O2 have added 4G to the area recently so I thought I'd check out the signal and compare with the performance of EE on my phone. 4G wise, it was pretty much the same as far as the signal strength is concerned, although it did cling onto the signal when I went downstairs whereas my EE phone dropped down to 3G. However, I got 80 Mpbs down in my parents room and 17 Mbps vs 25 down (I can't remember the upload) on the O2 phone. Downstairs it was 6 Mbps down on O2 vs about 28 Mbps down on EE which even I was surprised about as I really struggle to get 4G in the living room. 3G signal strength was also similar yet I had just over 3 Mbps up yet my Mum's phone could only manage 0.5 Mpbs. Uploads were about 0.2 Mbps up on both but the signal strength wasn't overly great. O2 managed a full 2G signal yet EE's was fluctuating between 1 and 3 bars. I get a full 2G signal upstairs though.
The point is that O2's coverage now seems almost equal to, if not slightly better than, EE's in my house, yet EE are clearly far better as far as performance is concerned. The masts aren't in exactly the same location so it's not a completely fair test, but it does make me wonder how much difference the frequencies really make. Obviously if the nearest O2 mast was much closer than the nearest EE one you'd expect it to be far better anyway, and vice versa. Using this:
https://www.daftlogic.com/projects-g...calculator.htm I've just quickly looked at the distance my house is from the nearest EE and O2 masts in Retford and there isn't much in it, although differing locations mean other factors may affect the signal differently.
So how much of an advantage, coverage wise, do EE have over O2 and Vodafone thanks to the the frequencies used by the latter two?
