01net.com continues its meeting dedicated to 5G in collaboration with QoSi (MOZARK group), telecom network measurement specialist, Arcep’s benchmark partner, which also publishes the 5GMark application.
Our objective is to measure in the field the quality of 5G service perceived by a user and to see what this technology brings compared to 4G. For our first part, three months ago, we chose to focus on intramural Paris. The second, today, provides an overview of the quality of 5G service in ten major cities, listed below: Paris, Le Havre, Marseille, Montpellier, Bordeaux, Lyon, Nantes, Nice, Dijon, Lille. They were selected because they have more than 150,000 inhabitants and because the four major operators have opened their 5G commercial network there.
This study provides an overview of the 5G experience in our country.
“With this perimeter of several agglomerations, we are starting to have something representative at the national level, knowing that 5G for the moment mainly concerns urbanites”, summarizes Thierry Moncorger, product director and co-founder of QoSi. 5G networks for the general public are not currently open in rural areas, the operators having chosen to deploy as a priority in dense environments.
Find l’full study on the site of QoSi.
The measurement campaign was carried out between November 2 and December 3, 2021 by QoSi teams. They carried out more than 58 000 tests in all urban areas with 4G and 5G packages from Bouygues Telecom, Free Mobile, Orange and SFR *. The results reflect the average experience a user would have had passing through all of these locations. You will find more information on the methodology and the material at the end of the article.
* 01net.com is published by a subsidiary of NextRadioTV, itself owned by Altice Media
Orange keeps one step ahead
The conclusion of this study is clear: Orange dominates on average on all quality of service criteria in 5G. If we take only the downlink speed, we see that it reaches 233.2 Mbit / s, far ahead of SFR (157.3 Mbit / s), Bouygues Telecom (150.9 Mbit / s) and Free Mobile (34.2 Mbit / s). It is also first in 4G.
The other lesson is that Bouygues Telecom and SFR show relatively equivalent performance. Finally, as with every measurement campaign, Free Mobile finds itself lagging behind. He is not only the last on the podium, far behind the top three. He is also the only one not to differentiate with his 5G.
So, of course, Free Mobile fans will tell us once again that if the tests had been carried out in multi-thread, the results would have been better. We will therefore remind you that we used the same protocol as that of Arcep, which corresponds to the state of the art in this area. The authority considers that the mono-thread, which corresponds to a single connection flow, remains more representative of the uses of subscribers on their smartphone than the multi-thread which has several connections in parallel.
The 3.5 Ghz core band makes the difference
Why this domination of Orange? “One of the explanations would be the choice to concentrate its deployment mainly on the 3.5 GHz frequency”, advances Thierry Moncorger. This is noticeable when we analyze the 5G hook rate by operator and by frequency. Orange obtains a hooking rate of 80% in this frequency, against 67% for Bouygues Telecom, 61% for SFR and only 28% for Free Mobile.
However, it is this 3.5 GHz band that makes it possible to provide capacity and speed, the low bands such as 700 MHz or 2 100 MHz only serving to ensure coverage of the territory.
There remains an enigma. Even if it has fewer than its competitors, Free has still activated a certain number of 3.5 GHz antennas, according to Arcep’s last 5G observatory, which dates from September. It even has almost as many as SFR while the difference in quality of service is notable between the two operators. Free Mobile’s poor performance therefore appears to be an anomaly with regard to its 5G deployment.
But the fact is that in the field, it was difficult to capture the 5G of the 3.5 GHz band of this operator in the ten large cities tested. More general reasons concerning the functioning of its network are perhaps in question, especially as Free Mobile was already obtaining worse results than its rivals in 4G.
Which city has the best 5G?
We will inevitably disappoint you by answering this question because it is impossible to really distinguish an agglomeration as the results differ from one operator to another depending on the city.
However, we can concentrate on the performance of downlink flows.
As can be seen in the diagram above, Bouygues Telecom obtains better performance in Paris, Dijon and Bordeaux. Orange stands out in Lille, Montpellier, Bordeaux and Paris. SFR performs in Bordeaux and Nice. It will be noted that the three all provide a high level of downward flow at Bordeaux in 5G as in 4G.
But the equation is complex. These numbers are snapshots and don’t just depend on the network. They vary depending on the city’s urban geography, population density or the number of active 5G users.
An increasing flow still not at the top
It is not a surprise : the average rising debits in 5G are extremely disappointing, as was already the case during our study in Paris intra walls. Not only is there no gain in 5G, but in addition the results are even slightly lower than those obtained in 4G for Orange and, to a lesser extent, for Bouygues Telecom.
This is a perfectly accepted choice for operators. They prefer for the moment to grant the maximum bandwidth to the downlink speed because this corresponds to the consumption needs of the subscribers.
Uses are not upset
From the point of view of uses, tests show that certain uses do not benefit from the switch to 5G. This is particularly the case of video streaming. Here again, some results are even superior in 4G. However, the gaps are so small that it cannot be concluded that the quality would be degraded to 5G but rather equivalent.
Probably because a high definition image (720p) does not need 5G. 4G is already sufficient to provide an optimum broadcast rate and quality. Further testing by QoSi at 1080p (HDTV) also did not prove to be better at 5G. But maybe with 4K, 5G would make a difference. Except that it is not representative of smartphone uses.
Another use not to really take advantage of 5G in our study, the navigation web. Here again, 4G already seems to be more than sufficient to ensure the display of the pages. Hence the difficulty for general public subscribers to see the difference between 4G and 5G when they have already taken the plunge.
« People may be tempted to say to themselves ‘But what’s the point of 5G?’ ”, bounces Thierry Moncorger. “The new uses are yet to be discovered. In the short term, the answer is that 5G is mainly used to manage the increase in traffic. So instead of bringing 100 Mbit / s to two or three people, we will be able to do it for ten per antenna ”, he concludes.
Individually, 5G hasn’t really been a game-changer in a year. But in large cities, it may already be able to cope with the ever-increasing consumption of data.
