Kerry Baker | June 30, 2025

Starlink Elevates In-Flight Wi-Fi Performance

Airlines are using in-flight connectivity to differentiate their service and create brand value

Just as hotels have progressively integrated Wi-Fi connectivity as a standard amenity for their guests, in-flight Wi-Fi is transitioning from a novelty to a convenience to an expected service.

Reflecting this increasing expectation, the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) this year incorporated “Quality of in-flight Wi-Fi” into its benchmarks for the airline industry. In-flight Wi-Fi placed 21st out of the 21 benchmarks, ranking lower than baggage handling, seat comfort, and even airline food.

To assess this performance, we analyzed our Speedtest data collected during Q1 2025. We examined performance for individual airlines and for in-flight connectivity service providers.

KEY TAKEAWAYS:

In-flight Wi-Fi for the majority of users compares very poorly with their experience on terrestrial networks
Hawaiian Airlines and Qatar Airways stand out as the best performing airlines based on our data
Starlink’s low-earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellation drives performance for leading airline Wi-Fi
Expect airlines to ramp up their efforts — in-flight connectivity can be a key point of differentiation for travelers, helps support the premium brand value that many international airlines aspire to create, and is an opportunity to monetize a literally captive audience

Airline In-Flight Wi-Fi Performance – Download / Upload / Latency

In-flight Wi-Fi Speed and Latency Performance by Airline
Speedtest data, Q1 2025, airlines sorted by median

Hawaiian Airlines and Qatar Airways use Starlink’s low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellation to deliver their inflight Wi-Fi, resulting in download speeds and upload speeds and latency that are better than the other airlines.

Many other airlines are also providing very usable speeds. Spirit Airlines, Air Canada, Delta Airlines, Breeze Airlines, American Airlines and Aeromexico all provide 10th percentile (where 90% of the results are faster) download speeds above 10 megabits per second (Mbps) and very respectable median download speeds. Furthermore, upload speeds on most of these airlines tend to support basic uplink connectivity needs like emailing. However, when the upload speed is observed alongside the many high-latency results, real-time uses like gaming or video calling are likely not possible (to the relief of all other passengers).

Lufthansa, at the other end of the download speed ranking, is limited by the Deutsche Telekom LTE ground-to-air network. While Lufthansa may offer other connectivity options, our data shows a significant number of its passengers are still connecting via this poorer-performing service.

Likewise, given the premium brand reputation of carriers like Japan Airlines, Turkish Airlines, and Cathay Pacific, they likely offer better-performing connectivity services on other aircraft. However, as with Lufthansa, our data reveals that a notable portion of their passengers are still encountering a substandard Wi-Fi experience.

Qatar Airways presents additional insight as, along with Starlink as one of its connectivity service providers, it also operates planes with geo-stationary orbit GEO connectivity. This is most evident in the multiserver latency results. While Qatar’s median latency is similar to Hawaiian Airlines, its 10th percentile (the laggiest experience) is much higher, keeping it in the company of other GEO-supported airlines.

Connectivity Service Providers

In our Speedtest samples of in-flight connectivity service providers we collect a mix of GEO, LEO, medium earth orbit (MEO), multi-orbit / hybrid network providers, and even ground-based LTE. Furthermore, the category includes satellite service integrators. These integrators do not own or operate their own satellite constellations. Instead they partner with satellite operators for capacity while managing the business relationship with the airline, including installing and managing the in-flight connectivity system on the aircraft.

In-flight Connectivity Service Providers and Associated Airlines

Deutsche Telekom	Air France, Cathay Pacific, Condor, Lufthansa
Hughes (SES)	Spirit Airlines
Inmarsat (Viasat)	Air New Zealand, Qatar Airways
Intelsat	Air Canada, Alaska Airlines, American Airlines, United Airlines
MTN Satellite Communications	Southwest Airlines
Nelco (PAC/Intelsat)	Air India
Panasonic Avionics Corporation	Aer Lingus, Air France, American Airlines, ANA, Asiana Airlines, British Airways, Etihad Airways, EVA Air, Fiji Airways, Finnair, Iberia Airlines, ITA Airways, Japan Airlines, KLM, Korean Air, Malaysian Airlines, Scandinavian Airlines, Singapore Airlines, SWISS Airlines, TAP Air Portugal, Thai Airlines, United Airlines, Virgin Atlantic, VoeAzul, WestJet, Zipair Tokyo
SITA Switzerland	Qatar Airways
SpaceX Starlink	Hawaiian Airlines, Qatar Airways
Türk Telekom	Turkish Airlines
Viasat	Aeromexico, American Airlines, Breeze Airlines, Delta Airlines, EL AL Airlines, Icelandair, JetBlue, Southwest Airlines, United Airlines, Virgin Atlantic

* Based on Speedtest data samples, Q1 2025; not based on active or announced partnerships

Deutsche Telekom is in the European Aviation Network, a hybrid network that combines a GEO satellite from Viasat/Inmarsat with a ground-based LTE network across Europe.
Hughes, an EchoStar company, provides GEO satellite internet for consumers and enterprises. In late 2022 it began offering “Hughes Fusion,” a multi-orbit in-flight connectivity solution that can simultaneously communicate with both GEO and LEO satellites. Hughes frequently collaborates with European satellite operator SES, a GEO and MEO provider.
Intelsat provides in-flight connectivity through its fleet of GEO satellites and offers a multi-orbit solution that combines its GEO network with access to a LEO constellation. Intelsat is in the process of being acquired by SES.
MTN Satellite Communications, primarily known for its services in the maritime and remote land-based sectors, also provides in-flight connectivity. The company leverages capacity from various satellite operators across different orbits, both GEO and LEO.
Nelco, a Tata Group enterprise, has partnered with Intelsat to offer its GEO-based connectivity services to airlines operating in Indian airspace.
Panasonic Avionics Corporation (PAC) – a provider of in-flight entertainment and connectivity systems, does not operate its own satellite constellation. Instead, it partners with various satellite operators, including those with GEO and LEO networks (eg, Eutelsat OneWeb), to offer multi-orbit connectivity service to airline customers.
SITA Switzerland, a multinational information technology company, partners with satellite network operators, to deliver passenger broadband.
SpaceX Starlink is rapidly expanding its LEO satellite network, offering high-speed, low-latency internet service to airlines, and is being adopted by several carriers.
Türk Telekom has been providing in-flight connectivity through partnerships including Panasonic Avionics.
Viasat operates a constellation of high-capacity GEO satellites. Its services are used by numerous airlines globally. Viasat acquired Inmarsat, another GEO satellite network, in May 2023.

Connectivity Service Provider In-Flight Wi-Fi Performance – Download / Upload / Latency

In-flight Wi-Fi Speed and Latency Performance by Connectivity Service Provider
Speedtest data, Q1 2025, provider sorted by median

The advantages of its dense LEO constellation compared to the GEOs make SpaceX’s Starlink the clear standout in speeds and latency. Its medians are 152.37 Mbps download speed, 24.16 Mbps upload speed, and 44 milliseconds (ms) multi-server latency.

Hughes and Intelsat, with their multi-orbit offering, deliver solid median download speeds – 84.55 Mbps and 61.61 Mbps, respectively. Viasat performs well on download speed, too, at 50.38 Mbps, given it is a GEO provider.

On the other end of the scale, the LTE ground network of Deutsche Telekom delivers a minimally usable median download speed of 4.14 Mbps. Passengers on these flights may have access to GEO services (which, for example, we see in our data with Air France, though not in sufficient sample size to include in this article), but, as stated above, given we record Speedtest samples on Deutsche Telekom means that passengers are connecting with very slow internet speeds.

Looking more closely at slower download speeds, the 10th percentile reveals a similar pattern to the median, with Starlink still performing well at 65.31 Mbps, and Hughes and Viasat still managing usable download speeds of 28.29 Mbps and 12.78 Mbps, respectively. The rest of the provider speeds tail off and down into the single-digit Mbps, and raises a question: is it the satellite constellation capacity or the onboard Wi-Fi technology (or both) that is the limiting factor? The question of onboard Wi-Fi technology is taken up in the conclusion to this research article.

Examining the uplink, besides Starlink at 24.16 Mbps, only Intelsat provides adequate median upload speeds at 9.96 Mbps. Next, Panasonic Avionics, Turk Telekom (also PAC) and Nelco (also PAC) neatly cluster – 3.65, 3.40 and 2.60 Mbps, respectively – followed by Deutsche Telekom at 2.53 Mbps.

Latency is the starkest separation between LEO and GEO, which is obvious given the orbital altitude differences in distance between them is roughly 60 times or more. Bearing this in mind, Starlink’s median multiserver latency of 44 ms would otherwise seem an outlier compared with all other providers, ranging from 667 ms to 839 ms.

Nowhere to go but up

In-flight connectivity isn’t seamless. Depending on airline routes or models of airplanes, different connectivity service providers may be used (or occasionally restricted by governments when crossing over certain territories). Moreover, old equipment on and in the airplanes takes time and expense to upgrade.

However, the upgrades are happening as many airlines see value and opportunity to provide extended services, along with better Wi-FI. For example, United Airlines is not just moving its entire fleet to Starlink for better performance, but also to deepen its customer loyalty relationships. “Access will be free for all MileagePlus customers and includes game-changing inflight entertainment experiences like streaming services, shopping, gaming and more.” SAS is also working with Starlink to enhance its “gate-to-gate” connectivity and offer free high-speed Wi-Fi by the end of this year.

Not all airlines are selecting Starlink. Also announced this year, American Airlines has aligned itself with Viasat and Intelsat, while Delta has gotten on board with Viasat and Hughes, deplaning Intelsat.

Another example of improvement, this time inside the airplane, is Panasonic Avionics offering Wi-Fi 6E. Wi-Fi 6E adds the 6 GHz frequency band to prior Wi-Fi generations (that offered 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz), which has more channels and less interference than older Wi-Fi devices.

Finally, competition is heating up. The likes of Project Kuiper and, perhaps, AST SpaceMobile will add new LEO options, where we see the leading LEO Starlink performing very well in our Speedtest data. Intention to provide “direct-to-device” connectivity to wireless customers from the mobile network operators, helps support the scale of the capital-intensive business case for launching rockets and orbiting satellites.

Watch this space

We will be revisiting this topic soon with updated information and insights. If you are an airline or an in-flight connectivity service provider, we’d like to hear from you to ensure we’re capturing and reflecting your passengers’ Wi-Fi connection experience.

Ookla assists ISPs, venue owners, and companies in designing Wi-Fi networks, monitoring their performance, and optimizing them. Please contact us to learn more about Speedtest Intelligence and Ekahau.

Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.

About the Author

Kerry Baker

| More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles

Kerry Baker | June 11, 2025

Wi-Fi 7 Speeds Up in the U.S.

Cable has the fastest-growing Wi-Fi 7, but Fiber has the fastest Wi-Fi 7 speeds

Editor’s note: This article was revised on June 12 to reflect that Verizon’s median download speeds are a result of its rate plans and for clarity about cable technology.

Wi-Fi 7 has been around for over a year. If you haven’t noticed this latest generation of Wi-Fi technology, it might be because it is still just gaining a foothold. But even for those who haven’t yet heard of Wi-Fi 7, one can surmise that a new technology generation will have better performance than what’s come before. This article looks at the growth of Wi-Fi 7 in the United States, then compares its performance against prior Wi-Fi generations across top fixed internet service providers (ISP).

Key Takeaways:

Wi-Fi 7 adoption is less than 2%, according to its share of fixed samples of Speedtest user data. ISPs are beginning to include Wi-Fi 7 routers in their service bundle, which is the primary means for households to acquire routers.
Wi-Fi 7 speed is faster, as expected, even delivering gig-speed for one fiber ISP. However, cable providers, which are competitive with fiber speeds on the downlink, have much slower uplink speeds and more lag on latency. Cable companies have 30% more of the older Wi-Fi 4 and 5 routers than fiber companies, constraining the potential customer experience.
Net Promoter Score (NPS) improves with each generation of Wi-Fi, with an immense gulf from -38 for Wi-Fi 4 to +45 for Wi-Fi 7.

Wi-Fi in the U.S. by Technology Standard and the Growth of Wi-Fi 7

Wi-Fi Generations Mix
Speedtest Intelligence data, United States, Q1 2025

Generation breakdown:

Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n), introduced in 2009, hangs onto 13.0% of Speedtest user samples
Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac) arrived in 2013 and registers a 33.0% share
Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) came to market in 2019 and 6E (also 802.11ax) added in early 2021 together account for a majority 52.3% share
Wi-Fi 7 (802.11be) came along early in 2024 and has garnered just 1.8% through Q1 2025

[NB: 6 and 6E are the same IEEE standard. 6E in this article is 6 GHz only, to allow for discrete analysis of this spectrum band. Wi-Fi 6E router samples on 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz are included with Wi-Fi 6. PC Mag explains.]

Wi-Fi 7’s Early Shoots

Wi-Fi 7 Speedtest user samples as share of total Wi-Fi Speedtest samples, Speedtest Intelligence data:

Q1 2024	Q2 2024	Q3 2024	Q4 2024	Q1 2025
0.2%	0.3%	0.5%	0.8%	1.8%

Wi-Fi 7 adoption started slowly and was less than 1% share through all of 2024, but then it more than doubled in Q1 2025 vs. Q4 2024, as more providers began offering Wi-Fi 7 routers as part of the service bundle. The role of ISPs providing equipment is critical. Seventy-one percent (71%) of internet households in the U.S. get their routers from their ISP, according to recent research from Parks Associates. For example, Spectrum (Charter Communications) began offering its Wi-Fi 7 router late last year and tripled its adoption over these two quarters, allowing the company to claim that it is the fastest growing Wi-Fi 7 provider as of Q1 2025.

The ISPs listed in the chart are the ten largest Wi-Fi 7 providers in Speedtest Intelligence data based on total Speedtest user samples on Wi-Fi 7.

Wi-Fi Performance by Generation

Median Download Speeds (Mbps), All and Top 10 Fixed Providers
Speedtest Intelligence data, United States, Q1 2025

For all providers, the increase in median download speed for each Wi-Fi generation is expected. At the top end, Wi-Fi 7 at 764.15 Mbps, even with Wi-Fi 7 including samples from slower bands of 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz, is still faster by 51.64 Mbps than Wi-Fi 6E at 712.51 Mbps. However, among the individual ISPs, there are some ISPs where 6E is faster than Wi-Fi 7. Even with the newest capabilities of Wi-Fi 7, the physical characteristics of a house, for example, can mean that the better coverage propagation characteristics of 2.4 GHz gives a better connection than 6 GHz.

Wi-Fi 7 benefits from double the channel bandwidth and four-times the modulation, as well as a feature called Multi-Link Operation (MLO) which allows data to travel across all frequency bands rather than one. As this analysis is focused on results rather than technical specifications, for those interested in learning more about Wi-Fi 7 capabilities, see The Ultimate Wi-Fi 7 Upgrade Guide by Ekahau (a Ziff Davis company, as is Ookla).

Among the top 10 ISPs, older generation Wi-Fi 4 and Wi-Fi 5 median download speeds generally cluster in similar ranges, respectively, though CenturyLink (Lumen) is slower due to a large portion of its customer base being on slower, copper-based broadband service. In its Q1 2025 earnings report, Lumen reported 1.1 million subscribers on fiber and 1.4 million customers primarily on the slower service.

Verizon’s relatively slower median download speeds on the newer Wi-Fi generations (6, 6E, 7) are likely due to customer rate plan mix.

Frontier, Verizon’s acquisition target, is clearly the fastest on Wi-Fi 7 and records the only gigabit median download speed of 1.011 Gbps.

Median Upload Speeds (Mbps), All and Top 10 Fixed Providers
Speedtest Intelligence data, United States, Q1 2025

As with download speeds, the upload speeds for all providers follow the expected path of getting faster with each newer Wi-Fi generation. However, among the ISPs, there is greater variation in the upload than the download. In particular, the cable ISPs – Cox Communications, Spectrum (Charter Communications), Xfinity (Comcast Corporation) – lagging behind the symmetrical speed of fiber, are far below in the uplink speed. The Wi-Fi 7 average of the median upload speeds of the three cable companies is just 64.40 Mbps vs. 595.75 for the seven fiber companies.

On Wi-Fi 4 and 5, the three cable companies average 47.1% of samples (almost half) while the seven fiber companies average 36.3% of samples on these older generations. The Wi-Fi 5 average of the median upload speeds of the three cable companies is just 27.65 Mbps vs. 178.17 Mbps for the seven fiber companies.

If older cable technology tracks with the Wi-Fi router generations, then the cable companies have a slow-to-change portion of their customer base who will need targeted incentives to upgrade. The cellular industry markets its generations and consumers know, for example, that they need a 5G phone to be on a 5G network. But Wi-Fi, as a category, has not educated consumers to the same extent such that consumers could experience better connectivity with, for example, the latest router (assuming they even know the technology generation of their current router). And, given that the vast majority of a consumers’ mobile traffic is via Wi-Fi – and basically all of the home internet – this is an opportunity for the industry to align the network capability with the service plan with the router with the end device.

As with download speed, again Frontier clocks a blazing median upload speed of 0.9 Gbps (866.85 Mbps).

Median Multi-Server Latency (ms), All and Top 10 Fixed Providers
Speedtest Intelligence data, United States, Q1 2025

Just as with speeds, latency tracks its improvements by Wi-Fi generation for all providers. However, it is arguable from a consumer relevance perspective that Wi-Fi 5, 6, and 6E provide essentially the same latency experience across all providers.

Also as with speed, the fiber companies (apart from MetroNet) have better performance on latencies than the cable companies. On average for Wi-Fi 7, the cable companies latency is 25 milliseconds (ms) vs. 15 ms for the fiber companies (including MetroNet, and including copper customers mentioned above).

The best performer on latency is the aptly named Ziply Fiber, with as-low-as or lower Wi-Fi 4 latency than other ISPs have on Wi-Fi 7 (12 ms), and Ziply is the only provider in single-digit Wi-Fi 7 latency (8 ms).

Wi-Fi 4 Nostalgia? Sentimental is bad for Sentiment

Speed and lag are critical in determining the customer experience. Customer experience relative to one’s expectations determines customer perception. The customer perception is captured by “sentiment” metrics like ratings or stars, satisfaction percentages, or loyalty and recommendation metrics like Net Promoter Score (NPS).

Taking a look at NPS by Wi-Fi generation, just as seen with download speed, upload speed and latency, each newer generation of Wi-Fi is attended by better consumer sentiment. To be clear, these are Speedtest users’ scores for their ISP by Wi-Fi generation, not a score for the routers themselves.

NPS by Wi-Fi Generation, Speedtest Intelligence data, Q1 2025:

Wi-FI 4	Wi-Fi 5	Wi-Fi 6	Wi-Fi 6E	Wi-Fi 7
-38	3	11	30	45

As noted, a legacy of older Wi-Fi router generations in an ISP’s customer base, cable companies having more than fiber providers, limits the customer experience. So too with the transport technology (eg, DOCSIS 3.0). Furthermore, Wi-Fi 7 may need new consumer-premise cabling; some Wi-Fi 7 capable devices may not support the full channel width; and so on. This is to say that technology bottlenecks are possible at each node in the ecosystem. Getting this all lined up to match the service capabilities to the right-fit rate plan that meets the customer needs is Rubik’s Cube. More awareness, better education, and technology transparency will help realize the potential of Wi-Fi 7.

Ookla can assist ISPs, venue owners, and companies in designing Wi-Fi networks, monitoring their performance, and optimizing them. Please contact us to learn more about Speedtest Intelligence and Ekahau.

Other recent Wi-Fi 7 reporting: Wi-Fi 7 in Europe: France Leads in Differentiating Multi-Gigabit Fiber Experiences | Ookla®.

Sidebar

The significant merger and acquisition (M&A) activity among eight of our top ten Wi-Fi 7 providers is noteworthy:

That leaves just Google Fiber and Xfinity on our top ten without recent, major M&A news. With so many providers (we count 59 ISPs in our data with Wi-Fi 7 samples, and there are more than a thousand fiber providers in the U.S.) in a capex-intensive industry, scale economics drives consolidation. Furthermore, there is a fiber-first imperative narrative that access technologies will converge over time, which also encourages industry consolidation.

About the Author

Kerry Baker

| More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles

Kerry Baker | June 9, 2025

Rising Tide of Fiber Speeds in Mexico

Fiber Fuels Uplink Revolution and Intensifies ISP Competition

Spanish/Español

Significant improvements in internet services are being seen by customers in Mexico, notably enhanced speeds due to the strategic deployment of fiber infrastructure, offering superior symmetrical upload and download capabilities. It is essential for Mexican consumers to understand the technological advancements that are leading to these speed improvements to ensure they are subscribing to the optimal service as ISPs continue to develop their offerings.

A recent development includes Totalplay’s introduction of new plans with symmetrical speeds, a shift from their previous offerings that featured only asymmetrical speeds. Consequently, Totalplay’s uplink speeds are now receiving a substantial increase.

Fixed ISP Median Speeds, Mexico
Speedtest Intelligence data, monthly January 2021 – May 2025
Median download and upload speeds for Mexican ISPs over time

Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® data reveals that median fixed download speeds in Mexico have more than tripled over the past five years across all fixed ISPs. Totalplay, known for its emphasis on speed leadership, has a median download speed more than two-thirds faster than all providers combined in 2025, consistently setting itself apart from competitors.

The true differentiator, however, is increasingly found in upload speeds, where fiber optic technology (FTTH) shines.

Totalplay’s new plans introduced in April 2025 marked its entry into offering symmetrical speeds. Concurrent with this change, Speedtest data shows a dramatic leap in Totalplay’s median upload speeds, more than doubling from the weeks prior. While the observed median speeds may not yet be perfectly symmetrical—potentially due to factors like user equipment capabilities—this represents a significant enhancement to their service and reinforces their competitive speed position. The introduction of these faster plans prompted elevated testing by the Speedtest community, with speeds now settling at a new, higher watermark.
Telmex: Leveraging its substantial fiber footprint (while also upgrading a legacy DSL network), Telmex was the first major ISP in México to offer symmetrical speeds, beginning in January 2024. Telmex leads the number of broadband and voice subscribers in México, although it cannot offer pay TV services.
Megacable is executing on a multi-year plan to transition its HFC network to become a fully-fiber provider, a move evident in its steady gains in median upload speed. At the end of Q1 2025, 77% of subscribers were on fiber vs 67% in 1Q 2024, per Mega earnings report.
izzi: Reliant primarily on cable (DOCSIS) technology, izzi faces inherent limitations in providing the same level of uplink speeds available with FTTH. Its network passes more than 19.9 million homes, but just 12.5 thousand of those are fiber, according to Grupo Televisa earnings report.

The strategic assets of each ISP clearly dictate their market positions and ability to compete on speed. Fiber providers like Totalplay and Telmex are less constrained by the asymmetrical nature of older technologies. Totalplay’s recent enhancement to its uplink capabilities is a clear strategic move, leveraging its FTTH infrastructure to further differentiate itself, particularly against the larger incumbent Telmex, and solidify its reputation as a speed leader in the dynamic Mexican broadband market.

We’ll continue watching the Mexican telecommunications market to see what the next chapters bring.

Aumento de la velocidad de fibra en México

La fibra impulsa la revolución de la velocidad de subida e intensifica la competencia entre los ISP

Los clientes en México están experimentando mejoras significativas en los servicios de Internet, velocidades notablemente mejoradas debido al despliegue estratégico de infraestructura de fibra, que ofrece capacidades simétricas superiores de carga y descarga. Es esencial que los consumidores mexicanos comprendan los avances tecnológicos que están llevando a estas mejoras de velocidad para asegurarse de que se suscriben al servicio óptimo a medida que los ISP continúan desarrollando sus ofertas.

Entre los recientes desarrollos se incluye la introducción por parte de Totalplay de nuevos planes con velocidades simétricas, un cambio con respecto a sus ofertas anteriores que presentaban solo velocidades asimétricas. En consecuencia, las velocidades de subida de Totalplay están ahora registrando un aumento sustancial.

Velocidades medias de proveedores de servicios de Internet fijos en México
Datos de Speedtest Intelligence, mensuales de enero de 2021 a mayo de 2025
Median download and upload speeds for Mexican ISPs over time

Los datos de Speedtest Intelligence® de Ookla revelan que las velocidades medianas de descarga fijas en México se han más que triplicado en los últimos cinco años en todos los ISP fijos. Totalplay, conocido por su apuesta en el liderazgo en velocidad, registra una velocidad mediana de descarga más de dos tercios más rápida que la de todos los proveedores combinados en 2025, lo que hace que se diferencie de sus competidores de manera constante.

El verdadero diferenciador, sin embargo, se encuentra cada vez más en las velocidades de subida, donde la tecnología de fibra óptica (FTTH) brilla.

Los nuevos planes introducidos en abril de 2025 por Totalplay marcaron su entrada en la oferta de velocidades simétricas. Paralelamente a este cambio, los datos de Speedtest muestran un salto dramático en las velocidades medianas de subida de Totalplay, más del doble que en las semanas anteriores. Si bien las velocidades medianas observadas pueden no ser perfectamente simétricas, potencialmente debido a factores como las capacidades del equipo del usuario, esto representa una mejora significativa para su servicio y refuerza su posición competitiva en velocidad. La introducción de estos planes más rápidos provocó pruebas elevadas por parte de la comunidad Speedtest, con velocidades que ahora se establecen en un nuevo punto de referencia más alto.
Telmex. Aprovechando su considerable huella de fibra (mientras también actualiza una red DSL heredada), Telmex fue el primer ISP en México en ofrecer velocidades simétricas, comenzando en enero de 2024. Telmex lidera el número de suscriptores de banda ancha y voz en México, aunque no puede ofrecer servicios de televisión de pago.
Megacable está ejecutando un plan de varios años para transformar su red HFC en un proveedor totalmente de fibra, un movimiento evidente en sus ganancias constantes en la velocidad de subida media. Al final del primer trimestre de 2025, el 77% de los suscriptores estaban en fibra frente al 67% en el primer trimestre de 2024, según el informe de ganancias de Mega.
izzi. Dependiendo principalmente de la tecnología de cable (DOCSIS), izzi enfrenta limitaciones inherentes para ofrecer el mismo nivel de velocidades de subida disponibles con FTTH. Su red pasa por más de 19.9 millones de hogares, pero sólo 12.5 mil de ellos son de fibra, según el informe de resultados de Grupo Televisa.

Los activos estratégicos de cada ISP claramente dictan sus posiciones en el mercado y su capacidad para competir en velocidad. Los proveedores de fibra como Totalplay y Telmex están menos limitados por la naturaleza asimétrica de las tecnologías más antiguas. La reciente mejora de Totalplay en sus capacidades de subida es un movimiento estratégico claro, al aprovechar su infraestructura FTTH para diferenciarse aún más, particularmente contra el incumbente más grande, Telmex, y solidificar su reputación como líder en velocidad en el dinámico mercado de banda ancha mexicano.

Continuaremos observando el mercado de las telecomunicaciones mexicano para ver qué traen los próximos capítulos.

About the Author

Kerry Baker

| More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles

Kerry Baker | May 5, 2025

Is it Time to Upgrade Your Old 5G Samsung Galaxy Before Prices Rise?

The Samsung Galaxy S25 family shows impressive performance for Speedtest users in the United States

U.S. consumers have been hanging onto their phones longer, lengthening the handset upgrade timeline for the mobile industry. Many device payment “installment” plans are 36-months long and Verizon stated in prior investor meetings that its average handset upgrade time is more than 40-months long.

Without any major change in technology (eg, from 4G to 5G) or innovation in device design (aka form factor), consumers haven’t been considering a phone upgrade. Improved device quality and already-high prices for smartphones further dampened consumers’ desire to purchase the latest-and-greatest devices.

But now, the tide may be turning thanks in part to the threat that looming import tariffs may cause a spike in handset prices. In addition, consumers may be tempted by switching offers and want to re-evaluate their mobile service provider which could also prompt a device upgrade. According to recent statements by executives from AT&T, Verizon, Comcast (Xfinity Mobile), and T-Mobile during Q1 earnings calls, there are indications that consumers are getting ahead of potential price increases and upgrading their phones now.

Enough about them – let’s talk about you.

If you upgraded your phone years ago to get onto 5G, now is the time to look at upgrading again. With Samsung’s annual update in February to its Galaxy family – the S25, S25+, and S25 Ultra – these devices take advantage of the latest network performance capabilities.

Key Takeaways:

If you need speed, consider upgrading your older 5G phone for a new S25 model. No matter which company is your mobile service provider, in our comparison of the S21 Ultra to the S25 Ultra, all providers are faster by at least 100 Megabits per second (Mbps) in median download speed on the new phone.
Bigger is better when it comes to device performance on wireless networks (as long as you are fine with the bigger size and bigger cost). The S25 Ultra outperforms the download and upload speeds of the S25 and S25+.
The price isn’t going down, probably, but it might go up. We’re not professing to have any insider information and the potential for import tariffs is uncertain, but some consumers have already decided to not wait around. (Check your eligibility for upgrade offers from your mobile service provider.)

To see how much your network speeds might improve, we compared Speedtest users’ experience across five generations of Galaxy Ultras – the S21 Ultra through the S25 Ultra. Each year with each new model, there is a new Snapdragon chipset and modem from Qualcomm underpinning its performance on the cellular networks. So, even being just somewhat faster each year can accumulate to a substantial speed increase over the years.

Galaxy S21 Ultra – S25 Ultra

While T-Mobile’s deeper spectrum advantage is evident across all of our Speedtest users performance results, each carrier categorically demonstrates better performance on the Galaxy S25 Ultra than any earlier models. So, even if you’re not interested in switching providers, there is still meaningful improvement in the network experience to be gained by staying on your current network.

Download Speeds

Samsung Galaxy Download Speeds (Mbps)
Speedtest Intelligence® | March 2025
DL speed 50/90/10 by AT&T/T-Mobile/Verizon for Ultras

Speedtest users on T-Mobile with the S21 Ultra experiencing speeds in the mid-200 Mbps would enjoy median download speeds over 400 Mbps by upgrading to the S25 Ultra. Not to be outdone, a Verizon S21 Ultra owner would approximately triple their speed with an S25 Ultra. A similar AT&T customer would about double their speed.

It’s worth noting that all of these median download speeds – T-Mobile, AT&T and Verizon alike – are far more than needed for just about any typical mobile application or use case. However, network speeds in the aggregate are indicative of the overall network capacity and its ability to serve all its customers, not just an individual.

Each successive generation of Galaxy Ultra generally shows improved performance. Chipsets and modems from Qualcomm lay at the heart of these gains. For example, from the S24 (Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 with Modem-RF system X75) to the S25 (Snapdragon Elite 8 with 5G Modem-RF system X80) increases the number of carriers that can be aggregated in the downlink. In other words, the S25 can use more spectrum than the S24, which is seen in the step-up in median download speeds for each provider.

In March, T-Mobile touted 4.3 Gbps on a Galaxy S25 with the Snapdragon X80 5G Modem-RF System running test software, leveraging many-carrier aggregation of its sub-6GHz spectrum trove. To see faster network speeds from Speedtest users, we look at their 90th percentile. Not quite 4.3 Gbps but still quite fast, T-Mobile’s S25 Ultra clocks 0.9 Gbps. Like T-Mobile’s, Verizon’s and AT&T’s 90th percentile on the S25 Ultra is their fastest, but across all the models, there is a surfeit of high-end speed for all these mobile service providers.

Fast is fast, but how slow is slow? Looking at the lower-end Speedtests, the 10th percentile download speeds aren’t actually too slow. Meaning, even the slowest at 11.23 Mbps for the S21 Ultra on AT&T is still ample to support browsing and streaming. (The fastest-slow at 69.10 Mbps for the S25 Ultra on T-Mobile would be a respectable median speed on 4G LTE.) As with median and 90th percentile, the S25 Ultra’s performance in the 10th percentile is a step up not only from the S21 Ultra, but even over last year’s S24 Ultra.

Upload Speeds

Samsung Galaxy Upload Speeds (Mbps)
Speedtest Intelligence® | March 2025
UL speed 50/90/10 by AT&T/T-Mobile/Verizon

Mobile video calls and live streaming have users paying more attention to the device-network uplink. The same goes for the technology side. On 5G standalone networks (ie, not connected to the 4G core network), the Galaxy S24 and S25 families can access two carrier aggregation (2CA) in the uplink. On the Galaxy S25 lineup, T-Mobile adds two more advanced features to aid the uplink called UL MIMO and PC 1.5 (uplink multiple-input multiple-output and power class). In our network testing conducted by our sister company RootMetrics^Ⓡ, we see these 5G advanced features in action, and it shows in our Speedtest Intelligence data here as well.

Speedtest user median upload speeds, relatively similar by mobile service provider on the S21, S22 and S23 Ultras, are faster on the S24 and, more so on the S25 Ultras. The advanced 5G uplink features are having an impact.

At the top end, the 90th percentile indicates the fastest upload speeds are generally similar for AT&T no matter which generation of Ultra, while T-Mobile and Verizon see clear gains on the S24 and S25 Ultras. This is corroborated by our RootMetrics data, where we see the vast majority of our uplink tests on the T-Mobile network and over a quarter of Verizon’s (in first quarter 2025) on 5G standalone.

At the slower 10th percentile, unlike with download speeds where we still saw useful performance, the upload speeds are quite slow to the degree of being unusable for some applications. T-Mobile’s S25 Ultra performs better, potentially aided by PC 1.5 mentioned earlier. (To be clear about the 10th percentile, this means 90% of our Speedtest users experienced at least this speed on these devices.)

Latency

Latency gets just a brief mention because there isn’t much variability — not to the extent that the milliseconds difference is perceivable. On the same mobile service provider, the difference in median multi-server latency from the S21 Ultra (the most lag) to the S25 Ultra (the least lag) is only 8 milliseconds (ms), 4 ms, and 7 ms on AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon, respectively.

Comparing among the service providers on just the S25 Ultra, latency tracks to the maturity (or lack) of the 5G standalone networks. That is, AT&T’s is nascent; T-Mobile’s is mature; Verizon is rolling it out. Thus, the corresponding median multi-server latencies are 52 ms, 38 ms and 46 ms.

The Galaxy S25 Family

If the analysis of the Galaxy Ultra generations above has you thinking about upgrading to the 25, here’s a look at Samsung’s three Galaxy models’ – the S25, the S25+, and again the S25 Ultra – performance using Speedtest Intelligence data since the device launch in early February through March 2025.

Download Speeds

Samsung Galaxy Download Speeds (Mbps)
Speedtest Intelligence® | February – March 2025
DL speed 50/90/10 by AT&T/T-Mobile/Verizon

As we would expect from our examination of the Galaxy Ultras, differences in median download speeds among the mobile service providers for the S25 and S25+ is here as well.

Less expected, however, is an obvious difference among the device models for the same mobile service provider. In particular for AT&T and Verizon, deciding between the S25 and the S25 Ultra can mean a difference in median download speed of in the ballpark of 90 Mbps.

What might be happening here? Size matters, and it matters in a few ways. But it isn’t just the screen size to consider about the size, the volume of the device is also important:

One, performance can be affected by the internal temperature of the phone, so a larger phone is better at regulating this (with something called a “vapor chamber” is doing work here). In fact, the volume of the SG 25 Ultra is 50% greater than the SG 25 (granted, some of that space is for housing its pen), which allows for better heat dissipation.
Two, the size of the device allows architectural flexibility within the chassis for optimal antennae placements. This is assuming that the antennae are the same across all three models, from a supply chain and manufacturing perspective. But, one could imagine putting larger antennae in larger devices as well if the model’s volume supported incremental unit costs at scale.
Three, a larger device has more space to be held in one’s hand. When we hold a phone (and hold it up to our head), we are blocking wireless signals. This blocking – attenuation – affects performance, which is familiar to everyone in more obvious situations like when parking underground. Depending on where the S25 Ultra is held (remember antennagate?), the antenna is less likely to be covered than it would be on the smaller S25.
(The same size-performance pattern exists with the S24 family)

Representing the best network signal conditions, the 90th percentile speed rips across all mobile service providers, with the fastest again from Speedtest users on the Ultra.

While on the other end, the slower download speeds are still very serviceable at the 10th percentile on any of these devices and mobile providers.

Upload Speeds

Samsung Galaxy Upload Speeds (Mbps)
Speedtest Intelligence® | February – March 2025
UL speed 50/90/10 by AT&T/T-Mobile/Verizon

Median upload speeds exhibit the same pattern seen with download speeds, where the device performance is better with each step-up in model. The range of upload speeds is much tighter than download, and there is very little difference between the S25+ and S25 Ultra on its respective mobile service provider.

The faster upload speeds of the 90th percentile are in a generally similar range across all S25 models on its respective mobile service provider.

As we saw across the Galaxy S generations, the 10th percentile upload speeds are quite slow to the cusp of being unusable for some applications like video calls, perhaps save the S25 Ultra. Again, T-Mobile’s S25 Ultra has PC 1.5 enabled which appears to be contributing to better performance.

Conclusion

In wireless technology, the generations (the “G’s”) run a course lasting about ten-years long before the next new generation launches. 5G launched six years ago, so there are many people who still have their first 5G phone. If that describes you, then now is a good time to upgrade to experience the technology gains that have accumulated in the wireless networks and in the latest Galaxy S25 family.

The S25 and S25+ phones are fast, but if you don’t mind the larger size of the S25 Ultra and can afford its higher price (tariffs not withstanding), then it is the top performer in Speedtest data. It’s Ultra fast.

To see an overall network comparison among mobile service providers in the U.S., check out Ookla’s Speedtest® Connectivity Report | United States H2 2024.

About the Author

Kerry Baker

| More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles

Kerry Baker | March 27, 2025

Play Ball with Speedtest®

Replay the 2024 season and playoffs according to Ookla Speedtest Intelligence^® data

Big league baseball is back! And like baseball, Ookla® Speedtest has lots of stats. So we’re taking the opportunity to replay 2024 through the lens of our Speedtest Connectivity reports for the United States and Canada from the second half of 2024. We use the mobile results for the baseball teams’ respective cities, as presented in these reports.

Here’s the framework:

- Speedtest Season standings are based on our Consistency Score, because, over the course of 162 games in the regular season, consistency is certainly the key to success.
- Playoffs Wild Card games are where teams can suddenly catch lightning in a bottle, so we determine the winners based on multi-server Latency.
- Playoffs Quarterfinals winner is determined by median Upload Speed, because we have to save Download Speed for the next one…
- Playoff Semifinals is won by the main workhorse network metric of median Download Speed
- Speedtest Finals reaches outside of the Connectivity Report to identify the all-star Top 10% Download Speeds in each city. (Note: this metric is not in the Connectivity Report, but comes from the same Speedtest Intelligence data source.)

Speedtest Season – Consistency

As noted in our framework, Consistency is key to winning the regular season. Boston, Cleveland, Arlington (Texas), Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and San Francisco are moving on.

But before starting our playoffs, let’s indulge in a little Inside Speedtest. It’s interesting to note how the Consistency metric for cities in the East tended to outperform cities in the West, particularly over California cities. Consistency is a minimum performance floor, measuring the percentage of Speedtest samples meeting or exceeding a threshold of 5 Mbps download and 1 Mbps upload throughput.

One reason to explain this is that older cities in the East developed to have more dense populations, and therefore the cellular networks are built accordingly. As a result, the opportunity for a given smartphone user to be closer to a cell site and better signal strength is more likely.

To highlight this with examples of opposites, vertiginous New York City has a population density over twenty-nine thousand (29,303) people per square mile. The sprawling city of Los Angeles, on the other hand, has over eight thousand (8,304) people per square mile (per 2020 US Census). Checking Speedtest Intelligence^® mobile network quality data – not included in our Speedtest Baseball – the signal quality (RSRP) in the second half of 2024 for New York City was -93 dBm and for Los Angeles was -98 dBm. Like a pitcher’s ERA, lower is better for RSRP. A difference of 5 dBM may not sound like much, but it can be what is needed to have a cell signal indoors or be able to stream the baseball game. Likewise, Consistency for New York City was 90.6% and Los Angeles was 87.1%. A difference of 3.5% points may not sound like much, unless you are one of the 3.5% with balky network data speeds.

Advancing to the Speedtest Playoffs

Boston, Cleveland, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh earn the bye, setting up the Wild Card matches for the rest of the cities.

Speedtest Playoff Wild Cards – Latency

For Speedtest Playoffs Round 1, the metric is Latency and, like RSRP and ERA, lower is better. New York edges out Arlington (Texas), Toronto sweeps Baltimore, and San Francisco squeaks past Washington. New York (again, but different) and Atlanta tied, so using Consistency for the tie breaker, New York (90.6%) is just able to move on past Atlanta (89.9%).

Speedtest Quarterfinals – Upload Speed

In actual big league baseball, the top regular season teams that earned the bye past the first round Wild Card often have found the time off not to their liking, with the break in their baseball routine blunting their competitive edge. Speedtest Baseball is similar, with Cleveland and Philadelphia both exiting versus Toronto and New York, respectively, based on Upload Speed. Upload Speed is great for posting your social media from the ballpark. Boston moves on over New York in that great rivalry, and Pittsburgh tops San Francisco.

Speedtest Semifinals – Download Speed

For measuring network performance, Download Speed is the champion. It’s not just about the individual’s data speed they see when running a Speedtest, it also indicates the network capacity available for everyone. Most people individually don’t need hundreds of megabits per second on their smartphone, but having that much speed available helps ensure a good network experience for all. Boston and Pittsburgh bring out their brooms to sweep their way into the Speedtest Finals.

Speedtest Finals – Fastest Download Speeds (top 10% of results)

Continuing from the Speedtest Semifinals, download speed is still on the field, but this time it’s just the all-star speeds – the top 10% – used to decide the winner. And with this, we have a change up in cities from the Speedtest Semifinals, where Pittsburgh was faster than Boston. Instead here in the Finals, Boston’s top speeds top Pittsburgh’s top speeds.

We didn’t see that coming, but an intrigue of baseball is that one can watch hundreds or even thousands of games, and still see something they had never seen before.

Congratulations to Boston, the victor of our Speedtest Baseball Finals.

Now, let’s Play Ball!

About the Author

Kerry Baker

| More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles

Kerry Baker | March 14, 2025

Broadband in LatAm: Uphill Climb

Originally published in Spanish on DPL News, February 20, 2025, under the title “La banda ancha en Latinoamérica: el camino ascendente”

To truly address the digital divide, meaningful connectivity starts with robust, accessible broadband internet for all

Telecommunications infrastructure in Latin American countries (LatAm) faces common challenges across the region. These include geographic barriers and economic disparities that hinder deployment. Further, these barriers directly contribute to the so-called “digital divide,” typically depicted as an urban-versus-rural condition. Not unique to LatAm, most countries and governments around the world are grappling with this same problem.

Ensuring broadband access alone is not adequate. Consumers are underserved by slow, unreliable internet connections. Many countries in LatAm are making steady progress toward providing high-speed broadband connectivity at scale.

The ‘Fiber Development Index Analysis 2024’ from the World Broadband Association (WBBA) highlights broadband connectivity’s foundational role in socioeconomic development. Broadband networks drive economic growth by supporting information and communications technology across all sectors, contributing significantly to GDP and employment. Furthermore, broadband enables the digitization of various industries, such as manufacturing, healthcare, and education, leading to increased productivity, efficiency, and business success. The World Bank cites research that finds when fast internet becomes available, employment increases by 13 percent and businesses nearly quadruple their exports.

The social benefits of broadband are equally important. In education, it provides access to better learning materials and facilitates communication between students and teachers, especially during remote learning situations. Other social benefits include remote work, telehealth services, and online banking for underserved populations. These benefits, while hard to quantify, are crucial for societal well-being.

Because of the numerous benefits it provides – including access to information, economic opportunities, education, healthcare, and entertainment – meaningful connectivity, characterized by high-quality and reliable broadband access, is increasingly recognized as a fundamental human right.

In LatAm and Europe, and in many regions across the globe, some countries are rapidly deploying fiber and 5G and emerging as digital leaders, while others are lagging behind; this disparity exists in both regions. For example, Europe has embedded universal gigabit broadband coverage by 2030 as a core pillar of its broader emerging pro-growth industrial strategy to boost the region’s competitiveness and differentiate it through world-class infrastructure. A common approach in LatAm and Europe, is the neutral network as a way to expand broadband coverage and foster competition. For example, in Mexico, Red Compartida is a nationwide wholesale-only wireless network. And in Spain, development of neutral networks through companies like Lyntia and MásMóvil, operate wholesale-only fiber networks used by multiple operators.

This article examines the high-level status of fixed and mobile connectivity of a selection of LatAm countries tending to have large populations, as well as Spain (Spain being the host of the Digital Summit LatAm 2025 in Madrid at the end of February).

Data sources are: (1) Ookla^Ⓡ mobile Speedtest^Ⓡdata sets are queried, including the Speedtest Global Index of 152 countries, and Speedtest Intelligence^Ⓡ with focus on 5G insights. And, (2) the Fiber Development Index (FDI) – “a collaboration between Ookla, the WBBA, and Omdia – benchmarks fiber development and performance across 93 countries, the FDI provides crucial insights into actual broadband performance and availability worldwide” for industry stakeholders, policymakers and regulators, service providers and suppliers, supporting the development and growth of the fiber industries. The full FDI list of 93 countries is seen here.

Fixed Connectivity

The Speedtest Global Index current rankings (January 2025) of countries based on median download speeds for fixed connectivity presents many LatAm countries among a mix of countries from other regions for comparison. Three categories are evident. More advanced countries where fiber performance is already strong, including in Chile, seeing well over 200 Megabits per second (Mbps) median download speed. The second group is solidly above 100 Mbps median download speeds where its fiber is deployed. The last group is generally below 100 Mbps, slower to take off and not yet delivering the performance possible with fiber.

Speed is simple to understand, but it only truly matters when one has access to a network that delivers the speed. High speeds on a network with limited availability are probably not as beneficial as medium speeds on a widely available network. To judge the breadth of fiber deployment, the FDI provides a measurement to assist in evaluating this called Fiber-to-the-Home (FTTH).

Up-Right Trends

In the chart of Fiber Deployment and Speed, for comparison over five years time (2020 – 2024) and among a selected cohort of larger population countries (not all of LatAm, to keep the visual intelligible), FTTH penetration percentage is on the horizontal axis and median download speed of the fiber connection in Mbps is on the vertical axis. FTTH penetration is the number of FTTH subscriptions divided by the total number of households.

FTTH penetration is often higher in relatively smaller-geography countries because population density tends to be higher as well, resulting in favorable economic conditions for deployment and adoption. This does not describe the morphology of countries in this analysis. Year-to-year consistent progress is clearly evident for all countries (FTTH moving to the right), with Brazil, Chile and Mexico moving the farthest. However, none of the six large LatAm countries approached 50% FTTH penetration, let alone catching Spain.

Download speed showed steady progress as well, though at different rates of improvement. The same three categories as identified early are evident: Chile and Spain in the upper; Brazil, Peru and Colombia in the middle; Argentina and Mexico in the lower. Chile’s rise in performance is particularly commendable, from 55.42 Mbps in 2020 to 263.89 in 2024. On the other hand, Mexico at 76.85 Mbps in 2024, was still not where Spain was at 84.80 Mbps in 2020. In sum, among this cohort, speed performance presents a mix of successes and opportunities.

Excluding Spain, only Chile and Brazil improved on both FTTH and speed axes. Mexico expanded FTTH access, but its speed performance lagged. In the other direction, Peru and Colombia presented limited FTTH deployment, but it’s fast where available. Argentina trailed on both metrics.

It is important to consider that the speeds cited here are median speeds. The median is the middle, which means that half of the speeds were slower (and, of course, half were faster). This matters especially for regulators that are mandating minimum performance targets, often in the context of closing the digital divide. For example, in the European Union’s (EU) goals from its Gigabit Society and Digital Decade policy:

Broadband Europe promotes the Commission’s strategy on Connectivity for a European Gigabit Society by 2025 as well as the vision set by the Digital Decade for Europe’s digital transformation by 2030 to connect European citizens and businesses with very high-capacity networks, which will enable innovative products, services and applications to all citizens and business across the EU.

This Gigabit Society vision for 2025 relies on three main strategic objectives:

Gigabit connectivity for all of the main socio-economic drivers;
uninterrupted 5G coverage for all urban areas and major terrestrial transport paths;
access to connectivity offering at least 100 Mbps for all European households

The ambition of the Digital Decade is that, by 2030, all European households are covered by a Gigabit network and all populated areas are covered by 5G. (Source: Support for Broadband rollout | Shaping Europe’s digital future)

The last two suggest a future where there is fixed service delivering 1,000 Mbps – that is to say, a Gigabit per second (Gbps). Incidentally, Brazil’s regulator Anatel also has a Gigabit target for fixed connectivity speed. And, for mobile networks in 2030, on the cusp of 6G, 5G will be pervasive in the same way that 4G is today. To that point, the next section examines 4G and 5G in these same cohort of countries.

Mobile Connectivity

Mobile is the primary internet access method for many people across LatAm, and sometimes their only internet access method. 4G can provide minimally adequate performance, with the benefit of being a mature and widely deployed technology. 4G networks and devices are abundant.

However, to fulfill the future promise, and enjoy the services and benefits that come with high-speed internet access, 5G is capable. 5G’s superior performance to that of 4G is competitive with fixed broadband, and can sometimes reach consumers where fixed networks might not yet have. Further, some consumers are making a financial decision – only affording one method of internet access. In this case, mobile usually wins this choice over fixed. (Mobile devices also have the benefit of being able to generate a Wi-Fi hotspot, whereas a fixed connection cannot become a mobile phone.)

This section will look at two “availability” metrics, analogous to FTTH penetration, to illustrate the accessibility of 5G. Then, just as with fixed performance above, compare the speed performance of 5G to that of 4G.

What the phone sees

Mobile Technology Generation, 2H 2024

Availability on Service-Active Devices shows the mobile network technology seen by all devices in a given county. This isn’t coverage or the amount of traffic (payload) on a given technology generation. Rather, this is the devices’ perspective of network technology generations (the “G”) available to connect with. In other words, this is a democratic view of available wireless technologies – every device is voting. Note that a 4G device will never see a 5G network, while a 5G device will see all the network technology generations. Just the same for a 3G or 2G device – devices are not “forward compatible” in mobile technology generations.

We can easily draw insights from the Availability on Service-Active Devices chart about the relative “G” availability for each country. Spain is further along in 5G deployment, Chile and Brazil are early in 5G, Mexico is just starting, and Colombia and Argentina are pre-deployment (perhaps in trials).

Less obvious is the velocity of change from one technology generation to the next. The installed base of 4G devices is large and slow to upgrade. Device quality is better and device costs are higher, leading consumers to use older technology for longer. In Spain, all of its operators had launched 5G networks in 2020, and thanks to proactive initiatives under the Universalization of Digital Infrastructures for Cohesion Program (UNICO), 5G coverage has expanded. Rural 5G coverage, as it is in most countries, is still a work-in-progress for UNICO. But also, five years into 5G, Spain still has many non-5G devices.

Thus, a key point this view makes, as obvious as it may be, is that the device is critical to the experience. (This point is also true of fixed networks. For example, an old Wi-Fi router would be a performance bottleneck on a Gigabit fiber connection.) In each new device, modern chipsets and advanced technologies, and spectrum bands and radios, combine to fulfill the potential capabilities of the network.

What the 5G phone sees

The 5G Availability time-series chart illustrates, for 5G devices, the percentage of those 5G devices that spend the majority of their time connected to a 5G network. Highly correlated with Availability on Service-Active Devices – Spain with the most 5G and Argentina with the least 5G – this view indicates the intersection of 5G network deployment and 5G devices.

Again, this is not a view of coverage, though it does suggest the degree of alignment between (network) deployment and (device) distribution. Rhetorically, what is the point of a 5G device without a 5G network?

However, let’s touch on coverage. In lay terms, coverage is usually thought of as geography, and this idea is reinforced with network maps. Networks, actually, and especially new ones, are deployed where the most people live. Scale economies dictate that network coverage is primarily about population, not geography.

For example, Anatel recently announced that Brazil had surpassed its 2027 coverage goal for 5G at 57.67% of the population – it now covers 62.98% of the population. With impressive precision, Anatel’s statement indicates that coverage is about people.

The Anatel news also contained the information that 5G subscriptions had doubled in 2024. Comparing this with data in the 5G Availability time series chart, from Q3-Q4 2023 to Q3-Q4 2024, Brazil 5G Availability went from 16.77% to 31.99% – it nearly doubled.

We have now touched on network availability, devices, and coverage. It’s time to turn to what 5G’s headline feature has been since before 3GPP release 15 in the prior decade. That is, of course, speed.

5G Speed – green means go fast

Based on Speedtest user data in each country in the second half of 2024, there is no question that 5G speeds are faster than 4G. And as we just learned with Brazil’s expanded 5G coverage and growth in devices and subscriptions, millions of Brazilian mobile users are enjoying mobile speed performance more than ten-times faster than their 4G friends. User experience will vary within each country based on the mobile service provider, among other factors.

Speed isn’t just about how fast an individual user gets to experience browsing or downloading. Speed is representative of network capacity. Moreover, speed is the result of the capacity (spectrum amount, technology, site count/density, backhaul) and user demand (number of users and, again, browsing or downloading or streaming…). So, when we look at Argentina’s 5G speed, we know from information above in this report that it is a very new deployment with very few users (Called “unloaded” in network jargon). Consequently, the speeds of newer networks must be considered in this context, to not over-estimate their potential and promise.

Spain offers a sensible counterbalance, though even a three-times faster experience should be encouragement for a Spaniard to ditch their 4G phone.

Don’t wait

Let’s consider meaningful connectivity and the digital divide. One could argue that, according to the findings in this analysis, fixed FTTH connectivity is under-penetrated and 5G mobile service is nascent to the extent that neither delivers meaningful connectivity. In this case, the digital divide, based on some aspirational access and performance objective, could mean most people. However, other countries’ experiences are likely to repeat. As penetration and adoption matures, attended by performance, to a state of meaningful connectivity, there will be those at risk of being left out. This is the real digital divide.

The opportunity is this – don’t wait. Programs and initiatives can pre-emptively address the systemic gaps that could otherwise result. Misses and successes of others can be instructive. There are billions in government funds aimed at this issue.

It is not the purpose of this article to survey each country’s digital divide initiatives, but to identify a few references for further exploration:

An example of pre-emptive success outside of LatAm, the state broadband office in South Carolina moved on the digital divide issue early and fast, resulting in a higher rural broadband adoption than in urban areas. An inverted divide! (How South Carolina Teamed with Ookla to Become a Rural Broadband Leader)
Brazilian regulator Anatel has produced its 2023 – 2027 Strategic Plan, wherein it lays out objectives and framework. (Other programs in Brazil can be found at this thorough list Hacking the Gap – Brazil’s Path to Digital Inclusion)
Recently announced, bridging the digital divide: okla® and efts group join forces to help transform connectivity in latin america

For more information about Ookla and Speedtest Intelligence data and insights, please get in touch.

About the Author

Kerry Baker

| More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles

Kerry Baker | March 12, 2025

How a Power Outage Impacted Chile’s Mobile Network Resiliency

Spanish / Español

Here’s what Chile’s 12-hour nationwide power outage looked like according to mobile Speedtest data

A major transmission line failure caused a massive power outage across most of Chile. The outage began in the afternoon of February 25th and lasted approximately 12 hours, into the early morning of February 26th. Critical facilities like hospitals had to rely on backup power generators and the outage was disruptive enough that a state of emergency was declared for the country.

How did mobile networks perform during the outage? This article looks at mobile networks’ performance through Speedtest^Ⓡ metrics of sample counts (i.e., the number of completed Speedtests) and download speeds.

Ookla examined the hourly Speedtest sample counts of the main four mobile carriers in Chile over a 72-hour period. Prior to noon on February 25, 2025, the networks performed in a normal state with fewer samples in the night and more in the day.

The outage reportedly started at 3:16 p.m., which matches the spikes in the counts of Speedtest users checking on the network. Comparing the 12-hour outage to the same time the day before, the rate of testing was over 2.5x. This behavior is typical of, and similar to, mobile network outages seen around the world. Staying connected in an emergency is critically important, so checking the status of the network makes good sense.

By the morning of February 26, 2025, when the outage is over and power restored, there is more testing than the prior two mornings. This is likely due to many people checking their phones upon waking up, so it isn’t unusual to see more aggressive testing than usual.

How did the mobile networks perform?

When mobile networks are “unloaded” — that is, not carrying much traffic — as they usually are at night, Speedtest users clock faster speeds. These are the peaks in the chart. The valleys are the times when most people are active and more loading occurs, resulting in slower speeds.

Selecting the 12 hours of the power outage (the labeled box) and the same 12 hours the prior day (the unlabeled box), the median download speed for the group of operators was effectively cut in half — 16.42 Mbps during the power outage compared to 33.68 Mbps before.

Taking a closer look at all the mobile service providers together, from the outage starting just after 3 p.m., median download speed initially held around 12+ Mbps, then dipped to its low point during the 6 p.m. hour at 7.49 Mbps. Thereafter and until recovery started around 11 p.m., download speeds remained in a narrow range around 9-10 Mbps through the 10 p.m hour. While these median download speeds wouldn’t be considered fast, they do suggest that the mobile networks were serviceable and customers were able to stay in touch.

However, noting that median means the middle, half of the Speedtest users were experiencing slower speeds than seen in the line chart. (And obviously, half were faster, but they wouldn’t have as poor an experience.) To get a sense of the bottom, the slowest 10th percentile for the day of the outage (February 25) compares unfavorably to the same three prior Tuesdays in February. On the day of the outage, the 10th percentile speed was below 1 Mbps – effectively unusable apart from a text message and hopefully holding a voice call. The prior three Tuesdays recorded 2.60 Mbps – still not great, but in older wireless network generations this was fast enough for watching a standard definition (SD) video.

Another observation from the closer look at All Providers Download Speed is the speed declined from early in the outage (3 p.m. to 4 p.m.) to the middle of the outage (5 p.m. to 10 p.m.). One explanation could be the network loading mentioned before, but this seems unlikely since the normal peak loading pattern would have been entirely disrupted by the power outage. A second explanation may be that backup battery power for the cell sites on mobile networks ran out. That is to say, if, for example, every site had a couple hours of battery backup, and some sites also had generators that came online after the batteries were used up, a pattern like this could be seen.

The Chilean telecoms regulator, SUBTEL, was cited in tech press to be looking into increasing the purported four-hour back up to six hours. Network hardening, whether against a power outage or other disruptions like natural disasters, is critical for network resilience.

Ookla data can offer insights into network performance, reliability, and resiliency. To find out more about Speedtest Intelligence® data and insights, please contact us here.

Cómo afectó un apagón eléctrico a la resiliencia de la red móvil de Chile

Así fue el apagón nacional de 12 horas en Chile según los datos de Speedtest móvil

Una importante avería en una línea de transmisión provocó un apagón masivo en la mayor parte de Chile. El corte comenzó en la tarde del 25 de febrero y duró aproximadamente 12 horas, hasta la madrugada del 26 de febrero. Las instalaciones críticas, como los hospitales, tuvieron que recurrir a generadores de energía de reserva y el apagón fue tan disruptivo que se declaró el estado de emergencia en el país.

¿Cómo funcionaron las redes móviles durante el apagón? Este artículo examina el rendimiento de las redes móviles a través de las métricas de recuento de muestras de Speedtest^Ⓡ (es decir, el número de Speedtests completados) y velocidades de descarga.

Ookla analizó los recuentos horarios de muestras Speedtest de los cuatro principales operadores de telefonía móvil de Chile durante un período de 72 horas. Antes del mediodía del 25 de febrero de 2025, las redes funcionaban de manera normal, con menos muestras durante la noche y más durante el día.

Al parecer, la interrupción comenzó a las 15.16 horas, lo que coincide con los picos en los recuentos de usuarios de Speedtest que comprueban la red. Si se compara la interrupción de 12 horas con la misma hora del día anterior, la tasa de comprobación se multiplicó por más de 2,5. Este comportamiento es típico y similar al de las interrupciones de la red móvil en todo el mundo. Mantenerse conectado en caso de emergencia es de vital importancia, por lo que comprobar el estado de la red tiene mucho sentido.

En la mañana del 26 de febrero de 2025, cuando terminó el apagón y se restableció el suministro eléctrico, se registraron más test que las dos mañanas anteriores. Esto se debe probablemente a que muchas personas comprueban sus teléfonos al despertarse, por lo que no es raro ver más pruebas de lo habitual.

¿Cómo funcionaron las redes móviles?

Cuando las redes móviles están “descargadas”, es decir, no tienen mucho tráfico, como suele ocurrir por la noche, los usuarios de Speedtest registran velocidades más rápidas. Esto es lo que representan son los picos en el gráfico. Los valles son los momentos en los que la mayoría de las personas están activas y se produce una mayor carga en la red, lo que da como resultado velocidades más lentas.

Seleccionando las 12 horas del apagón (el recuadro con la línea más gruesa) y las mismas 12 horas del día anterior (el recuadro con la línea más fina), la velocidad media de descarga del grupo de operadores se redujo efectivamente a la mitad: 16,42 Mbps durante el apagón frente a 33,68 Mbps antes.

Si analizamos todos los proveedores de servicios móviles en su conjunto, desde el apagón que comenzó justo después de las 15.00 horas, la velocidad mediana de descarga se mantuvo inicialmente en torno a los 12 Mbps o más, para descender a su punto más bajo a las 18.00 horas, con 7,49 Mbps. A partir de entonces, y hasta que comenzó la recuperación hacia las 23.00 horas, las velocidades de descarga se mantuvieron en un estrecho margen de entre 9 y 10 Mbps hasta las 22.00 horas. Aunque estas velocidades medianas de descarga no se pueden considerar rápidas, sugieren que las redes móviles estaban operativas y los clientes pudieron mantenerse en contacto.

Sin embargo, teniendo en cuenta que la mediana significa el medio, la mitad de los usuarios de Speedtest experimentaron velocidades más lentas que las que se ven en el gráfico lineal (y obviamente, la mitad eran más rápidos, pero no tendrían una experiencia tan mala). Para hacerse una idea de la parte inferior, el percentil 10 más lento para el día de la interrupción (25 de febrero) se compara desfavorablemente con los mismos tres martes anteriores de febrero. El día del apagón, la velocidad del percentil 10 estaba por debajo de 1 Mbps, prácticamente inutilizable salvo para enviar un mensaje de texto y, con suerte, mantener una llamada de voz. Los tres martes anteriores se registraron 2,60 Mbps, lo que sigue sin ser bueno, pero en las antiguas generaciones de redes inalámbricas era lo bastante rápido para ver un vídeo de definición estándar (SD).

Otra observación que se desprende del análisis de la velocidad de descarga de todos los proveedores es que la velocidad disminuyó desde el principio del apagón (de 15.00 a 16.00 horas) hasta la mitad del mismo (de 17.00 a 22.00 horas). Una explicación podría ser la carga de la red mencionada antes, pero parece poco probable, ya que el patrón normal de picos de carga se habría visto totalmente interrumpido por el apagón. Una segunda explicación podría ser que se agotaran las baterías de reserva de los emplazamientos de las redes móviles. Es decir, si, por ejemplo, cada emplazamiento tuviera un par de horas de batería de reserva, y algunos emplazamientos también tuvieran generadores que entraran en funcionamiento una vez agotadas las baterías, podría observarse un patrón como éste.

La SUBTEL, organismo regulador de las telecomunicaciones en Chile, ha sido citada en la prensa tecnológica por estudiar la posibilidad de aumentar a seis horas la supuesta reserva de cuatro horas. El refuerzo de la red, ya sea contra cortes de electricidad u otras interrupciones como catástrofes naturales, es fundamental para la resistencia de la red.

Los datos de Ookla pueden ofrecer información sobre el rendimiento, la fiabilidad y la resistencia de la red. Para obtener más información sobre los datos y perspectivas de Speedtest Intelligence, póngase en contacto con nosotros ®aquí.

About the Author

Kerry Baker

| More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles

Kerry Baker | February 20, 2025

What if Starlink Were Canceled in Ontario?

More than a million Canadians could be left out in the cold

In the head spinning geopolitical trade news, among many items was the canceling and uncanceling of Starlink in Ontario, Canada. In response to President Trump’s proposed tariffs on Canada, Ontario Premier Doug Ford stated on social media platform X that he planned to cancel the province’s contract with Starlink, which is owned by Elon Musk, who is working closely with Trump on a number of initiatives. However, within 24 hours of making that statement, Trump had delayed his planned tariffs and Ford said he would pause his retaliatory measures.

In Ontario and other provinces with relatively denser urbanization in their south, consumers have many options for broadband internet service. But in rural and remote areas of provinces and in much of The Territories, cancelling Starlink could result in the loss of internet connectivity entirely. Looking at Speedtest Intelligence data of Starlink users in Canada, we can estimate what might be at stake. We compared Starlink Speedtest user tests to the total number of fixed Speedtest user tests to estimate adoption trends among each Province and Territory from 2020 through 2024.

New Brunswick, Manitoba, Alberta and Ontario were the first to see traces of Starlink Speedtest users in 2020. Soon after in the first half of 2021, British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Quebec, and Saskatchewan appeared, with Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador lighting up in the second half of 2021 as well. Then the rest of Canada came in the back half of 2022 with the territories – Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Yukon – leaping into the picture.

Take off to the Great White North

A pattern emerges among the provinces and territories with the service launch of an adoption followed by a relative stabilization in the share of Starlink Speedtest user samples of the total fixed internet Speedtest samples.

Quite obviously the rates of adoption differ. As one would intuitively expect, the more-rural and less-population-dense areas see the steepest adoption curves. Nunavut in particular (population 37 thousand, whom all could fit inside the Rogers Center – home of the Toronto Blue Jays – yet similar in area to Mexico) rockets to the top of the chart and settles into the low-to-mid-40%s of Starlink Speedtest user sample share. Northwest Territories and Yukon, launching in the same time frame as Nunavut, also follow the more-rural-less-population-dense logic, reaching 27.8% and 20.9% share in 2H 2024.

Vertical scale notwithstanding, the pattern is this: a relatively quick market adoption with stabilization after a year roughly. Share stabilization could be due to the Starlink service fulfilling latent market demand or the satellite constellation’s capacity limits being reached (halting further sales of the service, like around Edmonton currently, for example, per starlink.com/map), or a combination of the two.

Ontario (the protagonist), British Columbia, and Quebec have the lowest percentage of rural populations in Canada, and that is reflected in their lower samples shares – 4.9%, 4.5% and 2.2%, respectively.

Bringing it back together – what is at stake? Imagine that Starlink Speedtest user share is projectable to the population of Canada. That calculates to roughly 2 million Canadians who could feel the effects of such a cancellation. While many of those affected could switch to another internet service provider, for some in Canada – Nunavut especially – satellite connectivity is sometimes the only means of accessing the internet. Some portion of these people would be casualties in a trade war.

Learn more about the state of Canada’s internet connectivity at Canada’s Narrowing Broadband Divide and check out more Starlink analysis in Ookla’s recent article, Starlink Shines in Europe as Constellation Investments Boost Performance | Ookla®.

About the Author

Kerry Baker

| More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles

Kerry Baker | January 14, 2025

Booster Rocket – Cable MVNO Speeds Take Off With Wi-Fi

Customers of the two biggest cable mobile virtual network operators (MVNO) in the U.S. – Charter’s Spectrum Mobile and Comcast’s Xfinity Mobile – are both enjoying an impressive upward trajectory in their overall network performance. In their respective service areas over the past two years, Spectrum Mobile and Xfinity Mobile users’ download speeds increased by more than 100 Mbps. The performance lift is largely thanks to Wi-Fi offloading capabilities through Spectrum Mobile’s Speed Boost and Xfinity Mobile’s PowerBoost.

Charter began augmenting speeds for its Spectrum Mobile customers leveraging their home Charter Wi-Fi in spring 2022 and, in the fall the same year offered speeds up to 1 Gigabit per second (Gbps). Likewise, Comcast was aggressive in tapping into its installed base of customer hotspots, and in 2023, Charter and Comcast offered their combined footprints to each other’s MVNO customers. That is, Charter’s Spectrum Mobile customers have access to the network of Comcast Wi-Fi hotspots within the Comcast service area – and visa-versa for Xfinity Mobile customers in the Charter service area.

Comcast said it operates more than 23 million Wi-Fi hotspots in its footprint. Charter says it has 43 million Wi-Fi access points in its and its partners’ networks, the latter including the Comcast figure. Both cable companies say that between their own Wi-Fi networks and those of partners, with minimal overlap, they provide near-nationwide (population) coverage.

Then, in April 2024, Comcast took the lid off with WiFi Boost offering speeds up to 1 Gbps, and just last week have rebranded the feature to PowerBoost. These steps by Charter and Comcast to converge the mobile and Wi-Fi networks are meaningfully boosting their customer experience in home and out-and-about.

We examined the last eight quarters (Q1 2023 – Q4 2024¹) of Speedtest Intelligence^Ⓡ data for the median download speed performance of Speedtest users for customers of Spectrum Mobile, Xfinity Mobile, U.S. mobile providers as a group, and Verizon; the latter is the host mobile network for both MVNOs. We analyzed the Spectrum Mobile and Xfinity Mobile results within their two respective geographic service areas of Charter and Comcast, where “public” Wi-Fi is available to enhance available speeds of their mobile customers. (“Public,” in our usage here, means access points managed by Charter and Comcast, available to Spectrum Mobile and Xfinity Mobile customers.) We do not have knowledge about the wholesale network relationships or any performance implications as part of their agreements.

Spectrum Mobile – They Have Separation

Charter’s earlier start in promoting Speed Boost had its Spectrum Mobile users consistently clocking higher overall download speeds in its service area than Comcast did for Xfinity Mobile users in its service area. (Charter and Comcast service areas do not overlap.)

During these past two years, Spectrum Mobile customers saw their median download speeds increase by more than double from 84.35 Mbps to 188.63 Mbps – a 104.28 Mbps increase. The pause in its quarterly climb in Q2 and Q3 2024 is explained, at least partly, by the underlying host mobile network slowing down.

Xfinity Mobile – Up and Up

Xfinity Mobile, on the other hand, was not affected the same way. Its later introduction of WiFi Boost, compared to Spectrum Mobile’s Speed Boost, was still providing gains during this period. Speed Boost, however, had already realized the speed gains from Wi-Fi (also explaining why Spectrum Mobile was faster than Xfinity Mobile), thus being more sensitive to the mobile network performance. Interestingly, the Xfinity Mobile and Spectrum Mobile speeds became closer to one another in the second half of 2024, as WiFi Boost (now PowerBoost) was catching up.

Xfinity Mobile users, comparing year-on-year Q4 2023 to Q4 2024, saw their download speeds increase more than 2.5 times from 66.60 Mbps to 170.39 Mbps.

Quarter-on-quarter, Xfinity Mobile Speedtest users experienced a relentless climb in their download speed performance starting from Q3 2023 at 54.81 Mbps:

• Q4 2023 up 11.79 Mbps to 66.60 Mbps
• Q1 2024 up 29.60 Mbps to 96.20 Mbps
• Q2 2024 up 24.85 Mbps to 121.05 Mbps
• Q3 2024 up 21.86 Mbps to 142.91 Mbps
• Q4 2024 up 27.48 Mbps to 170.39 Mbps

The Verizon network provides the Spectrum Mobile and Xfinity Mobile customer experience, when not on Wi-Fi. During this same two-year period, nationwide Verizon’s overall median download speeds increased from 66.81 Mbps in Q1 2023 to 97.45 Mbps in Q4 2024 – up 30.64 Mbps. Increased network capacity from Verizon’s ongoing C-Band spectrum deployment is a rising tide that floats the boat for Verizon’s customers, as well as for Spectrum Mobile and Xfinity Mobile customers.

To Xfinity, Spectrum and Beyond

Hardware is a key component to faster speeds, and PowerBoost benefits from a new access point with Wi-Fi 6E technology that triples the available bandwidth versus the prior generation. Comcast began offering its 6E-capable xFi Advanced Gateway in 2022.

Comcast also is making improvements to its underlying network. The company is currently upgrading from DOCSIS 3.1 to DOCSIS 4.0, doubling downstream capacity and quadrupling upstream capacity. In September 2024 the cable company said it had deployed DOCSIS 4.0 to parts of 10 markets and 1 million homes.

And, as older handsets are replaced with newer and faster ones, the technology ecosystem as a whole comes together to deliver an ever-better customer experience.

And just as technology advancements mentioned above have provided the foundation for the performance gains these past two years, more is on the way.

The XB10 gateway, coming in 2025, will be Comcast’s fastest and most powerful device yet – supporting WiFi 7 and DOCSIS 4.0 – and will deliver multi-gigabit symmetrical speeds over WiFi, with the unprecedented capacity to connect to 300 devices simultaneously. The XB10 also includes AI technology that will help ensure a consistent experience. Comcast WiFi

Implicit in the march of technology is not just the network foundation, but also the consumer adoption. New access points require new cabling, and newer devices offer improved capabilities, and often paying for the “right” bundled service offering is needed. For example:

For Spectrum Speed Boost, you need Spectrum Internet, Spectrum Mobile and Advanced WiFi. Spectrum Speed Boost

It’s not a secret that the vast majority of mobile device data traffic is actually served by Wi-Fi, rather than the mobile network. Comcast President Michael Cavanagh noted in a recent call with investors, “My final thought on broadband is the importance of bundling with mobile, with 90% of Xfinity Mobile smartphone traffic traveling over our Wi-Fi network.”

Noteworthy is Cavanagh’s mention of “bundling,” which, in the context of the foregoing analysis, is the combining of networks in a way to best benefit the customer experience. Comcast and Charter are proving this to be the case.

This approach of combining the networks is part of a strategic narrative happening in the U.S. telecoms industry called network “convergence.” Were it not for AI, convergence could have been the industry’s top buzzword in 2024. And, like with AI, there will be plenty more said about convergence in 2025.

Through December 10, 2024 ↩︎

About the Author

Kerry Baker

| More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles

Kerry Baker | December 18, 2024

Above Maine, Starlink Twinkles

The Maine Connectivity Authority (MCA) recently made it possible for homes and businesses in remote locations of the state to become eligible to receive low-Earth orbit satellite internet service from Starlink. According to Ookla data, Starlink Speedtest users in Maine are able to get median download speeds of 116.77 Mbps, which surpasses the FCC’s threshold for broadband.

Maine is a Top 10 state in Ookla’s U.S. Broadband report, ranking 9th with a 30% year-on-year increase in Speedtest users who achieved broadband speeds (1H 2023 vs 1H 2024). Yet only 37.6% of Rural Speedtest users experienced speeds at or above the FCC thresholds of 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload speeds for broadband, lagging its Urban counterparts by 13.3 percentage points.

Taking a look to see how the MCA Starlink program might help, here are current Starlink Speedtest user results in Maine:

1 Oct – 15 Dec 2024	10th percentile (Slower)	Median	90th percentile (Faster)
DL (Mbps)	22.81	116.77	250.96
UL (Mbps)	6.79	18.17	27.17
Latency* (ms)	72	47	37

* Multi-server latency

With a median of 116.77 Mbps download speed, a majority of Starlink Speedtest users are already exceeding the FCC’s 100 Mbps download speed target minimum. The median upload speed of 18.17 Mbps is close to the FCC’s 20 Mbps upload speed target minimum.

Taking a look at the slower results (that is, the 10th percentile, where 90% of Speedtest user tests results are faster), this cohort saw download speeds of 22.81 Mbps and upload speeds of 6.79 Mbps. Coincidentally, there exists a lower threshold of 25 Mbps download speed and 3 Mbps upload speed that divides the Unserved (below 25/3 Mbps) from the Underserved (above 25/3 Mbps; over 100/20 Mbps is considered Served by broadband internet).

These results are based upon the existing end-user equipment and the current satellite constellation. Newer customer premise equipment and recent (and future) satellite launches could improve these results.

Satellites are an important solution for addressing the digital divide in rural areas, as the MCA program with Starlink represents. The Starlink Speedtest results demonstrate this, and we look forward to revisiting this data as this program takes flight.

About the Author

Kerry Baker

| More Articles

Reimagining In-Building Cellular

Ookla Joins Ericsson's Leading Telecommunications Open RApp System

Starlink Elevates In-Flight Wi-Fi Performance

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Airlines are using in-flight connectivity to differentiate their service and create brand value

Airline In-Flight Wi-Fi Performance – Download / Upload / Latency

Connectivity Service Providers

In-flight Connectivity Service Providers and Associated Airlines

Connectivity Service Provider In-Flight Wi-Fi Performance – Download / Upload / Latency

Nowhere to go but up

Watch this space

About the Author

Kerry Baker

Wi-Fi 7 Speeds Up in the U.S.

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Cable has the fastest-growing Wi-Fi 7, but Fiber has the fastest Wi-Fi 7 speeds

Key Takeaways:

Wi-Fi in the U.S. by Technology Standard and the Growth of Wi-Fi 7

Wi-Fi 7’s Early Shoots

Wi-Fi Performance by Generation

Wi-Fi 4 Nostalgia? Sentimental is bad for Sentiment

About the Author

Kerry Baker

Rising Tide of Fiber Speeds in Mexico

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Fiber Fuels Uplink Revolution and Intensifies ISP Competition

Aumento de la velocidad de fibra en México

La fibra impulsa la revolución de la velocidad de subida e intensifica la competencia entre los ISP

About the Author

Kerry Baker

Is it Time to Upgrade Your Old 5G Samsung Galaxy Before Prices Rise?

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

The Samsung Galaxy S25 family shows impressive performance for Speedtest users in the United States

Galaxy S21 Ultra – S25 Ultra

Download Speeds

Upload Speeds

Latency

The Galaxy S25 Family

Download Speeds

Upload Speeds

Conclusion

About the Author

Kerry Baker

Play Ball with Speedtest®

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Replay the 2024 season and playoffs according to Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® data

Speedtest Season – Consistency

Advancing to the Speedtest Playoffs

Speedtest Playoff Wild Cards – Latency

Speedtest Quarterfinals – Upload Speed

Speedtest Semifinals – Download Speed

Speedtest Finals – Fastest Download Speeds (top 10% of results)

About the Author

Kerry Baker

Broadband in LatAm: Uphill Climb

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

To truly address the digital divide, meaningful connectivity starts with robust, accessible broadband internet for all

Fixed Connectivity

Up-Right Trends

Mobile Connectivity

What the phone sees

What the 5G phone sees

5G Speed – green means go fast

Don’t wait

About the Author

Kerry Baker

How a Power Outage Impacted Chile’s Mobile Network Resiliency

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Here’s what Chile’s 12-hour nationwide power outage looked like according to mobile Speedtest data

Cómo afectó un apagón eléctrico a la resiliencia de la red móvil de Chile

Así fue el apagón nacional de 12 horas en Chile según los datos de Speedtest móvil

About the Author

Kerry Baker

Replay the 2024 season and playoffs according to Ookla Speedtest Intelligence^® data