Intel 5G Trial Platform to Support Still Undefined Standard

[SansVarnic]

Intel 5G Trial Platform to Support Still Undefined Standard

By: Dan Meyer

 

Source: https://www.sdxcentral.com/articles/news/intel-5g-trial-platform-to-support-still-undefined-standard/2017/09/

 

 

Quote

Intel is boldly predicting its 5G Mobile Trial Platform will meet upcoming 5G New Radio standards that are expected to be finalized later this year.

Asha Keddy, vice president and general manager of next generation standards at Intel Communications and Devices Group, noted in a blog post that the company’s platform would be the first of its kind to specifically support the 5G non-standalone NR specification.

Quote

Intel first unveiled its 5G trial platform at the 2016 Mobile World Congress event. It has since collaborated with vendors and carriers, including Ericsson, Nokia, AT&T, Korea Telecom, NTT DoCoMo, and Verizon. The platform uses the company’s field programmable gate array (FPGA) chip design and Core processors.

Intel isn’t the only vendor aggressively pushing its 5G plans. Ericsson recently added new capabilities to its 5G platform designed to foster network deployments scheduled to begin as early as next year.

Quote

The non-standalone specification utilizes the current 4G mobile network core, while the standalone specification is set to rely on a 5G-specific network core. The 3GPP standards body is scheduled to release the non-standalone specification by year-end, with the standalone specification schedule for release by the end of 2018.

 

I am genuinely fascinated on how this will pan out. I dont have much to add as the article pretty much lines it out and there will be more on this later in the year.

[vanished]

So many places don't even have reliable 4G yet, and they're already moving on 

 

@themctipers

[SansVarnic]

 

4 minutes ago, Nicholatian said:

But wait, what is so great about 5G? Do we even know how much of a leap it will be?

6 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

and there will be more on this later in the year.

6 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

The non-standalone specification utilizes the current 4G mobile network core, while the standalone specification is set to rely on a 5G-specific network core. The 3GPP standards body is scheduled to release the non-standalone specification by year-end, with the standalone specification schedule for release by the end of 2018

[captain_to_fire]

18 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

The non-standalone specification utilizes the current 4G mobile network core, while the standalone specification is set to rely on a 5G-specific network core. The 3GPP standards body is scheduled to release the non-standalone specification by year-end, with the standalone specification schedule for release by the end of 2018.

Meanwhile, my wireless carrier hasn't even achieved 80% LTE coverage. I think it will involve a lot of refarming and re-purposing existing LTE spectrum into 5G. 

 

[ignaloidas]

53 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

--snip--

34 minutes ago, hey_yo_ said:

--snip--

Complaining about still not having reliable 4G

me: well, sucks for you, in my country, every carrier has 4G network with 99.99% coverage

[vanished]

1 minute ago, ignaloidas said:

Complaining about still not having reliable 4G

me: well, sucks for you, in my country, every carrier has 4G network with 99.99% coverage

good for you

[captain_to_fire]

Just now, ignaloidas said:

Complaining about still not having reliable 4G

me: well, sucks for you, in my country, every carrier has 4G network with 99.99% coverage

Good for you. I'll just wait until my carrier has finalized deploying 700 MHz LTE. Also, what country are you from?

[TheOriginalHero]

1 hour ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

So many places don't even have reliable 4G yet, and they're already moving on 

 

@themctipers

Where i live we dont even have reliable 3g

[vanished]

2 minutes ago, TheOriginalHero said:

Where i live we dont even have reliable 3g

But let me guess, there's spots where they've attempted to setup 4G anyway, right?

 

To clarify, my main issue isn't that they're developing new tech before we have the old stuff implemented - obviously everywhere is different in terms of what's installed and we can't hold back waiting on the lowest common denominator, that wouldn't make any sense.  What bugs me is cell companies tend to always jump to the latest thing for marketing purposes before they've managed to properly flush out the previous system properly, and so you end up just getting bad service at every level, rather than perhaps getting good quality service on a version that's 1 gen old.

[themctipers]

2 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

So many places don't even have reliable 4G yet, and they're already moving on 

 

@themctipers

fucking

 

*drags out my -117 LTE phone*

 

seriously though, that's TWO bars on iOS. Fucking Rogers and Apple, changing what dbm = what bar thing. 

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

But let me guess, there's spots where they've attempted to setup 4G anyway, right?

 

To clarify, my main issue isn't that they're developing new tech before we have the old stuff implemented - obviously everywhere is different in terms of what's installed and we can't hold back waiting on the lowest common denominator, that wouldn't make any sense.  What bugs me is cell companies tend to always jump to the latest thing for marketing purposes before they've managed to properly flush out the previous system properly, and so you end up just getting bad service at every level, rather than perhaps getting good quality service on a version that's 1 gen old.

That's an issue coming from cell companies though, not tech development partners. 

[Bcat00]

3 hours ago, ignaloidas said:

Complaining about still not having reliable 4G

me: well, sucks for you, in my country, every carrier has 4G network with 99.99% coverage

well, not everyone live a small country like yours that equivalent to a single province in some big country.

[done12many2]

6 hours ago, ignaloidas said:

Complaining about still not having reliable 4G

me: well, sucks for you, in my country, every carrier has 4G network with 99.99% coverage

 

Lithuania is 150x smaller than the United states so I wouldn't brag that they have full 4G coverage.  Hell, the carriers over there probably only need to share 3 or 4 towers to cover the country.  

 

Then there's the fact that you are 80% more likely to be murdered or 70% more likely to be unemployed in Lithuania.  I'll stick with slightly worse 4G coverage in rural areas, but thanks.

 

 

[mynameisjuan]

6 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

To clarify, my main issue isn't that they're developing new tech before we have the old stuff implemented

So we shouldnt have developed 5GHz wifi or AC until everyone has upgraded their router? How about shouldnt have developed electric cars because not everyone has the ability to buy a petroleum based car? Developing new tech while old is still being used is a good thing. That means research is moving faster than we can deploy it (sort of).

 

All I hear is boo-hoo I dont have it yet so no one should. Yeah not all of america is covered by 4G yet but thats because its either too much work to service an area or they dont want to spend millions of dollars to serve 3 customers. I hate to burst your bubble but cell providers are still businesses and are not required to give you 4G if they see fit. 

[goodtofufriday]

9 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

So many places don't even have reliable 4G yet, and they're already moving on 

 

@themctipers

In the United States we don't even have Actual 4G. its just faster the HSPA+. Doesnt meet the standards that are met in Europe. 

[ignaloidas]

3 hours ago, done12many2 said:

Then there's the fact that you are 80% more likely to be murdered or 70% more likely to be unemployed in Lithuania.  I'll stick with slightly worse 4G coverage in rural areas, but thanks.

you know what I think of it?

and for towers https://www.telia.lt/privatiems/rysio-zemelapis

this is the map for one carrier

more than 3 towers

it's not vatican

[Trixanity]

4 hours ago, done12many2 said:

 

Lithuania is 150x smaller than the United states so I wouldn't brag that they have full 4G coverage.  Hell, the carriers over there probably only need to share 3 or 4 towers to cover the country.  

 

Then there's the fact that you are 80% more likely to be murdered or 70% more likely to be unemployed in Lithuania.  I'll stick with slightly worse 4G coverage in rural areas, but thanks

Wow, show me on this doll where Lithuania touched you. 

Irrelevant argument and the US is not exactly the poster child for safety and social security. Why are we even talking about this again?

 

Coverage and speeds in the US are shitty. Even if you adjust for area, population and pricing. You pay a lot more for less. 

 

The US could easily have excellent coverage if carriers upgraded and expanded their network instead of bagging all excess money. Just need to invest in more towers with sub-Gigahertz spectrum. 

 

Might never rival any European country but there is ample opportunity for massive improvements.

[captain_to_fire]

2 hours ago, goodtofufriday said:

In the United States we don't even have Actual 4G. its just faster the HSPA+. Doesnt meet the standards that are met in Europe. 

LTE is actually more of a 3.9G while HSPA+ was 3.75G. LTE Advanced is actually the one that met the 4G specifications 

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 hours ago, ignaloidas said:

you know what I think of it?

and for towers https://www.telia.lt/privatiems/rysio-zemelapis

this is the map for one carrier

more than 3 towers

it's not vatican

heh true enough... but it isn't the 215,000 cell towers in the US in order to merely cover like 99% of Americans, and not even close to that high of area.

[vanished]

4 hours ago, mynameisjuan said:

So we shouldnt have developed 5GHz wifi or AC until everyone has upgraded their router? How about shouldnt have developed electric cars because not everyone has the ability to buy a petroleum based car? Developing new tech while old is still being used is a good thing. That means research is moving faster than we can deploy it (sort of).

 

All I hear is boo-hoo I dont have it yet so no one should. Yeah not all of america is covered by 4G yet but thats because its either too much work to service an area or they dont want to spend millions of dollars to serve 3 customers. I hate to burst your bubble but cell providers are still businesses and are not required to give you 4G if they see fit. 

I think you misread the sentence you quoted of me and misinterpreted the meaning as the opposite of what it was.

[Bananasplit_00]

22 hours ago, ignaloidas said:

I honestly think mods should close this, because

 

One of the people I'm the discussion is a mod if you didn't notice lol