3 ms·
>"It seems criminal that these budget Qualcomm chips prioritize barely there 5G bands yet only support 802.11ac, AKA "Wi-Fi 5," which first hit smartphones in 2
by bcraven 3y ago
>"It seems criminal that these budget Qualcomm chips prioritize barely there 5G bands yet only support 802.11ac, AKA "Wi-Fi 5," which first hit smartphones in 2013."
I'm often surprised when phone reviewers _can't believe_ that a phone designed to be cheap doesn't hit the same target specs as a modern flagship.
Of course it doesn't, that's why it's cheap.
- gruez 3y agoI'm not even sure why they need wifi 6. According to the specs page, the chipset supports wifi 5 2x2 80 mhz, which translates to a theoretical speed of 866.7 Mb/s. Even if we halve or third the speed for "real life" speeds, that's plenty enough for whatever can be done on a lowend phone. Even if you're downloading netflix videos (to watch later), you'll probably be bottlenecked by the slow eMMC storage. Meanwhile 5G is significantly faster than LTE, probably due to better spectral efficiency as well as being less congested (less 5G devices around). In congested areas I'd only get 10-20Mb/s on LTE but 200+ Mb/s on 5G. That's far more useful than getting 866.7Mb/s vs 1021 Mb/s over wifi.
- hulitu 3y ago> 5G is significantly faster than LTE, probably due to better spectral efficiency as well as being less congested I think they just converted 4G to 5G. So they give the illusion that 5G is faster. It will pass in a couple of months. /s
- wildrhythms 3y agoBecause these tech journalists have no actual credentials and are borderline tech illiterate.
- Saris 3y agoAlso 802.11ac gets me 400mbps or so down/up on my phone, I can't imagine why I would need faster than that. Even offloading 4k videos is perfectly fast enough.