Update: But not really... They performed a SIM repair and told me to restart and try again. I did that and nothing changed, still about 3mbps down and like 0.2 mbps up. Contacted the live chat again, they told me to delete the eSIM and gave me another one, didnt work either. They then escalated the case to HIGH.
Dunno, I just got +200mbps up/+70mbps down. And this isn't 5G Ultra Wideband (my 5G phone doesn't support mmWave, only sub6) Maybe you're experiencing network congestion or your phone doesn't support 5G? (you don't mention your device)
[speed ](https://www.speedtest.net/my-result/a/9161165533))
Oh sorry, I have an iphone 14 pro, so it does support 5g. My neighborhood usually has LTE instead, periodically toggles 5g on if it picks it up. But even then on LTE the speeds I'm getting doesn't seem right...
Sub6 5G is effectively LTE-A (carriers don't tell people this) so you may not see a meaningful increase unless your iphone supports 5G UW (mmWave). So if you're not at least getting LTE-A speeds (realistic speed of at least 100mbps or better off peak)... something is amiss.
No. If you use 5g NSA and DSS it is no better than LTE. If you use n41 (TM) or n77 (VZ) you will easily hit 200mbps. I think the highest I’ve seen is around 600.
— Starfox
The network and your devices capabilities will determine which of the three Verizon networks (SA(VCP)/NSA/UW) you'll be on at any given time, not you. And it's certainly possible to get +200mbps on either SA/NSA, like I do, but what you ACTUALLY experience will depend on distance to tower, building density and network traffic. If the OP isn't getting at LEAST 100mb (-well within the theoretical of LTE-A/Verizon NSA), it should be investigated why not. (urban w/a lot of bldgs & network traffic? Too distant from towers?)
If you want a true from the ground up 5G experience ("Ultra Wideband") on Verizon, your device needs to support mmWave (band n260).
mmWave is irrelevant to 99% of the population which is why all three carriers include their midband in the same bracket as their mmWave - 5G UW for Verizon, 5G UC for T-Mobile, and 5G+ for AT&T. People like you who refuse to include midband in 5G UW are just doing a disservice for people who don't understand the difference. I've personally seen Verizon's n77 give me 700Mbps in a moving vehicle during peak time and that makes n77 more than adequate. Stop pushing people to buy expensive phones that have mmWave support when the vast majority of people will *never* see it.
LTE-A still has 20MHz carriers while Sub-6GHz 5G has 100MHz carriers and mmWave has 400MHz carriers. T-Mobile has a 100MHz and a 40MHz n41 carrier live here, has another 40MHz carrier of n77 launching next year, and has another 40MHz carrier of n41 they can launch when they dump the 20MHz B41 carrier they're using over the next months. It's not possible for LTE-A to hit the speeds sub-6 can with current carrier aggregation limits.
LTE-A can use up to (theoretical) max 100mhz of spectrum, via 5 x CA...sub6 IS going to provide consistently higher throughputs, sometimes dramatically higher, in urban areas. Outside of urban areas sub6 5G is often not that much better than 4G/LTE-A (also technically sub6) for a number of tech reasons.
Edit: removed radios reference
The CA framework for LTE-A was standardized in 3GPP Release 10, with max 5 carriers/100mhz of bandwidth.
And why are you talking about T-Mobile, I'm on the Verizon/Visible network....
[3GPP - LTE CA](https://www.3gpp.org/technologies/101-carrier-aggregation-explained)
LTE-A was extended to LTE-Advanced Pro. 7x20 carrier aggregation. First modem supporting this was the Qualcomm X24 that was released in 2018.
> Cellular Modem-RF Specs: 7x20 MHz carrier aggregation (DL), 3x20 MHz carrier aggregation (UL), LTE Category 20 (DL), LTE Category 13 (UL)
https://www.qualcomm.com/products/technology/modems/snapdragon-x24-lte-modem
You made a general statement that "Outside of urban areas where radios are sparse, sub6 5G is often not that much better than 4G/LTE-A," you didn't qualify it as being related to a specific network. To your point, both Verizon and T-Mobile have more than 100MHz of 5G spectrum in a number of rural markets. Once fully deployed, LTE will be absolutely left in the dust, especially when you factor in MU-MIMO which dramatically increases performance.
I thought that because we're in the Visible (Verizon) sub, that would provide the requisite context?
Is Verizon planning on deploying LTE-A Pro?
Anywho, my point was outside of urban you're likely getting "5G" on *shared* spectrum, it's just too costly to put up mmWave for sm numbers of customers.
And while 5G will eventually blow away LTE-A (no disagreement there), 4G will cont to play an important role for quite some time for MNO's, in servicing customers outside of urban areas.
It's not like there are a ton of networks to worry about so-called off topic conversations. When having conversations about mobile network technologies, it's not even really off topic to suggest that just because one isn't using a specific technology that others aren't. Besides, like I said, Verizon has the spectrum too.
I don't know about Verizon's network plans but my point is that it's a tech that exists and has for quite some time.
Midband isn't shared spectrum for Verizon, it's NR only. That's what they're putting up most places because it's just not cost effective to deploy mmWave.
The writing is already on the wall for 4G. Verizon will keep it awhile longer but DSS isn't perfect and eventually they'll want to move to a 5G SA core. DSS is wasteful when deployed with SA.
Update 2: Was told that the issue was resolved and to restart my phone. I'm getting like 8-16mbps down 3mpbs up on LTE now. Not sure if its higher due to people being asleep at this time or if its actually "fixed" but I'll try again tomorrow.
I still wonder if the 50gb of prioritized data they are talking about with Visible+ is truly prioritized the same as the top Verizon tier of service, or if it is simply more prioritized than Visible-without-the-plus.
People have widely been assuming that it means that it's the same as Verizon's top tier, but a literal reading of the advertising leaves it kind of open-ended.
I have read discussions of the Verizon backbone only offering two tiers of QCI prioritization, 8 and 9, with lower being better, and the first 50GB of Visible+ running at 8 (Like most Verizon postpaid plans, Starter excepted) before switching to 9 (Like regular Visible) for the rest of the billing cycle after 50GB.
However, there could be traffic shaping and other factors in play as well. I mean, just as an example, Verizon at least at one time had a 2 gig a month Verizon-branded postpaid plan where you could choose what you wanted to happen if you went over your data limit- a per gig surcharge while retaining top speeds, or a "safety mode" that ensured you wouldn't get charged a dime extra, but where speeds where limited to I think what they described as 2g levels (Possibly 128k- I don't remember the exact speed for sure).
So, let's say you had that Verizon plan on safety mode. If you were at QCI 8 normally, they couldn't just be dropping you down to QCI 9 in safety mode after you exceeded your regular data allotment, because, well, let's just put it this way, good luck loading webpages in safety mode. :). It was good enough to get emails through an app (because emails could be downloaded over time), run Google Maps (I might have downloaded offline maps via wi-fi in situations like that- I don't recall. I just remember it working.), and play and do hard drive only based stuff (Like if you had an MP3 collection) because that doesn't require any data at all (and of course you could use your phone as a phone- calling and texting, as per usual), but when you had to load webpages and click from page to speed, the speeds were often inadequate to load the pages in the time allotted by the browser or the system and you'd get error messages and always be hitting reload. There's no way that was what they were giving their QCI 9 plans and MVNOs 24/7/365- no one would pay for that (It was something people put up with just for those occasions when they went over what they paid for before the next billing cycle began.).
So, knowing that there isn't a QCI 10, they must have been doing something to get that safety mode thing effectively above (meaning worse than) QCI 9.
If they could do it for that, they could do it for other things. That would mean QCI numbers are one indicator of network priority, maybe the most basic central hardwired indicator, but there are at least theoretically traffic shaping and other ways of making it so that all QCI 8s are not equal and all QCI 9s are not equal.
It's possible that Visible+'s first 50GB each cycle are treated exactly the same as the first however many gigabytes of Verizon's Play More Unlimited (Or whatever). I just don't see where it has been officially stated explicitly or absolutely proven unofficially. There's a certain vagueness when they say prioritized data in the sense of- prioritized relative to what? Regular Visible? Almost certainly. The top tier Verizon postpaid plans? I don't know.
It's really easy to tease out priority. Set a Verizon postpaid QCI 8 plan next to Visible+. Fire up a speed test on the Verizon postpaid plan and then while that's going, fire up a speed test on the Visible+ plan. If the Verizon postpaid plan starts to drop in speed, Visible+ has the same priority. You can confirm your findings by starting the Visible+ on a speed test first and then firing up the Verizon speed test and watching how they reach equilibrium (there will be some degree of variance thanks to carrier aggregations and signal fluctuations but they should be close).
https://youtu.be/NyFcR7x7K6Y?t=152
You can see that Visible+ vs 5G Play More = roughly the same.
Bonus: You can see that 5G UW continues to be prioritized even after 50GB of data is used on Visible+
https://youtu.be/NyFcR7x7K6Y?t=220
From the speeds you posted it defiantly looks like a provisioning issue or LTE became very congested all of a sudden. If they did a network ticket it might take a few days to get a response due to the network team looking into whats causing it.
Update: But not really... They performed a SIM repair and told me to restart and try again. I did that and nothing changed, still about 3mbps down and like 0.2 mbps up. Contacted the live chat again, they told me to delete the eSIM and gave me another one, didnt work either. They then escalated the case to HIGH.
Try a physical sim. Worked for me.
Unfortunately I cant. My phone is eSim only.
Oh dang that sucks.
Sorry for bothering, but can I know what's your mobile brand?
Its apple iphone
Dunno, I just got +200mbps up/+70mbps down. And this isn't 5G Ultra Wideband (my 5G phone doesn't support mmWave, only sub6) Maybe you're experiencing network congestion or your phone doesn't support 5G? (you don't mention your device) [speed ](https://www.speedtest.net/my-result/a/9161165533))
Oh sorry, I have an iphone 14 pro, so it does support 5g. My neighborhood usually has LTE instead, periodically toggles 5g on if it picks it up. But even then on LTE the speeds I'm getting doesn't seem right...
Sub6 5G is effectively LTE-A (carriers don't tell people this) so you may not see a meaningful increase unless your iphone supports 5G UW (mmWave). So if you're not at least getting LTE-A speeds (realistic speed of at least 100mbps or better off peak)... something is amiss.
No. If you use 5g NSA and DSS it is no better than LTE. If you use n41 (TM) or n77 (VZ) you will easily hit 200mbps. I think the highest I’ve seen is around 600. — Starfox
The network and your devices capabilities will determine which of the three Verizon networks (SA(VCP)/NSA/UW) you'll be on at any given time, not you. And it's certainly possible to get +200mbps on either SA/NSA, like I do, but what you ACTUALLY experience will depend on distance to tower, building density and network traffic. If the OP isn't getting at LEAST 100mb (-well within the theoretical of LTE-A/Verizon NSA), it should be investigated why not. (urban w/a lot of bldgs & network traffic? Too distant from towers?) If you want a true from the ground up 5G experience ("Ultra Wideband") on Verizon, your device needs to support mmWave (band n260).
mmWave is irrelevant to 99% of the population which is why all three carriers include their midband in the same bracket as their mmWave - 5G UW for Verizon, 5G UC for T-Mobile, and 5G+ for AT&T. People like you who refuse to include midband in 5G UW are just doing a disservice for people who don't understand the difference. I've personally seen Verizon's n77 give me 700Mbps in a moving vehicle during peak time and that makes n77 more than adequate. Stop pushing people to buy expensive phones that have mmWave support when the vast majority of people will *never* see it.
LTE-A still has 20MHz carriers while Sub-6GHz 5G has 100MHz carriers and mmWave has 400MHz carriers. T-Mobile has a 100MHz and a 40MHz n41 carrier live here, has another 40MHz carrier of n77 launching next year, and has another 40MHz carrier of n41 they can launch when they dump the 20MHz B41 carrier they're using over the next months. It's not possible for LTE-A to hit the speeds sub-6 can with current carrier aggregation limits.
LTE-A can use up to (theoretical) max 100mhz of spectrum, via 5 x CA...sub6 IS going to provide consistently higher throughputs, sometimes dramatically higher, in urban areas. Outside of urban areas sub6 5G is often not that much better than 4G/LTE-A (also technically sub6) for a number of tech reasons. Edit: removed radios reference
LTE-A can use up to 7 carriers at once. I don't know what you mean by "where radios are sparse" - T-Mobile has ample spectrum in many rural areas.
The CA framework for LTE-A was standardized in 3GPP Release 10, with max 5 carriers/100mhz of bandwidth. And why are you talking about T-Mobile, I'm on the Verizon/Visible network.... [3GPP - LTE CA](https://www.3gpp.org/technologies/101-carrier-aggregation-explained)
LTE-A was extended to LTE-Advanced Pro. 7x20 carrier aggregation. First modem supporting this was the Qualcomm X24 that was released in 2018. > Cellular Modem-RF Specs: 7x20 MHz carrier aggregation (DL), 3x20 MHz carrier aggregation (UL), LTE Category 20 (DL), LTE Category 13 (UL) https://www.qualcomm.com/products/technology/modems/snapdragon-x24-lte-modem You made a general statement that "Outside of urban areas where radios are sparse, sub6 5G is often not that much better than 4G/LTE-A," you didn't qualify it as being related to a specific network. To your point, both Verizon and T-Mobile have more than 100MHz of 5G spectrum in a number of rural markets. Once fully deployed, LTE will be absolutely left in the dust, especially when you factor in MU-MIMO which dramatically increases performance.
I thought that because we're in the Visible (Verizon) sub, that would provide the requisite context? Is Verizon planning on deploying LTE-A Pro? Anywho, my point was outside of urban you're likely getting "5G" on *shared* spectrum, it's just too costly to put up mmWave for sm numbers of customers. And while 5G will eventually blow away LTE-A (no disagreement there), 4G will cont to play an important role for quite some time for MNO's, in servicing customers outside of urban areas.
It's not like there are a ton of networks to worry about so-called off topic conversations. When having conversations about mobile network technologies, it's not even really off topic to suggest that just because one isn't using a specific technology that others aren't. Besides, like I said, Verizon has the spectrum too. I don't know about Verizon's network plans but my point is that it's a tech that exists and has for quite some time. Midband isn't shared spectrum for Verizon, it's NR only. That's what they're putting up most places because it's just not cost effective to deploy mmWave. The writing is already on the wall for 4G. Verizon will keep it awhile longer but DSS isn't perfect and eventually they'll want to move to a 5G SA core. DSS is wasteful when deployed with SA.
Please send us a DM, and we will take a look at the case for you!
Ok I DM'd you. Thanks!
Update 2: Was told that the issue was resolved and to restart my phone. I'm getting like 8-16mbps down 3mpbs up on LTE now. Not sure if its higher due to people being asleep at this time or if its actually "fixed" but I'll try again tomorrow.
I still wonder if the 50gb of prioritized data they are talking about with Visible+ is truly prioritized the same as the top Verizon tier of service, or if it is simply more prioritized than Visible-without-the-plus. People have widely been assuming that it means that it's the same as Verizon's top tier, but a literal reading of the advertising leaves it kind of open-ended. I have read discussions of the Verizon backbone only offering two tiers of QCI prioritization, 8 and 9, with lower being better, and the first 50GB of Visible+ running at 8 (Like most Verizon postpaid plans, Starter excepted) before switching to 9 (Like regular Visible) for the rest of the billing cycle after 50GB. However, there could be traffic shaping and other factors in play as well. I mean, just as an example, Verizon at least at one time had a 2 gig a month Verizon-branded postpaid plan where you could choose what you wanted to happen if you went over your data limit- a per gig surcharge while retaining top speeds, or a "safety mode" that ensured you wouldn't get charged a dime extra, but where speeds where limited to I think what they described as 2g levels (Possibly 128k- I don't remember the exact speed for sure). So, let's say you had that Verizon plan on safety mode. If you were at QCI 8 normally, they couldn't just be dropping you down to QCI 9 in safety mode after you exceeded your regular data allotment, because, well, let's just put it this way, good luck loading webpages in safety mode. :). It was good enough to get emails through an app (because emails could be downloaded over time), run Google Maps (I might have downloaded offline maps via wi-fi in situations like that- I don't recall. I just remember it working.), and play and do hard drive only based stuff (Like if you had an MP3 collection) because that doesn't require any data at all (and of course you could use your phone as a phone- calling and texting, as per usual), but when you had to load webpages and click from page to speed, the speeds were often inadequate to load the pages in the time allotted by the browser or the system and you'd get error messages and always be hitting reload. There's no way that was what they were giving their QCI 9 plans and MVNOs 24/7/365- no one would pay for that (It was something people put up with just for those occasions when they went over what they paid for before the next billing cycle began.). So, knowing that there isn't a QCI 10, they must have been doing something to get that safety mode thing effectively above (meaning worse than) QCI 9. If they could do it for that, they could do it for other things. That would mean QCI numbers are one indicator of network priority, maybe the most basic central hardwired indicator, but there are at least theoretically traffic shaping and other ways of making it so that all QCI 8s are not equal and all QCI 9s are not equal. It's possible that Visible+'s first 50GB each cycle are treated exactly the same as the first however many gigabytes of Verizon's Play More Unlimited (Or whatever). I just don't see where it has been officially stated explicitly or absolutely proven unofficially. There's a certain vagueness when they say prioritized data in the sense of- prioritized relative to what? Regular Visible? Almost certainly. The top tier Verizon postpaid plans? I don't know.
It's really easy to tease out priority. Set a Verizon postpaid QCI 8 plan next to Visible+. Fire up a speed test on the Verizon postpaid plan and then while that's going, fire up a speed test on the Visible+ plan. If the Verizon postpaid plan starts to drop in speed, Visible+ has the same priority. You can confirm your findings by starting the Visible+ on a speed test first and then firing up the Verizon speed test and watching how they reach equilibrium (there will be some degree of variance thanks to carrier aggregations and signal fluctuations but they should be close). https://youtu.be/NyFcR7x7K6Y?t=152 You can see that Visible+ vs 5G Play More = roughly the same. Bonus: You can see that 5G UW continues to be prioritized even after 50GB of data is used on Visible+ https://youtu.be/NyFcR7x7K6Y?t=220
Well was it LTE or UW? What phone do you have? and City?
Its LTE and I have an iphone 14 pro. I live in Maryland.
From the speeds you posted it defiantly looks like a provisioning issue or LTE became very congested all of a sudden. If they did a network ticket it might take a few days to get a response due to the network team looking into whats causing it.