Ofcom have published their latest survey of mobile broadband performance (based on tests from October - December 2014). As last time, it's based on 5 cities (although most are different this time).

http://consumers.ofcom.org.uk/news/4...utperforms-3g/

Some key figures are:


4G download speed (Mb/s):
EE: 18.6
Vodafone: 16.4
O2: 13.9
Three: 8.5

4G upload speed (Mb/s):
EE: 17.6
O2: 13.2
Vodafone: 13.1
Three: 9.4

3G download speed (Mb/s):
Vodafone: 7.6
O2: 6.6
Three: 5.4
EE: 4.0

4G Web browsing speed (secs, lower is better)
Three: 0.63
O2: 0.71
Vodafone: 0.76
EE: 0.77

3G Web browsing speed (secs, lower is better)
Three: 0.84
O2: 1.09
Vodafone/EE: 1.10

4G Coverage (March 2015 Premises Covered):
EE: 81%
O2: 66%
Vodafone: 65%
Three: 53%

3G Coverage (March 2015 Premises Covered):
EE/Three: 98%
O2: 92%
Vodafone: 90%

The full report is here
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bin...Chart_Pack.pdf

Interesting data set. I took from it that EE has more issues but more capable network - and wondered if that was down to live customers actually using the data networks.

Vodafone's becoming more and more of an option to me, with fast speeds (helped by the fact that they own C&W I presume) and large amount of spectrums coupled with the fact that they lowered their prices for SIM Only. If they only zero rated root-metrics then I'd probably switch.

Up to date 3G/4G coverage maps for each network right at the end of the report here.

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bin...April_2015.pdf

Its a bit of a mixed bag to say the least. It demonstrates how slow Three's 4G roll out is, but on the other hand shows how good their 3G coverage is.

O2 & Voda with better 3G speeds than Three/EE. That is certainly something I've never seen.

And I guess Three prioritize http traffic, even with poor speeds or a bad signal, webpages seem to load fast and that's reflected here.

Don't forget this is mobile broadband, so its possible MBB devices hang in where phones would fall back to 2G.

I've experienced great 4G from Vodafone since changing to them last month. As others have said, if they carry on this way, they will be a serious contender. And their current sim only price plans are great value for money imo.

However their page load times are the fastest on 3G and 4G, for streaming and downloads I don't see how more than 5 or 8 Mb/s actually makes a big difference.

Their rollout will continue to lag until the O2 deal is done and the network integration happens. They plan to keep as partners of both MBNL and Cornerstone with no reduction in cell site numbers, I think talks with Telefonica have been happening for a year and that has had a bearing on the 4G investment.

It also doesn't mean roaming if and when the O2 acquisition goes through, it can be much smarter than that.

Unbranded Galaxy Note 3s used for all tests. I guess EE/Voda could have a moan about that for the London test.

EE was still far better than the others in the 4G speeds in London despite no LTE-A. With EE now in the '80s' in percent coverage is their rollout going to slow down in percentage increase as it gets harder and harder?

I get the feeling that Three just have given up on rolling out until 800mhz is deployed to everyone.

EDIT: By everyone I meant as in access to the network by changing the frequency priority on the selection.

It's a shame this report doesn't somehow collect data showing availability of or time spent on each of the 3 network levels 2g,3g & 4g, o2/V and three 4g figures might have a bit more meaning then.

The maps at the end are great for showing how many 3G Orange masts up in north Scotland that are still to be MBNL'd i.e. get Three access.. Hence why i've been saying there should be very few sown south or in cities left.