Originally Posted by Gigabit:
“It is interesting.
In my case, the nearest O2 mast provides a -85dBm signal and is in fact further away than the nearest Three/EE mast which provides a -105dBm signal.
They are both in the same general area so it's not due to trees, topography, etc.
In this case it must be down to frequency, so I am hoping when Three roll out 800MHz, I might finally be able to get a good signal from them.”
It is indeed.
In your case you're probably right. IMO I'd say you're getting 3G900 from O2 and 3G2100 from Three/EE, which would explain the difference there and, as long as Three put out their 800 at similar power levels to O2's 3G900 you should be fine.
In my case (just for comparison) it's all a bit of a mess, and I probably know far too much about it for my own good:
My nearest O2 mast and my nearest Three/EE mast are both pretty close to me, and about 100 metres or so away from each other. O2 is 2G only though (circa -89dBm) while the Three/EE mast is hopelessly congested so won't accept connections except for overnight in the small hours (at circa -83dBm on 3G).
Second choice Three/EE mast is a bit further away (and is, I believe, the nearest one EE have 4G on), but gives -89dBm or so on 3G (about the same on 2G). Second choice O2 mast meanwhile is further away still, covers a sizably large area, and gives -105dBm or so on 3G2100, -87dBm or so on 2G900... and around -89dBm on 3G900. However, due to poor mast location and lack of masts, cell breathing is very much in effect and that 3G900 signal is anything but consistent, which is a bit of a shame really as when available it's actually very good.