network working in Santo domingo and Santiago and coming soon in other areas.
So, my question is, if I get speeds over 21Mbps, let say between 25-30Mbps, that would mean I will get the top speed in devices with a 21, 14.4 and 7.2 Mbps radios? or I could get 25Mbps with devices with a 42Mbps HSPA+ radio (Huawei E372, for example), and get less than 14.4Mbps in devices with a 14.4Mbps radio, etc?
note: I tried to use the youtube feature but didn't work.
A little tougher to answer based on the specific set up in your country. I only gave a background as example or foo for thought regarding HSPA+. I would venture to guess that you could potentially hit that 25Mbps mark depending on traffic, network conditions, interference, and base equipment. If you are within 2 km of a tower and not in a null sector of the broadcast with no interference it would be possible but mostly at burst speed an not sustained. Let me know what develops, PM me with your speeds when you can test it.
Have you heard the rumour that the cell phone had better not be used when there is only one bar of power left because the radiation in such a circumstance may be about 1000 times the intensity of that in normal circumstances. Do you believe that?
As a matter of fact, the radiation intensity of cell phones that usually mentioned by people means the transmit power. It has nothing to do with the dump energy, while it has something to do with the signal intensity of the cell phone. The signal intensity of the cell phone is controlled by base stations which receive signals from cell phones constantly. If the signal of a cell phone is too weak to maintain communication, the base station will issue instructions to intensify the radiation of the cell phone. If the signal of a cell phone is so strong that it may cause mutual interference of cell phones, the base station will issue instructions to reduce the radiation of the cell phone. Therefore, the weaker the signal of the cell phone is, the more intense the radiation is. Maybe the creator of the rumour mixed up “one bar of battery power” and “one bar of signal”.
View attachment 2289879
Can the radiation reach 1000 times the intensity of that in normal circumstances when there is only one bar of signal left? The answer is yes. Maybe the situation of each cell phone is not the same as others, but it doesn’t affect the conclusion.
Can the 1000-time radiation do harm to our health? The qualified cell phones comply with the industrial standard even though they are used when their radiation is the most intense. In addition, a recent epidemiological investigation shows that there is no relation between cancers and the usage of cell phones.
If you are still afraid of being harmed by the radiation, you can keep away from your phone if the signal is weak.