Help Signal strength/call quality of Evo 3D

[TheHoodedClaw]

Following up on this post:

http://androidforums.com/htc-evo-3d/360306-signal-strength-analysis-evo-3d-evo-4g.html#post2859539

Tonight I did some more EVO 3D download speed tests on the 3G network, at the same time of day in the same place I'd done my EVO 4G tests. This evening, the results for the 3D were actually better than the results I'd gotten with the 4G: 522, 526, and 543. I don't think this proves that the 3D is "faster" than the old 4G, I think it just shows there is enough variability (probably based on what is going on in the Sprint network, and possibly on all sorts of stuff that might include atmospheric conditions, minute variations in how I hold the phone, other radios operating in the vicinity, and the presence of hostile UFOs) that I don't believe it is possible to read anything into most variations of download speed. I don't know enough to accept or reject the criticisms of the Xtreme Labs download speed app that were mentioned earlier, but they may also play a role. I still stand by the conclusion that I reached within the first few hours of using this phone, it is quite usable for surfing the net or making calls, and the ability to get and hold a signal is at least competitive with the original EVO!

One thing that mildly mystifies me is that I DEFINITELY consistently get slightly lower signal strengths showing for the voice radio on the 3G compared to the higher readings I got with the 4G. This applies across three different apps I've tried that measure signal strength. But I'm skeptical that the weakness carries over to the 3G radio. I suppose it is possible that voice calls in areas on the fringe of coverage might be more difficult or lower quality on the 3D, if the readings these apps are giving me are valid. I've not had any trouble with calls I've made, though most of them have been in areas with excellent signal anyway. I did get one call today in an area of weak signal--In my office inside a large, tall old-fashioned building that attenuates the snot out of the signal, I received a call from Best Buy asking when I wanted to come pick up the EVO 3D that I'd pre-ordered a month or so ago! I told her that I'd received one early from Sprint, so they could sell it to someone else. Though the signal wasn't very good, we both understood each other perfectly.

 

[fattank]

You've performed an excellent test from the few measurement tools at your disposal. I've taken the liberty of adding your data to a few graphs. (Note, in the first graph, lower means better signal; in the second, higher is better.)

Some other statistics:

• 3G signal reception quality of the EVO 3D was roughly 9.61% better than that of the EVO 4G across the performed tests.
• Wifi signal reception quality of the EVO 3D was roughly 32.0% better than that of the EVO 4G.

(Standard deviations are not provided due to lack of sufficient sample sizes.)

Pretty cool.

Edit: Wait a minute. When you mention your phone's "signal" and the "towers" -- are you talking about 3G data or just voice radio signal? I looked at the EVDO and thought, ah, you must be testing the 3G network's signal. But then I saw your subsequent posts about not being able to perform such tests, so I was wondering.

 

[Vanquished]

...and the presence of hostile UFOs.

*waves fist at the air*

Stop interfering with my reception!

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

*waves fist at the air*

Stop interfering with my reception!

"Welcome to Earth!" *PUNCH!*

 

[Jackietreehorn]

Digital calling is a 2G function but - 1x is 3G.



What is 1xRTT? - Definition

As it's all CDMA, I simply refer to it as voice and 3G for data, trying to avoid confusion. Sorry that I caused some instead.

Does that clarify?

Heh, fair enough. I was trying to refer to it being 2G in that the icon at the top changes from 3G to 1X, but yes, you got me. I guess I should also be more clear when trying to correct something I think is wrong.

 

[jcunwired]

I'm not quite sure whether to fault Sprint or the 3D for my 3G test results so far. I am not in a great coverage area, bars fluctuate from 1-4, more often in the 2-3 range (not that I pay much attention to the bars). Last night I conducted several tests with 3G in various locations, it was fairly consistently showing about 500ms ping and upload/download speeds of 120kbps.

Today I've gone through the same series of tests. The best result was 135ms ping, and 265/457kbps. Not too bad, I can live with that (I use wifi unless there is a power outage), but get this: I moved two steps to the right (6 feet) and re-ran speedtest. 938ms ping, 22kbps download, 17kbps upload. I haven't seen those speeds since the early '90s.

Is there a valid explanation why it would fluctuate so greatly? Would you place blame more on the network (and my distance from tower), or the phone hardware?

Thanks in advance.

 

[marctronixx]

lots of factors influence wireless technology . you should test your theories in different locations and aggregate your data after that.

 

[EarlyMon]

Just a quick check in. My first 3vo was found to be defective with Sprint's RF service test. In Open Signal at my desk, it showed the same signal - on average - as my Evo, but I had every problem with GPS and 3G downloads, and I had signal fluctuations of +2/-8 dBm from my norm. (And random tower handoffs.) My replacement unit is another matter entirely.

Evo: -75 dBm, 19 asu solid and fluctuating to -73 dBm, 20 asu
3vo: Identical

3G downloads -
Evo with proxy fix: 1.2 Mbps down/700k up
3vo w/o proxy fix: 1 Mbps down/600k up

Given the known improvements for the proxy fix (I'll have to apply that after I get my MSL), I'm going to simply declare my _working_ 3vo identical.

My tower distance is 1834 meters.

 

[Dooderino]

I'm definitely getting a weaker signal with my 3VO than my EVO... losing service in buildings that I wasn't with the EVO and lower signal and losing signal in my home which wasn't happening with my EVO.... Still a great phone but I hope they come out with an update to fix this

 

[EarlyMon]

Suggest you take that phone to Sprint for an RF test immediately.

 

[dequardo]

I'm definitely seeing 3G performance issues-much slower than the 4G. Have done PRL and Network updates but issue still remains. Software or HW problem?

 

[EarlyMon]

I'm definitely seeing 3G performance issues-much slower than the 4G. Have done PRL and Network updates but issue still remains. Software or HW problem?

Please see - http://androidforums.com/htc-evo-3d/361044-3g-issues-3d.html

 

[RiverOfIce]

This is not directed at anyone, but needs to be stated.

Ok, I am going to have to pull this over to the pretentious turnpike.

Let me make this 100% clear. All internet speed test are not accurate. It really does not matter what you use, how you use it, or what think is average.

When we do a network speed test, we conduct AT LEAST 148 test per location, every 10 minutes, for 7 days, only the average of all those test, can give you an idea of internet speed. You can not take 1, 2, or 10 test in one location to get a good idea of network performance.

2 test taken back to back with the same phone can offer vastly different speeds. And flash based programs can give you an minor idea of what you speed is, but never give you an idea of the over all speed test.

Ok, now the thing that just gives me a headache.

Cell phones use frequencies on a invisible spectrum. The fcc requires all devices to receive interference from any device. When you place to cellphones next to each, that uses very close frequencies, those devices will start to interfere with each other. Especially when you have the option to boost power in low signal areas. When frequencies bounce off stuff they change there frequency, which makes them bounce.

If you place the phones with in 8-10 inches of each other, but the shear nature of the spectrum used, there will be interference. Lastly, the decibel reported by the phone may or may not be accurate.

We find that the software vs hardware reporting of decibels can be vastly different. In the htc evo 3d, there is some software problems which are causing the radio to power to a lower energy state, even though it in an "active" state. I have not looked fully but it is very common in all radios, just needs a firmware update.

As for person experience with the topic, the htc evo performance about 3 times better in most test I put it through compared to the htc evo 4g, in 4g test. There is also about a 14% increase in 3g performance.

The phone has a tendency to hold a signal longer then the htc evo 4g, but also seems to fluctuate in the -90 to -78 range.

But as for speed test, they can not tell you how the cell phone is performing. What it gives you is snap shot. Doing a few test is like taking a random picture of the speedometer and claiming it the maxnium speed of the car or the average speed of the road in your areas. But in the real world, traffic and road contintions will effect your performance more then how fast your car is. Wireless networks are the same.

 

[NeoteriX]

As for person experience with the topic, the htc evo performance about 3 times better in most test I put it through compared to the htc evo 4g, in 4g test. There is also about a 14% increase in 3g performance.

The phone has a tendency to hold a signal longer then the htc evo 4g, but also seems to fluctuate in the -90 to -78 range.

Just to clarify, here you mean the Evo 3D, correct?


As to your other comments, I certainly respect your experience in the RF/wireless world here and your information here is quite useful. My only response is that -- despite the extremely flawed nature of our testing -- side-by-side signal tests that interfere with one another and also rely on the phone's self reporting, back-to-back speedtest and other bandwidth testing results, etc., what alternative is there?

If we accept that different phones have fundamentally different RF performances, dependent on their design limitations and tradeoffs, it is fair for consumers to want to evaluate and factor this criteria into their purchasing decisions.

If we're to suggest that there is no comparative value in these tests, all we're left with are gut/superficial impressions which must be invariably worse than any attempts we make at objectively evaluating RF/bandwidth performance. I mean that's how we got here in the first place -- a non-trivial number of reviews have suggested from their purely observational experience that the RF performance in the Evo 3D is inferior.

Prior history with the iPhone 4 shows that sometimes this kind of anecdotal data can reveal actual hardware issues, but it's clear that sometimes they're also untrue.

If these methods are fundamentally flawed, what better methods exist for consumers to compare or verify/validate the RF differences between phones? (not a rhetorical question -- if you can think of/design better test criteria for the common user to implement, I'm sure we would all love to know)

 

[novox77]

As I said in my OP, I welcome comments and criticisms of the methodology. And River gave me some good insight... My favorite takeaway was the speed tests. The only way to get something remotely reliable is to do a ton of trials over a long period of time and get that average. Textbook scientific method.

In my OP, the quick speed test was more a sanity check than a proof.

I will say that with the speakeasy site that I routinely use at work, it's probably the most reliable. At least that's a few variables that I can assume are held constant.

From what I know of my own ISP, my speeds are also very stable. So on any given day if I were to run this test on one of my computers, I get very similar results. So I've proven to myself (if not to others here) that speakeasy and my Fios connection are very stable.

As for putting phones close together, my assumption (which may be completely wrong) was that any interference between the phones would affect each other somewhat equally. But if not, I swapped their positions as well as did other tests where they were far apart. But what I omitted from my OP was that when I removed one phone and continued to monitor the existing, there was no change in measured signal strength, so any RF interference appeared to be negligible.

What I sought to do was compare signal strength of the E3D relative to another phone, the E4G. I had no interest in measuring the absolute signal quality of either phone. That's just a meaningless number to me. Therefore if the absolute value was wrong, it would be consistently wrong for both phones because I controlled the other variables.

Lastly, a nitpick about River's comment about invisible spectrum: it doesn't matter if it's invisible or not. If I have a device built to transmit and receive data using pulses of visible light, putting two devices close together is going to cause interference all the same because the devices are going to be confused with each other's light flashes.

Actually, if you use visible light to think about how radio works, things start making a LOT more sense. A good thought experiment for those interested: what would the world look like if our eyes could only see in the spectrum where our cell phones (or wifi) worked? Suddenly, things that we know to be opaque will become transparent and vice versa. It might even help you visualize how to position your home wifi routers/access points for max coverage.

I got a little taste of this when I was doing R&D for the TurboChef microwave/convection combo oven back in 1999.

 

[EarlyMon]

I'd like to inject before we get into arguments about RF interference.

novox77 got his phone before I did and I was excited that he was able to perform these trials and I chipped in my 2 cents at the time. I asked him to not only try the two side-by-side but also to separate them by about 3 meters - and to then swap positions when separated.

I had concern of the two units interfering if side by side, but also concerns about RF interference overall where the tests were conducted.

Reviewers were coming out and insisting that the 3vo had no sensitivity compared to decent phones like the Evo. novox77's methods were far more rigorous than theirs and debunked their statements.

Had the results of full engineering test been available - or better still, had the reviewers not made false claims - there'd have been no need of the test here.

novox77's methods reflect best practices for a user without further instrumentation and limited time and resources.

The hypothesis was that the 3vo performs poorly, especially in signal strength, relative to an Evo. Relative to an Evo, using tools and methods that could have been available to the reviewers in question, the statement was proven wrong.

We've already shown elsewhere that - like the Evo - the 3vo is subject to quality issues (requiring phones to be replaced) and that they're finicky about accepting configuration settings (just like the Evo at launch).

This is not directed at anyone, but needs to be stated.

Ok, I am going to have to pull this over to the pretentious turnpike.

Let me make this 100% clear. All internet speed test are not accurate. It really does not matter what you use, how you use it, or what think is average.

When we do a network speed test, we conduct AT LEAST 148 test per location, every 10 minutes, for 7 days, only the average of all those test, can give you an idea of internet speed. You can not take 1, 2, or 10 test in one location to get a good idea of network performance.

2 test taken back to back with the same phone can offer vastly different speeds. And flash based programs can give you an minor idea of what you speed is, but never give you an idea of the over all speed test.

Ok, now the thing that just gives me a headache.

Cell phones use frequencies on a invisible spectrum. The fcc requires all devices to receive interference from any device. When you place to cellphones next to each, that uses very close frequencies, those devices will start to interfere with each other. Especially when you have the option to boost power in low signal areas. When frequencies bounce off stuff they change there frequency, which makes them bounce.

If you place the phones with in 8-10 inches of each other, but the shear nature of the spectrum used, there will be interference. Lastly, the decibel reported by the phone may or may not be accurate.

We find that the software vs hardware reporting of decibels can be vastly different. In the htc evo 3d, there is some software problems which are causing the radio to power to a lower energy state, even though it in an "active" state. I have not looked fully but it is very common in all radios, just needs a firmware update.

As for person experience with the topic, the htc evo performance about 3 times better in most test I put it through compared to the htc evo 4g, in 4g test. There is also about a 14% increase in 3g performance.

The phone has a tendency to hold a signal longer then the htc evo 4g, but also seems to fluctuate in the -90 to -78 range.

But as for speed test, they can not tell you how the cell phone is performing. What it gives you is snap shot. Doing a few test is like taking a random picture of the speedometer and claiming it the maxnium speed of the car or the average speed of the road in your areas. But in the real world, traffic and road contintions will effect your performance more then how fast your car is. Wireless networks are the same.

I have zero arguments with what you say. (What a surprise! )

I will point out only that reviewers were just going by wild claims about bars they were seeing total vs. what they remembered seeing on an Evo - on different days.

I had acceptable voice quality with a unit with something defective in the CDMA radio - going by bars wouldn't have told me I was constantly swapping around for different towers and having my signal fluctuate while showing little or no change in bars.

Based on that, I still believe the tools in question have merit as well as novox77's tests, they alerted me to call Sprint and seek professional help.

My only question is: where were you when we needed you!?!? (just kidding)

It's comforting to know that you tests showed great results for the 3vo.

Now all we need is a software update or two and I'll bet we'll all be happy.

~~~~~

PS - Moved side discussion to - http://androidforums.com/htc-evo-3d/361521-streaming-media-tyrrany-sprint-proxies-2.html#post2895281

 

[fattank]

Speaking of signal strength, I'm happy to report that even with 0-1 bars in my 4G connection, using the speakeasy.net/speedtest site on two servers rated me at 8mbps down and ~1mbps up.

Holy cow, folks. My 7mbps Qwest modem maxes out at 5.4mbps no matter where I test it (I tried all the servers and about a dozen on speedtest.net).

So signal "strength" and reception doesn't necessarily equate to reduced speeds. I mean, it can and often does, but it doesn't have to, at least in the form presented on the device's status bar.

 

[Tyler Perez]

Speedtest: im in irvine ca on 4g

Ping: 131ms
Download: 11313kbps / 11.04mbs
Upload: 1490kbps / 1.45mbs

 

[MBM7881]

the only little issue i had with my phone was the call quality and after a little help using the MSL to fix it this phone has by far exceeded my expectations. its an amazing phone. i thought my OG Evo was bada$$ but this thing is super fast. i now have zero complaints except how often i want to be on it lol. further more i've tried putting my battery through everything i could think of (texts, calls, internet surfing, wi-fi, 3G and 4G) and after 12 hours i still have 65% battery life! how cool is that?

 

[JonQ]

So, here's a phonescoop review, but it's a bit cringe worthy...


Review: HTC EVO 3D (Phone Scoop)



The WHOLE review isn't nearly that bad, and it was tested in NY and NJ (I don't have a clue how coverage is there), but it's certainly not all rosy in this particular reviewers eyes.

i have the E3D, in his review his downloads are fairly slow. i live in the N.Y. & i usually in three of the boroughs manhattan,brooklyn & queens. my average downloads are between 8 to 10mbs in brooklyn, 7 to 11mbs in manhattan & 6 to 9mbs in queens. i see alot of reviews with mostly low speeds & i wonder why. i always have full set of bars except when inside my apt in the 3rd floor of an 8 story building (about 3 bars with 3g & 2 to 1 bar 4g) so reception is good, also you can roam to verizon unlimited 3g if you cant get a signal from sprint. so id say its really good, but from all the reviews it seems either im the only one with fast 4g downloads or theyre biased.

 

[copperavery]

Took my 3D to Sprint today. I complained on line and was told to visit the corp store. While there, my phone was never looked at. I was told there is a known problem with 3D reception and just live with it or for $35 I could choose another phone model. The rep wasn't really interested in helping me in any way, with any of the three problems I brought to them. The 3D, in 3 weeks has already dropped more calls than the 4G did in a year. I can't use a golf gps that I regularly used with the 4G, on the same course. You can do all the testing you want, my 3D does not receive signals as well as the 4G did.At least in my real world use.

 

[EarlyMon]

That's unacceptable. In your shoes, I'd call *2, then choose to call Sprint from top of the menu, and ask to speak to a manager.

That's just unacceptable.

 

[Androidalltheway]

I agree, I was talking to my dad in the car while driving home from work which I always did with my evo, call as choppy, muffled, cut out, then dropped the call. I went to a sprint store last sunday and made a call from another evo 3d, and the same thing, choppy. Clearly it seems HTC focused on the HTC Sense 3.0, and 3d experience and basicall said, oh no! we forgot to add the radio, this will do. That's what it seems like. My Evo 4g, never had that problem with reception. I am torn, I have til 7/22/11 to return the phone, was thinking of the photon 4g, now I heard the Galaxy s 2 is coming soon, so I dont know. I do not want to be stuck with a phone for a t least a year if I continue to have trouble hearing people clearly. It's funny because my friend who I talk to everyday tells me "youn sound fine", I said, "well, you don't, thats not the issue. Anyone exchange one and if so, has the call quality been better? I even did the whole msl thing, did nothing.

 

[EarlyMon]

Bad radios happen, I replaced mine within the first day for 3G and GPS troubles. I don't even know if had call problems or not, but the rest of it was borked.

My opinion is that life is too short to live with a crappy phone. Swap that puppy pronto and if the replacement doesn't work, definitely consider all options right for you.

 

[a36guy]

Im taking my EVO 3d back, I love the speed and the newer software. the problem is reception. It is not as good the signal is not as good as the 4G. Teh little difference is enough to cause problems at both houses I own. The internet worked fine before but now fails most of the time. It drops calls were it rarely did before.
The battery is nice it lasts about double the 4g and I will miss that.