1 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
LTE and WiMaxTechnology and Performance Comparison
Dr.-Ing. Carsten BallNokia Siemens NetworksRadio Access, GERAN &OFDM Systems: RRM and Simulati ons
EW2007 PanelTuesday, 3rd April, 2007
2 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Contents:
• Towards Broadband Wireless Access: Categorization of different Radio Access Standards
• Radio Access Solutions: the 3GPP and the IEEE Technol ogy Family
• Detailed LTE vs. WiMax Comparison(Radio Perspective, Focus on lower Layers)
• Performance Numbers: Peak Data Rates, Spectrum Effic iency and Technology Capability Limits
• LTE or WiMax Market Success, what will be the winning Tec hnology ?
• Operator Use Cases and potential Ways of Acting
• Summary and Conclusions
3 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Mobility / Range
Towards Broadband Wireless Access 3GPP and IEEE offer a comprehensive migration path to Beyond 3G
���
��
��
�
��
����
������
��������
� �������
�������������
�������������
�������������
����������
������
User data rate
10 Mbps0.1 1 100 1000
Systems
beyond 3G
>2010
IEEE802.16d
HSPA
IEEE802.16e
WLAN(IEEE 802.11x)
GSMGPRS
DECT
BlueTooth
UMTS(W-CDMA)
EDGE
XDSL, CATV, Fiber
GERANEvolution
(= EDGE-II)LTE
HSPAEvolution
� WiMAX (IEEE802.16d/e) covers fixed wireless and nomadic access, the e-Standard extends towards (limited) mobility.
� HSPA Evolution and LTE target at high data rates combined with high subscriber mobility.
� Both WiMax and LTE offer excellent User Data Rates in t he order of 10 – 160 Mbps (Bandwidth !).
� LTE design seems to be superior especially concerning Mob ility and Data Throughput.
4 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Radio Access Solutions at a GlanceThe 3GPP Technology Family
GERAN (GSM/GPRS/EDGE)
UTRAN (W-CDMA/HSPA) LTE
• HSPA to apply the full power of W-CDMA @ reduced network cost
• User experience comparable to DSL in terms throughput & latency
• High capacity, full mobility, high data security and QoS
• Quick and cost-effective upgrade of existing networks
• Seamless 2G/3G handover
• 3G evolution towards full broadband multimedia services
• Significantly reduced network cost
• Flat Architecture, fully IP based
• Flexible bandwidth and spectrum usage
• Full mobility, security, QoS assets
• Seamless 2G/3G/LTE handover
• Large installed base with excellent large-area coverage
• Quick and cost-effective upgrade of existing networks
• Near-broadband data services with EDGE Phase II (up to 1 Mbps)
• Seamless 2G/3G handover –worldwide coverage, global roaming
Full mobility with medium data rates
High speed data rates with full mobility
Broadband multimediaat lowest cost
Clear 3GPP Evolution Path towards LTE, comprehensiv e 2G/3G/4G interworking, easy upgrade & re-farming potential, seamless services (handover, roaming), full high-speed mobility.
5 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Radio Access Solutions at a GlanceThe IEEE Technology Family
WLAN(IEEE 802.11)
WiMAX stationary (IEEE 802.16d)
WiMAX mobile (IEEE 802.16e)
• Fixed or mobile network operators
• Optimized wireless-DSL services(Voice + data)
• Support of charging/billing typical for DSL (e.g. user classes, volume/flat-rate packages)
• High capacity for stationary use
• Selective QoS
• Fixed or mobile network operators
• Optimized wireless-DSL services(Voice + data)
• Support of charging/billing typical for DSL (e.g. user classes, volume/flat-rate packages)
• High capacity; Limited mobility
• Selective QoS
• Solution for specific markets including municipal networks and backhauling in combination with other radio access technologies, e.g. WiMAX backhaul for WLAN or WLAN backhaul for GSM
• Hotspot business solution to complement MNO’s offering
• High capacity for stationary use
Large capacity for metro networks
High speed data ratesfor fixed wireless access
High speed data rates with limited mobility
Modular stand-alone Standards allowing for easy combina tions and offering high performance.
6 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
LTE is fully embedded in the3GPP world incl. interRAT HO.
Full 3GPP Mobility with Target up to 350 km/h; 2G/3G Handover and
Global Roaming
Mobile IP with targeted Mobility < 120 km/hMobility
Packet Data, VoIPPacket Data, VoIPServices
Both designed to combatMultipath Fading in different
Environments
Short (5 µs) or Long CP (17 µs)
Flexible 1 / 32, ….,1 / 4; CP typical 1 / 8Cyclic Prefix
Large dF required againstDoppler => higher velocity
128- 2048;fixed dF = 15 kHz
128 – 2048; dF variable; 7- 20 kHz typically 10 kHz
FFT-Size and Subcarrier Spacing
Both technologies withsignificantly reduced number of
nodes compared to 2G/3G.
Very Flat, IP basedeNodeB + aGW
Flat, IP based;BS + ASN GW
Network Architecture
LTE available at preferred lowFrequency Bands � Coverage
Advantage
Licensed,IMT-2000 Bands
Licensed & unlicensed,2.3, 2.5, 3.5 & 5.8 GHz
Spectrum
Both very flexible1.25, 2.5, 5, 10, 15, 20 MHz
1.25, 3.5, 5, 7, 8.75, 10, 14, 15, 20, 28 MHzChannel BW
QPSK, …, 64-QAM; CC + CTC
BPSK, …, 64-QAM;CC + CTC (+BTC+LDPC)Modulation & Coding
TTI determines the Latency / PING
fixed 2*0.5 ms slots= 1 ms sub-frames
2, …, 20 ms;5 ms focusFraming, TTI
TDD requires Synchronization, FDD can be asynchronous.
FDD + TDDFDD focus
TDD + FDDTDD focus
Duplex Mode
SC-FDMA reduces PAPR by~5 dB � UL improvements !!!
DL: OFDMA, UL: SC-FDMA
Scalable OFDMA in UL & DLAccess technology
CommentsLTEWiMax 802.16e
LTE vs. WiMax Comparison (Radio Perspective)
7 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
LTE is more efficient, e.g. VoIPoptimizations
VoIP + Data Mixturetypically ~ 15-20 %
VoIP + Data Mixturetypically ~ 25 %
Overall Overhead @ MAC Layer
Diversity + Spatial Multi.Diversity + Spatial Multi.MIMO Modes
LTE with less complexRessource Signaling
Stripe-wise Allocation in F-Domain
Flexible arbitraryRectangles in T-F-Domain
User Multiplexing
12 x 14 ConstellationPoints
24 x 2 ConstellationPoints in PUSC Mode
Subchannel / PhysicalResource Block
LTE working assumption is 2 DL Antennas per UE
eNodeB: 1, 2, 4 ; UE: 2 Closed + open Loop
BS: 1, 2, 4 ; MS: 1, 2 Closed + open Loop
MIMO, # Antennas
LTE provides optimized and more efficient L1/L2-Signaling also utilizing CDM components
Signaling Channels in max. first 3 Symbols;Separate BCH, SCH
Flexible FCH + MAPfollowing the Preamble; Sync. by Ranging CH
L1/L2 Signalling
Distributed Pilotsdepending on #
Antennas
DL Preamble + distributedpermuted Pilots
depending on # Antennas
Pilot Assisted ChannelEstimation (PACE)
LTE prefers frequency selectivePacket Scheduling,
WiMax focuses on interferenceaveraging.
Localized + Distributed;Focus Localized
Adjacent AMC 2x3 orPUSC/FUSC Permutation;
Focus PermutationInterleaving / Mapping
Chase Comb. + IR; N=8 stop & wait;
UL Sync., DL Async.
Chase Comb. + IR;
stop & waitHARQ
CommentsLTEWiMax
LTE vs. WiMax Comparison (Radio Perspective)
8 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Performance NumbersPeak Data Rates Peak data rates
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2 x 5 MHz 2 x 5 MHz 1 x 10 MHz 1 x 20 MHz 2 x 10 MHz 2 x 20 MHz
HSPARelease 6
HSPARelease 8
WiMAX802.16e
WiMAX802.16e
LTERelease 8
LTERelease 8
Mbps
DownlinkUplink
• Rather similar Peak Data Rates for HSPA evolution a nd WiMAX• LTE provides outstanding Data Rates beyond 150 Mbps in 2 x 20 MHz Bandwidth
due to less overhead• WiMAX uses asymmetric 29:18 TDD in 10/20 MHz, whereas H SPA and LTE use FDD
with 2 x 5 and 2 x 10/20 MHz• Prerequisite: 2x2 MIMO with 64-QAM in Downlink
> 150 Mbps
9 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Performance NumbersSpectrum Efficiency Benchmarking
• Similar spectral efficiency for HSPA evolution and WiMAX due to similar Feature Set• LTE is expected to provide higher efficiency than H SPA or WiMAX• WiMax assumed to be deployed in recommended frequency reu se 1/3,
HSPA is definitely deployed in real reuse 1, whereas LTE utilizes fractional tightreuse due to coordinated interference reduction
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
HSPA R6(TU channel)
HSPA R6(Vehicular A)
HSPA R7MIMO +
64QAM +equalizer
WiMAXreuse 3
(29:18 TDD)
LTE
bps/
Hz/
cell
DownlinkUplink
Full Buffer Simulation Results
10 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Performance NumbersMobile Technology Capability Limits
������������ �������������������������
������������
����� ���������
!�����������
�"#��$%�&�"#�'(
�����)�&��*�������( +��,�+��,�
"�������--������)����������.����� ���/
�01����0��0!����0�
������1������
��2�$��3����4�����
���,�
�0�����05
�!���1�����
�6�����"#��$�
1��,�
�0%����0!
�4�������������������!� ��� �1+��7�����7 �����7�����7
"�����*, �+��8��1��8�+1��9��:���������
"�������--������)�;�����.*������� ���/
��+� !1−11��−�+
6����<�����*�������&�������=�*�����(
9��:��������� 9��:���������
1!�������������
���>����0��<��
?1�,�
?�01−�0�
�����7
�−�
�!��8�1!��
+�−����,�0�−%0!� , �0�−�01� ,�0�−%0!� , �0�−%0!� ,
All radio standards show comparable performance under comparable conditions and similar feature set:
• Laws of physics apply to all of them
• User rates mainly depend on bandwidth, modulation/coding and availability of MIMO (2x2 assumed)
• Spectrum Efficiency is determined by Frequency Reuse and Feature Set (e.g. FSPS, MIMO, …)
• Latency (e.g. PING Performance) depends on chosen Frame Duration or TTI
• Coverage depends on frequency band, RF power limitations and duplex mode
11 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
LTE or WiMax Market Success, what will be the winnin g Technology ?Choosing the right technology path depends on each operator’s individual situation
Data
rate
s Latency
Capacity Mobility
Technical characteristics are just one part of the story !!!
Technologicalconstraints
Regionalconstraints
Regulatoryconstraints
Operatorstrategy
E.g.� Available spectrum� Spectrum cost� Standards compliance
E.g.� Service
offering� Competitive
situation� Legacy
networks� Investment
Protection� Future
proofness� Technology
Evolution Path� OPEX� Terminal Costs
E.g.� Population density� Traffic distribution� Demand for
services� Spending on
communication� Availability and
variety of terminals� Site Locations
12 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
LTE or WiMax Market Success, what will be the winnin g Technology ?Looking at typical operator use cases, there are most applicable and probable ways of acting
No license available
Incumbent 2G mobile operator with BWA (non-3G) license
Incumbent 2G/3G mobile operator
New operator with BWA (non-3G) license
• Extend to EDGE and EDGE II for mobile data• In addition, use WiMAX mostly in urban-area
hot-zones, with focus on fixed-line substitution (voice & data) since HSPA not possible.
• Extend 3G to HSPA• Extend 2G to EDGE and EDGE II• Upgrade to LTE later
• Use WiMAX for licensed bands,3.5 GHz FDD (fixed/nomadic) or 2.5 GHz TDD (fixed/nomadic/mobile)
• Use WLAN for hotspot/metro networks
New 3G mobile operator
• Build up UMTS/HSPA network
• Upgrade to LTE later
Mob
ile N
etw
ork
Ope
rato
rA
cces
s P
rovi
der,
Fix
edN
etw
orks
13 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Summary and Conclusions:
�� �full 3GPP interoperability
BackwardsCompatibility
� � (�)� � �Latency
2007/20082009/2010Availability
� �(�)� � �Capacity
�� �, if f < 3.5GHz
� �� � � (LTE-900)
Coverage
Performance
Full MobilityNomadic Mobility
Circuit Switched, VoicePacket Switched, Data
IMT2000other
�� �
� �� �Mobility
WiMax IMT-2000 member� (2.3, 2.5 & 3.5 GHz)
��Spectrum
� � (VoIP)� � �
� � � (VoIP)� � �Services
(�)WiMax to WiMax
� �Roaming
WiMAX MobileLTE
• LTE comes ~ 2 years later than WiMax and hence provi des some technical advantages over WiMax.
• LTE must be seen especially in the context of the mature an d world-wide dominating GERAN andUMTS/HSPA Systems allowing for Handover/Roaming as wel l as Refarming Scenarios.
• Judgment on the “best” technology, however, depends on specific operator needs and prerequisites.
• LTE and WiMax are basically for different customers in different spectrum: ���� no strong Competition.
• Nokia Siemens Networks is pleased to offer a strong and comprehensive Portfolio includingboth WiMax and LTE operating even on the same Platform (NSN FlexiBTS).
14 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Thank You …
15 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Dr.-Ing. Carsten Ball
Dr. Carsten Ball received the Dipl.-Ing. degree in electrodynamics in 1993 and the Dr.-Ing. degree in electrical engineering in 1996 from the Technical University of Karlsruhe, Germany. Since 1997 he is with Siemens Mobile Networks and since April 2007 with Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN) in Munich, Germany, currently heading the GERAN and OFDM Systems Architecture Radio & Simulation group. He is responsible for the GSM, GPRS and EDGE performance as well as for the upcoming OFDM radio technologies (WiMax, LTE). Dr. Ball’s research interests include simulation, protocol stacks, optimization and efficient algorithm design in cellular radio networks.
16 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Backups:
17 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Flat Architecture Evolution
����
������
�� ��������� ���
����
���������� ������������
��� ���
����
� ���
�������
� ���!
��"��
�
� �
�� #
��
9�������:�"#�
• Flat architecture = single network element in radio network and in the core network• Significant Node Reduction compared to previous GERAN an d UMTS Standard • Same architecture in i-HSPA, LTE and in WiMAX
����
� �
������!
$����%
����
��
18 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Suburban coverage
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
HSPA900 indoormobile
HSPA2100 indoormobile
WiMAX 2500 indoormobile
WiMAX 3500 indoormobile
WiMAX 2500outdoor fixed
WiMAX 3500outdoor fixed
km
UplinkDownlink
Cell Range for Mobile and Fixed Wireless
Fixed application� No indoor loss � CPE Antenna
height 5 m
Mobile application� Indoor loss 15 dB� MS Antenna
height 1.5 m
• Good quality Fixed wireless WiMAX network can be built for outdoor antennas with GSM/EDGE and UMTS/HSPA sites
• Mobile WiMax suffers from Coverage Challenge (especially indoor) due to high Frequency Bands• LTE provides comparable coverage to GSM/EDGE (@ 900 MHz) or HSPA (@900/2100 MHz)
19 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Key success factors show clear profiles for available technologies
WiMAX
GSMGPRSEDGE
UTRANHSPA
LTE
Full mobility with medium data rates High speed data rates with full mobility
Broadband multimedia at lowest cost High speed data rates with limited mobility
Economy of scale Spectrum availability and cost impact
Variety of terminals
Voice performance
IPR regime
Compatibility with existing standards
Lean architecture Broadband data performance
Economy of scale Spectrum availability and cost impact
Variety of terminals
Voice performance
IPR regime
Compatibility with existing standards
Lean architecture Broadband data performance
Economy of scale Spectrum availability and cost impact
Variety of terminals
Voice performance
IPR regime
Compatibility with existing standards
Lean architecture Broadband data performance
Economy of scale Spectrum availability and cost impact
Variety of terminals
Voice performance
IPR regime
Compatibility with existing standards
Lean architecture Broadband data performance
20 © Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Technology Choice is Defined by Current Network, Spectrum Assets and Voice Strategy
@"���6��
��
����)��A
���"�����
;���A
����6"�
;����A
B��B��
�6�����"#��'���2
>�>��&C�9#(
>� @"������
��-�,��<
�������A
B��
�����
>�
�01�@� ����
+01�@� �
;���A
B��
B��
>�
LTE and WiMax are basically for different customersin different spectrum: ���� no strong Competition expected
Top Related