LTE and WiMax Technology and Performance Comparison

LTE and WiMax Technology and Performance Comparison
LTE and WiMax
Technology and Performance Comparison
Dr.-Ing. Carsten Ball
Nokia Siemens Networks
Radio Access, GERAN &OFDM Systems: RRM and Simulations
EW2007 Panel
Tuesday, 3rd April, 2007
1
© 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 Technology Family
• Detailed LTE vs. WiMax Comparison
(Radio Perspective, Focus on lower Layers)
• Performance Numbers: Peak Data Rates, Spectrum Efficiency and
Technology Capability Limits
• LTE or WiMax Market Success, what will be the winning Technology ?
• Operator Use Cases and potential Ways of Acting
• Summary and Conclusions
2
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Towards Broadband Wireless Access
3GPP and IEEE offer a comprehensive migration path to Beyond 3G
WiMAX (IEEE802.16d/e) covers fixed wireless and
nomadic access, the e-Standard extends towards
(limited) mobility.
Mobility / Range
HSPA Evolution and LTE target at high data rates
combined with high subscriber mobility.
Systems
UMTS
(W-CDMA)
beyond 3G
HSPA
GSM
GPRS
>2010
HSPA
Evolution
EDGE
GERAN
Evolution
IEEE
802.16e
LTE
(= EDGE-II)
WLAN
DECT
(IEEE 802.11x)
BlueTooth
0.1
XDSL, CATV,
1
Fiber
10
IEEE
802.16d
User
data rate
100
Both WiMax and LTE offer excellent User Data Rates in the order of 10 – 160 Mbps (Bandwidth !).
3
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially
not Binding
<<< and Data Throughput.
LTE design seems to be superior especially
concerning
Mobility
1000
Mbps
Radio Access Solutions at a Glance
The 3GPP Technology Family
GERAN
(GSM/GPRS/EDGE)
UTRAN
(W-CDMA/HSPA)
• Large installed base with excellent
• HSPA to apply the full power of W-
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
4
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
High speed data rates
with full mobility
LTE
• 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
Broadband multimedia
at lowest cost
Clear
3GPP Evolution Path towards LTE, comprehensive 2G/3G/4G interworking, easy upgrade &
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially
not Binding <<< roaming), full high-speed mobility.
re-farming potential, seamless services
(handover,
Radio Access Solutions at a Glance
The IEEE Technology Family
WLAN
(IEEE 802.11)
• 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
5
WiMAX stationary
(IEEE 802.16d)
WiMAX mobile
(IEEE 802.16e)
• Fixed or mobile network operators
• Optimized wireless-DSL services
• 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
High speed data rates
for fixed wireless access
(Voice + data)
• Support of charging/billing typical
for DSL (e.g. user classes,
volume/flat-rate packages)
• High capacity; Limited mobility
• Selective QoS
High speed data rates
with limited mobility
Modular stand-alone Standards allowing for easy combinations and
>>> Commercially
not Binding <<<
offering high
performance.
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
LTE vs. WiMax Comparison (Radio Perspective)
WiMax 802.16e
LTE
Comments
Flat, IP based;
BS + ASN GW
Very Flat, IP based
eNodeB + aGW
Both technologies with
significantly reduced number of
nodes compared to 2G/3G.
Packet Data, VoIP
Packet Data, VoIP
Network Architecture
Services
Mobility
Access technology
Channel BW
FFT-Size and
Subcarrier Spacing
Cyclic Prefix
Spectrum
Duplex Mode
Framing, TTI
Modulation & Coding
6
Full 3GPP Mobility with
LTE is fully embedded in the
Target up to 350 km/h;
2G/3G Handover and 3GPP world incl. interRAT HO.
Global Roaming
DL: OFDMA,
Scalable OFDMA
SC-FDMA reduces PAPR by
in UL & DL
~5
dB
UL improvements !!!
UL: SC-FDMA
1.25, 3.5, 5, 7, 8.75, 10,
1.25, 2.5, 5, 10,
Both very flexible
14, 15, 20, 28 MHz
15, 20 MHz
128- 2048;
Large dF required against
128 – 2048; dF variable;
Doppler
=> higher velocity
7- 20 kHz typically 10 kHz
fixed dF = 15 kHz
Both designed to combat
Flexible 1 / 32, ….,1 / 4; Short (5 µs) or Long CP Multipath
Fading in different
CP typical 1 / 8
(17 µs)
Environments
Mobile IP with targeted
Mobility < 120 km/h
Licensed & unlicensed,
2.3, 2.5, 3.5 & 5.8 GHz
Licensed,
IMT-2000 Bands
LTE available at preferred low
Frequency Bands
Coverage
Advantage
TDD + FDD
TDD focus
2, …, 20 ms;
5 ms focus
BPSK, …, 64-QAM;
CC + CTC (+BTC+LDPC)
FDD + TDD
FDD focus
fixed 2*0.5 ms slots
= 1 ms sub-frames
QPSK, …, 64-QAM;
CC + CTC
TDD requires Synchronization,
FDD can be asynchronous.
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
TTI determines the Latency /
PING
LTE vs. WiMax Comparison (Radio Perspective)
MIMO, # Antennas
MIMO Modes
LTE
Comments
BS: 1, 2, 4 ; MS: 1, 2
Closed + open Loop
eNodeB: 1, 2, 4 ; UE: 2
Closed + open Loop
LTE working assumption is 2
DL Antennas per UE
Diversity + Spatial Multi. Diversity + Spatial Multi.
stop & wait
Chase Comb. + IR;
N=8 stop & wait;
UL Sync., DL Async.
24 x 2 Constellation
Points in PUSC Mode
12 x 14 Constellation
Points
Chase Comb. + IR;
HARQ
Subchannel / Physical
Resource Block
WiMax
LTE prefers frequency selective
Adjacent AMC 2x3 or
Localized + Distributed;
Packet Scheduling,
Interleaving / Mapping PUSC/FUSC Permutation;
Focus Localized
WiMax focuses on interference
Focus Permutation
averaging.
DL Preamble + distributed
Distributed Pilots
depending on #
Antennas
VoIP + Data Mixture
typically ~ 25 %
VoIP + Data Mixture
typically ~ 15-20 %
LTE is more efficient, e.g. VoIP
optimizations
Flexible FCH + MAP
following the Preamble;
Sync. by Ranging CH
Signaling Channels in
max. first 3 Symbols;
Separate BCH, SCH
LTE provides optimized and
more efficient L1/L2-Signaling
also utilizing CDM components
Pilot Assisted Channel
permuted Pilots
Estimation (PACE)
depending on # Antennas
Overall Overhead @
MAC Layer
L1/L2 Signalling
User Multiplexing
7
Flexible arbitrary
Stripe-wise Allocation in
F-Domain
Rectangles in T-F-Domain
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
LTE with less complex
Ressource Signaling
Performance Numbers
Peak Data Rates
Peak data rates
> 150
Mbps
100
90
80
Downlink
Uplink
70
60
Mbps 50
40
30
20
10
0
2 x 5 MHz
2 x 5 MHz
HSPA
Release 6
HSPA
Release 8
1 x 10 MHz 1 x 20 MHz 2 x 10 MHz 2 x 20 MHz
WiMAX
802.16e
WiMAX
802.16e
LTE
Release 8
LTE
Release 8
• Rather similar Peak Data Rates for HSPA evolution and WiMAX
• LTE provides outstanding Data Rates beyond 150 Mbps in 2 x 20 MHz Bandwidth
8
due to less overhead
• WiMAX uses asymmetric 29:18 TDD in 10/20 MHz, whereas HSPA and LTE use FDD
with 2 x 5 and 2 x 10/20 MHz
•© Prerequisite:
MIMO with 64-QAM in Downlink
Nokia Siemens Networks. All2x2
rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Performance Numbers
Spectrum Efficiency Benchmarking
2.5
bps/Hz/cell
2.0
Downlink
Uplink
Full Buffer Simulation Results
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
HSPA R6
HSPA R6
(TU channel) (Vehicular A)
HSPA R7
MIMO +
64QAM +
equalizer
WiMAX
reuse 3
(29:18 TDD)
LTE
• Similar spectral efficiency for HSPA evolution and WiMAX due to similar Feature Set
• LTE is expected to provide higher efficiency than HSPA or WiMAX
• WiMax assumed to be deployed in recommended frequency reuse 1/3,
9
HSPA is definitely deployed in real reuse 1, whereas LTE utilizes fractional tight
© Nokia Siemens
All rights reserved.
reuse
dueNetworks.
to coordinated
interference
reduction
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Performance Numbers
Mobile Technology Capability Limits
6
"#
"# $%
& "# '(
$
! 1
)& *
"
(
-.
--
);
0!
!
"
*,
6
<
(
0!
&
=
:
0
01
,
0
0
?1 ,
05
? 01− 0
−
!1−11
7
9
0 −%0! ,
+ ,
+
7
9
*
+ ,
:
0 −%0! ,
1+ 7
+
8 1
8 +1
>
<
0
1!
1
− +
/
4
*
0%
/
"
.*
!
1 ,
)
2$ 3
4
7
9
0 − 01 ,
:
0 −%0! ,
7
!
8 1!
+ −
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
10
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
,
LTE or WiMax Market Success, what will be the winning Technology ?
Choosing the right technology path depends on each
operator’s individual situation
E.g.
Regulatory
constraints
Available spectrum
Spectrum cost
Standards compliance
Da
ta
E.g.
Population density
Traffic distribution
Demand for
services
Spending on
communication
Availability and
variety of terminals
Site Locations
y
nc
te
La
ra
te
s
E.g.
Technological
constraints
Regional
constraints
Ca
pa
ci
ty
y
lit
i
b
Mo
Operator
strategy
Technical characteristics are just one part of the story !!!
11
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Service
offering
Competitive
situation
Legacy
networks
Investment
Protection
Future
proofness
Technology
Evolution Path
OPEX
Terminal Costs
LTE or WiMax Market Success, what will be the winning Technology ?
Access Provider,
Fixed Networks
Mobile Network Operator
Looking at typical operator use cases, there are most
applicable and probable ways of acting
12
• Extend 3G to HSPA
• Extend 2G to EDGE and EDGE II
• Upgrade to LTE later
Incumbent 2G/3G
mobile operator
• Build up UMTS/HSPA network
• Upgrade to LTE later
New 3G
mobile operator
Incumbent 2G mobile operator
with BWA (non-3G) license
New operator
with BWA (non-3G) license
No license available
• 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.
• 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
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Summary and Conclusions:
LTE
Spectrum
Services
Mobility
IMT2000
other
Circuit Switched, Voice
Packet Switched, Data
Full Mobility
Nomadic Mobility
Backwards
Compatibility
Coverage
Capacity
Latency
Availability
ᅛ ᅛ ᅛ (VoIP)
ᅛᅛᅛ
WiMax IMT-2000 member
ᅛ (2.3, 2.5 & 3.5 GHz)
ᅛ ᅛ (VoIP)
ᅛᅛᅛ
ᅛᅛ
ᅛᅛ
ᅛ
ᅛᅛ
ᅛᅛ
full 3GPP interoperability
ᅝ
ᅛᅛ
Roaming
Performance
ᅛ
ᅝ
WiMAX Mobile
(ᅛ)
WiMax to WiMax
ᅛᅛ
ᅛ ᅛ ᅛ (LTE-900)
ᅛ
ᅛ ᅛ, if f < 3.5GHz
ᅛᅛᅛ
ᅛ ᅛ (ᅛ)
2009/2010
2007/2008
ᅛᅛᅛ
ᅛ ᅛ(ᅛ)
• LTE comes ~ 2 years later than WiMax and hence provides some technical advantages over WiMax.
• LTE must be seen especially in the context of the mature and world-wide dominating GERAN and
UMTS/HSPA Systems allowing for Handover/Roaming as well 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.
Siemens Networks.
All rights reserved.
•13Nokia© Nokia
Siemens
Networks
is pleased to offer a strong and comprehensive Portfolio including
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
both WiMax and LTE operating even on the same Platform (NSN FlexiBTS).
Thank You …
14
© 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.
15
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Backups:
16
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Flat Architecture Evolution
• Flat architecture = single network element in radio network and in the core network
• Significant Node Reduction compared to previous GERAN and UMTS Standard
• Same architecture in i-HSPA, LTE and in WiMAX
$
!
%
9
: "#
!
#
"
17
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Cell Range for Mobile and Fixed Wireless
• 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)
Suburban coverage
WiMAX 3500
outdoor fixed
Uplink
Downlink
WiMAX 2500
outdoor fixed
WiMAX 3500 indoor
mobile
Fixed application
No indoor loss
CPE Antenna
height 5 m
WiMAX 2500 indoor
mobile
Mobile application
Indoor loss 15 dB
MS Antenna
height 1.5 m
HSPA2100 indoor
mobile
HSPA900 indoor
mobile
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
km
18
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
4.0
5.0
Key success factors show clear profiles for
available technologies
Economy of scale
Spectrum availability
and cost impact
IPR regime
Variety of terminals
Compatibility with
existing standards
Lean architecture
GSM
GPRS
EDGE
Economy of scale
IPR regime
Compatibility with
existing standards
Voice performance
Lean architecture
Broadband data performance
Full mobility with medium data rates
Economy of scale
Spectrum availability
and cost impact
IPR regime
Variety of terminals
Compatibility with
existing standards
Lean architecture
Voice performance
19
UTRAN
HSPA
Variety of terminals
Voice performance
Broadband data performance
High speed data rates with full mobility
LTE
Economy of scale
IPR regime
Compatibility with
existing standards
Lean architecture
Broadband data performance
Broadband multimedia at lowest cost
Spectrum availability
and cost impact
Spectrum availability
and cost impact
WiMAX
Variety of terminals
Voice performance
Broadband data performance
High speed data rates with limited mobility
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Technology Choice is Defined by Current Network,
Spectrum Assets and Voice Strategy
@"
6
)
>
;
A
6"
A
B
@"
- , <
A
>
A
B
01 @
+01 @
;
>
A
B
B
"
;
> &C 9#(
>
B
6
"# '
2
LTE and WiMax are basically for different customers
in different spectrum:
no strong Competition expected
20
© Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved.
>>> Commercially not Binding <<<
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertisement