Antenna Market Overview

June 2014

Presentation Outline

• The benefits and shortcomings of MIMO

• LTE network performance and the need for higher capacity / better edge of cell throughput

• Mobile device performance implications – “it takes two to tango”

• Final thoughts

The Impact of MIMO on Data Rates

Test conducted in our hotel room

Logged using Accuver XCAL drive test software

Occurred while operator / vendor turned on MIMO at 6 AM

Results from each test were fairly consistent!

MIMO gains varied as a function of SINR (no surprise)

The benefits of MIMO are most evident with SINR >20 dB

At 15 dB the impact of MIMO on end user data rates is only modest

Below 10 dB the availability of MIMO could actually degrade performance

Is the Glass half-empty or half-full?

At least 40% of the time TM 3 increased user throughput by at least 20%

At least 50% of the time the availability of TM 3 would only have a modest improvement on throughput while 30-40% of the time it could degrade performance

In all likelihood, SINR will only get worse, not better

Actual MIMO Utilization is much lower!

Results based on network-level testing at multiple sites and for extended lengths of time

Logged using the Sanjole IntelliJudge test platform

Likely due to a combination of poor network conditions and user / application behavior

The typical data connection consumes very little data

Actual MIMO Utilization is much lower!

A mobile device is far more likely to use transmit diversity versus MIMO (Rank Indicator 2)

Device performance (as we’ll see in a bit) could have been a contributing factor

Device location (and application behavior), combined with network design criteria was also a likely contributing cause

Spectral Efficiency isn’t what we think it is!

Median efficiency across all tests was 1.16 bps/Hz

Vendor differentiation is evident

Most device interactions with the network involve minimal amounts of transferred data while network design also played a likely role

Mobile Devices don’t perform the same

OTA testing in an anechoic chamber done with Spirent and ETS-Lindgren

All devices use LTE chipsets from the same manufacturer

Major differences in performance likely due to poor RF front-end design

Challenges escalate with multi-band (7+ band) devices

Mobile Devices don’t leverage MIMO to the same degree

Simulated network conditions were good, but by no means ideal

RSTP = -80 dBm

Uncorrelated MIMO signals with UMi channel model

Device 2 outperforms all other devices by a considerable margin

~120% higher throughput than worst performing device

Device 1

Device 2

Device 3

Device 4

Device 5

Mobile Devices don’t leverage MIMO to the same degree

Best performing device leveraged MIMO fairly extensively and with success

Two devices barely used MIMO, if at all

Up to 2 unit differential in reported median CQI values

Device 1 – CW0 Device 1 – CW1

Device 3 – CW0 Device 3 – CW1

Device 5 – CW0 Device 5 – CW1

Device 4 – CW0 Device 4 – CW1

Device 2 – CW0 Device 2 – CW1

Where do we go from here?

Vendors and operators are moving from 2x2 to 4x2 MIMO with Closed Loop MIMO now becoming more prevalent Preliminary analysis of test results suggests it offers a compelling gain at

edge of cell (uplink) and in some cases even at the center of the cell

4x4 MIMO has promise based on test results we’ve seen, but market opportunity is limited by device support

Impact of higher order MIMO schemes on devices cannot be ignored – they are already struggling to keep up

More “complex” antenna technologies, such as 8T8R, are being deployed in support of LTE TDD – largely to compensate for higher frequencies

Multi-user MIMO and/or beamforming will help drive capacity gains – good news is no impact on devices w.r.t. feature requirements