Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
The Internet Communications Network Networking United States Wireless Networking

US Rank Drops To 55th In 4G LTE Speeds 70

alphadogg writes: The U.S. has fallen to No. 55 in LTE performance as speeds rise rapidly in countries that have leapfrogged some early adopters of the popular cellular system. The average download speed on U.S. 4G networks inched up to 10Mbps (bits per second) in the June-August quarter, according to research company OpenSignal. That was an improvement from 9Mbps in the previous quarter, but the country's global ranking fell from 43rd as users in other countries enjoyed much larger gains.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Rank Drops To 55th In 4G LTE Speeds

Comments Filter:
  • USA! USA! (Score:5, Funny)

    by PvtVoid ( 1252388 ) on Thursday September 24, 2015 @04:58PM (#50592151)

    In your face, Indonesia!

  • by turkeydance ( 1266624 ) on Thursday September 24, 2015 @04:59PM (#50592157)
  • by pushing-robot ( 1037830 ) on Thursday September 24, 2015 @05:01PM (#50592169)

    USA is near the top in LTE penetration. It's easy to have high speeds when you've got the tower to yourself...

  • by The-Ixian ( 168184 ) on Thursday September 24, 2015 @05:15PM (#50592293)

    But, hey, we are still in the top 1/3 out of ALL countries in the world...

  • I keep saying this, but a small European Country having really good stats, isn't the same as the USA having mediocre stats. Have you seen the size of the US vs Europe?

    https://becovegan.files.wordpr... [wordpress.com]

    However, since I don't have a list of countries that beat the US, my assumption is that at least some of them are european.

    • by Teun ( 17872 )
      It's got nothing to do with the size of a country.
      It does have everything to do with the population density and the populated parts (especially the coasts) of the US are no different to certain EU countries.
      The US does have vast areas that are sparsely populated were coverage is going to be expensive, such areas are less prevalent in western Europe.
      I am not sure how they calculated but am fairly sure that availability is going to add up more in the denser populated areas.
    • by AK Marc ( 707885 )
      That would be applicable if carriers tried to cover an entire country with a single tower. Nope, they do what they do everywere in the world. More towers in more populated places, fewer in less populate areas. The total density of the USA isn't that low, and most of the people and coverage is concentrated in cities, just like the rest of the world.

      There is no "size" issue.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Nice job leaving HALF of Norway and Sweden out, and whole Finland out! (which is size of the whole damn east coast!!)... btw, Finland has 98% 3G coverage (and is most loosely populated country in EU) and 4G catching up with that pretty fast....

    • by dave420 ( 699308 )
      You keep making this mistake. That is not Europe overlaid on the map, but parts of the EU. I know, I know - anything to stop the hurt of admitting the US isn't the best at everything. Oh noes!
    • Have you seen the size of the US vs approximately 1/3 of Europe?


  • 10Mbps = megabits per second, NOT bits per second.
  • Here in Canada, I am getting 27.7 Mbps down and 22 Mbps UP on Rogers on LTE and then there are areas of the city with LTE-Advanced.
    • I live in a semi-rural area outside of Brisbane and just pulled 26.87 Mbps down 21.89 Mbps on Testra according to ookla Speedtest. At the same time my ADSL is synced at 22.696 down .940 up. I'm lucky though as the digital rim is literally at the end of my driveway.

  • In the dallas fort worth airport hyatt many brands of phones get no reception at all. it's a joke.

    It's annoying to go from the "modern world" back to the 1980s when you travel about 10 miles.

  • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Friday September 25, 2015 @02:40AM (#50594839)
    If #1-54 have average LTE speeds of 11 Mbps, then 10 Mbps is not that bad.
    If #1-54 have average LTE speeds of 90 Mbps, then 10 Mbps sucks.

    Rank on an arbitrary list is meaningless. If you want to compare against a distribution, compare to the distribution itself. Not some arbitrary index. The distribution is linked in TFA [opensignal.com] and is vastly more informative than TFA or TFS. In fact it's one of the best interactive data presentations I've ever seen. It should've been linked as TFA, not some article talking about it.

    Most of the countries are clustered between 8-18 Mbps. #43 (the previous U.S. rank) is 13 Mbps. If the U.S. were to increase its LTE speed by 50% to 15 Mbps it would jump to #28. And if it were to double its speed to 20 Mbps, it would jump to #12.

Can anyone remember when the times were not hard, and money not scarce?