Close Menu
    938 Gbps: 6G testing hits 9000x 5G speed, could download 20+ movies in a second | The researchers achieved a 938 Gbps transmission data rate with less than a 300 MHz gap between different RF and mm-wave bands.
    Technology

    938 Gbps: 6G testing hits 9000x 5G speed, could download 20+ movies in a second | The researchers achieved a 938 Gbps transmission data rate with less than a 300 MHz gap between different RF and mm-wave bands.


    938 Gbps: 6G testing hits 9000x 5G speed, could download 20+ movies in a second | The researchers achieved a 938 Gbps transmission data rate with less than a 300 MHz gap between different RF and mm-wave bands.

    https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/6g-testing-hits-9000x-5g

    View 21 Comments

    21 Comments

    2. Workaroundtheclock on

      Ok, but, why?

      What I really want is full cell coverage when I am out and about.

      I would take LTE coverage if it’s everywhere over 5 or 6g coverage that’s in a single room if you squint right.

    5. TypicalDumbRedditGuy on

      Yeah that’s cool and all but half the time you still won’t have signal depending on where you are 

    6. Girlkisser17 on

      Imagine if ISPs tried to get us excited about 1.6 Terabit ethernet standards. That’s what this is.

    8. RollingThunderCat1 on

      I couldn’t give any less of a flying fuck about servers and data centers if you paid me, what I give a fuck about is consistent actual service without calls dropping. Because that matters infinitely more when it counts than some nerds having faster data transfer in a data center.

    10. good4y0u on

      I remember the first time I connected to a mmWave tower and pulled like 3 Gbps from my phone.

      Then I walked back inside and it was gone, which is the problem with it.

      I think if mobile ISPs focus on high speed ~ gig low latency mobile they might be in a sweet spot. Even low latency 100-500 Mbps would be awesome. Especially when sat companies like Starlink exist. Though, that might be one reason to aim for higher speeds due to competition.

    11. cloudzhq on

      There isn’t a single storage device that can handle speeds like this so what is the use case, I wonder.

    13. A_Herd_Of_Elk on

      Is this the one U.S. Democrats use to mind control people or sterilize kids or whatever the hell it is they say

    15. Dixie_Normaz on

      I’m old enough to remember these testing claims about 3g, 4g and 5g…real world speed is never anywhere close.

    17. juhix_ on

      5g already is already so easily blocked by any object in the way. 6g would probably be blocked by rain and dust in the air.

    19. TuffNutzes on

      > could download

      Of course everywhere you could download anything that fast throttles it anyway. So what difference does it make?

    20. grahamsuth on

      This is all very wonderful, except is the bottleneck between the tower and your phone or somewhere back in the congested network? It seems to me that the network rarely works at claimed speeds as it is. If things slow down during peak times, a faster link to the tower won’t make any difference except that there will need to be more towers because the higher frequency signal has shorter range.

      There is a trade-off here that may lean towards more towers in a city, but more range in rural areas and wilderness areas.