-
4G is not the same from everyone
Very true.
Three is slower, I (on average, testing now and then) see 5-6 Mbps down, and 11-12 Mbps up.
But... there's nothing I do on my phone that uses even that much speed, but the feeling of decreased latency is that everything is much snappier and responsive.
The real benefit is in having as much speed as I can feasibly use on a phone, and for it to feel fast... whilst being dirt cheap and unmetered.
Three doesn't begin to compete with Vodafone on edge case network performance, but then... it's edge case. I've never encountered a time when Three hasn't been adequate, and yes I tether.
What do you need more than a few Mbps for? Even listening to Spotify whilst casting iPlayer and tethering your computer is going to fit into 5Mbps. It's only torrenting or moving enormous files that really call this speed into question, and that doesn't happen on the phone.
You are reading a single comment by @ and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Velocio
@ 
I've said it before, but I'm going to say it again (because I've just looked into it again, as I'm due an upgrade and trying to decide whether to jump ship or not): 4G is not the same from everyone. Threes 4G rolled out at speeds not a whole lot faster than previous gen. I'm not sure if it's much faster now, but I'm skeptical. EE's 4G is faster than most people's home ISP speeds. Both have advantages (one's fast, the other's cheap). But simply saying Three is 4G at a fraction of the cost isn't the whole story. (It seems O2 is by far the loser, btw - don't get O2 4G. Something about their network being unsuitable for urban areas, so it ends up being slow and costly - which means Giffgaff 4G will be equally shit).
I'm still tempted by Three. Money is an object in my case. If it wasn't, I'd stick with EE. Having said that, I'd like to see some real data on average speeds before making the decision.