Mobile Broadband Shootout: Vodafone vs Three

[Ben]

The Test

Both networks will be tested at the same location at approximately the same time of day, both in good HSPA coverage. Each will undergo a total of 4 speed tests followed by two ping tests.

Summary of results

http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/
Vodafone: PING 249.5ms, DOWN 4790kbps, UP 1157.5kbps
Three: PING 179ms, DOWN 5079kbps, UP 1190kbps
Winner: Three. 70.5ms less latency, 289kbps faster downloads, 32.5kbps faster uploads.

http://speedtest.net/
Vodafone: PING 242.5ms, DOWN 4638.5kbps, UP 1166.5kbps
Three: PING 171ms, DOWN 5216.5kbps, UP 1259kbps
Winner: Three. 71.5ms less latency, 578kbps faster downloads, 92.5kbps faster uploads.

PING bbc.co.uk
Vodafone:
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 378.156/443.599/629.308/78.642 ms
Three:
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 81.706/90.153/102.444/5.725 ms
Winner: Three. 353.446ms less latency and more stable.

PING google.com
Vodafone:
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 377.897/410.791/499.677/32.504 ms
Three:
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 67.100/82.406/95.790/9.648 ms
Winner: Three. 328.385ms less latency and more stable.

Conclusion

The speed test results are actually pretty close. Download speeds are very good on both networks, but Three had the edge in every single test. Three also has consistently lower latency, a good thing because it means the connection 'feels' faster in terms of responsiveness when you're browsing and is also better suited to online gaming and real-time apps like VoIP, but the gap isn't too huge. Vodafone, however, have historically had very low latency, relatively speaking... not so great now.

The ping tests show up some more serious issues for Vodafone. The time it takes for a packet of data to go to one of the servers in the test and come back is significantly longer than on Three. You really feel that extra 300ms of latency when browsing on Vodafone, and it'd make online games unpleasant. Why it was so much worse in the dedicated ping tests I don't know. Vodafone's times also varied significantly more - what we're looking for is ping times to be relatively stable. Perhaps Vodafone's network is congested.

Three is the clear winner. As little as a year ago I sincerely doubt that this would've been the case. I'm actually glad that these numbers support my usage experience, because I would've been surprised if I'd discovered that my increasing reliance on Three for mobile broadband, and recent praise of their network, had been misplaced.

As always, your own geographic location and circumstances will affect your experiences. However, given Three's extensive 3G coverage, they definitely get my recommendation at the moment. Gulp.


Full Results

Vodafone (Option K3760 USB)

14:40 18/08/2010

http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/
1.
PING 247ms
DOWN 5082kbps
UP 1192kbps
2.
PING 252ms
DOWN 4498kbps
UP 1123 kbps

http://speedtest.net/
1.
PING 247ms
DOWN 5089kbps
UP 1187
2.
PING 238ms
DOWN 4188kbps
UP 1146kbps

PING bbc.co.uk (212.58.224.138): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=0 ttl=116 time=549.531 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=1 ttl=116 time=629.308 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=2 ttl=116 time=449.017 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=3 ttl=116 time=418.991 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=4 ttl=116 time=388.924 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=5 ttl=116 time=388.520 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=6 ttl=116 time=398.233 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=7 ttl=116 time=378.156 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=8 ttl=116 time=387.724 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=9 ttl=116 time=447.585 ms
^C
--- bbc.co.uk ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 378.156/443.599/629.308/78.642 ms

PING google.com (173.194.36.104): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=0 ttl=55 time=499.677 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=419.409 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=399.267 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=399.108 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=379.059 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=408.790 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 time=418.426 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=7 ttl=55 time=408.273 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=8 ttl=55 time=398.006 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=9 ttl=55 time=377.897 ms
^C
--- google.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 377.897/410.791/499.677/32.504 ms

Three (Huawei E5830 WiFi)

14:50 18/08/2010

http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/
1.
PING 176ms
DOWN 5153kbps
UP 1259kbps
2.
PING 182ms
DOWN 5005kbps
UP 1121kbps

http://speedtest.net/
1.
PING 171ms
DOWN 5416kbps
UP 1320kbps
2.
PING 171ms
DOWN 5017kbps
UP 1198kbps

PING bbc.co.uk (212.58.224.138): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=0 ttl=120 time=84.712 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=1 ttl=120 time=95.232 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=2 ttl=120 time=85.312 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=3 ttl=120 time=93.225 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=4 ttl=120 time=102.444 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=5 ttl=120 time=91.973 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=6 ttl=120 time=81.706 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=7 ttl=120 time=86.460 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=8 ttl=120 time=90.409 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.224.138: icmp_seq=9 ttl=120 time=90.058 ms
^C
--- bbc.co.uk ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 81.706/90.153/102.444/5.725 ms
MacBook-Air-Rev-A:~ benfitter$

PING google.com (173.194.36.104): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=0 ttl=56 time=89.585 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=69.081 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=88.687 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=78.377 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=78.063 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=67.100 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=76.660 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=7 ttl=56 time=95.790 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=8 ttl=56 time=95.566 ms
64 bytes from 173.194.36.104: icmp_seq=9 ttl=56 time=85.152 ms
^C
--- google.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 67.100/82.406/95.790/9.648 ms

[Hands0n]

An excellent test and analysis which pretty much reflects what I have seen when checking out the performance of Vodafone vs Three. Although my reasons have been because my experience of Vodafone's mobile data network are such that the facility is all but unusable.

The biggest problem that I have observed with Vodafone is one of network Jitter or Packet Delay Variation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packet_delay_variation) which is absolutely smashing their data capability to pieces. Coupled with packet loss, which I have measured in abundance on Vodfone's network of late, the current experience is dreadful.

Three's mobile data network, by comparison, is a veritable nirvana. Coupled with their current tariffs the Three mobile broadband proposition is highly appealing.

[The Mullet of G]

I personally think Vodafone have been suffering from an identity crisis, they are still charging premium prices for what is at best an average service. They either need to drastically improve the quality of their service, or drop the prices to reflect the quality. I'm glad people are starting to get wise to Vodafone, I ditched them 3 or 4 years ago as they were 3rd rate and their CS was 4th or 5th rate at best. Its sad as I was once a proud Vodafone customer, now I'd choose Tesco Mobile or Three long before I went back to Vodafone.

[Ben]

This made me chuckle!

Mobile News, Aug 16th 2010:
"It will be clear who has prepared for the future and who has been milking the present. Those milking the present, those which haven't invested in their networks, will find data usage goes up and their networks fall over" -- Guy Laurence, UK chief executive, Vodafone.

[The Mullet of G]

This made me chuckle!

Mobile News, Aug 16th 2010:
"It will be clear who has prepared for the future and who has been milking the present. Those milking the present, those which haven't invested in their networks, will find data usage goes up and their networks fall over" -- Guy Laurence, UK chief executive, Vodafone.


He must have been referring to Vodafone falling over or he is patient zero in a new outbreak of foot and mouth. :)

[Hands0n]

This made me chuckle!

Mobile News, Aug 16th 2010:
"It will be clear who has prepared for the future and who has been milking the present. Those milking the present, those which haven't invested in their networks, will find data usage goes up and their networks fall over" -- Guy Laurence, UK chief executive, Vodafone.

Wow! How prescient. This is a classic case of talking the talk but not having the wherewithall to walk the walk.

This should be writted large over the entrance to Vodafone's HQ Boardroom.

[Hands0n]

I personally think Vodafone have been suffering from an identity crisis, they are still charging premium prices for what is at best an average service. They either need to drastically improve the quality of their service, or drop the prices to reflect the quality. I'm glad people are starting to get wise to Vodafone, I ditched them 3 or 4 years ago as they were 3rd rate and their CS was 4th or 5th rate at best. Its sad as I was once a proud Vodafone customer, now I'd choose Tesco Mobile or Three long before I went back to Vodafone.

I'd agree with much of that. For my own part I am a complete company tart. That is, I do not hold any loyalty whatsoever to any company that is selling me product for which they are taking my hard earned readies. If they want my business then they will damned well have to earn it. Period.

And so, with Vodafone I have had a good few years. Previous to that I had a couple of bad years, jumped ship to Orange, a big mistake, jumped ship to Three which was okay until they started messing me around and then jumped back to Vodafone from which point all has been good. Until of late that is.

This last few months has seen Vodafone lose its sheen in my eye. The propositions have become less attractive by each month. Almost punitive rules and tariff changes are being introduced, and worse still retrospectively. The final nails are now the network lack of performance which have been going on for several weeks, and with no formal announcement by Vodafone of what is going on. Dissatisfaction is being registered everywhere. Vodafone is trading on its brand reputation but that is now at some risk as word spreads.

Vodafone are a massive company and it would take a lot to actually harm them. But if the Enterprise is as unable to use their mobile networks as successfully as are their retail customers they will feel the pain when those contracts come up for renewal. They cannot sign up to Enterprise SLA with a network that they cannot control from time to time! Now that will hurt.

[3GScottishUser]

There is no doubt that 3 have invested heavily in their new shared network and data has been made more reliable. They have more bandwidth to begin with than any other operator so they should have far better capacity for users. They still have huge issues with calls switching from 3G to 2G and dropping and that will probably always remain a major problem for them selling mobile phones but I am sure they could be a good option for mobile data until the 900Mhz 3G becomes available which will be far more robust although LTE might arrive before the squabbles about the reallocation of 900Mhz is resolved.

3 should be reaping the benefits of the smartphone data consumption now but I fear their past performance might be too much in terms of form for anyone who has sampled their vioce and text services to trust them with a heafty £30-£40 a month contract for 24 months. I would'nt.

[Hands0n]

I would'nt.

See, thats the trouble that Three face. I'll very tentatively risk a SIM-only 30-day contract with them, but then again not for my primary mobile number. I've taken out a low-cost 18 month contract with the MiFi, but wouldn't think of doing so for my primary mobile.

Their brand reputation has been ruined by their very own off-shore CS team and it would take a great deal of effort to change it. Three need to inspire the public's confidence. Right now I'm almost terrified of risking a commitment to them of anything longer than 30 days. I am not alone.

They'd likely have to do a Nat West (was it?) who brought their CS back to these shores and made a big public song and dance about it.

[DBMandrake]

There is no doubt that 3 have invested heavily in their new shared network and data has been made more reliable. They have more bandwidth to begin with than any other operator so they should have far better capacity for users.

I quite often test the speeds of the different networks at different locations just out of sheer geek curiosity and in the last few months it's now reached the point where I am surprised if Three is not the fastest of the bunch in just about any area where they have 3G coverage. (Not to mention they often have 3G coverage in areas where many of the other networks don't) The last few weeks I've been all over Scotland including many small towns and Three has been the clear winner both for 3G coverage and data speeds.

We're not always talking about being fastest by small margins either - in many places I've found Three to be 2 to 3 times faster than other networks. It's not at all uncommon for me to see speeds of 3Mbit in the same location where I might see 800kbit or less, sometimes much less, on say Orange. (Despite relatively good 3G coverage compared to O2 and Vodafone, Orange's data speeds seem to be abysmal - I've seldom seen over 1Mbit on Orange, yet I've come to expect 1Mbit+ speeds from Three, even in out of the way places...)

It's clear that Three have been investing heavily in the data side of their 3G network, (not just geographic coverage) to the point that I currently consider them a data network which almost as an afterthought can make calls - which depending on whether you primarily use your phone for data or calls could be seen as a good thing or a bad thing. The other networks on the other hand all seem to be phone networks that are optimized for making calls, but treat data as an afterthought.



They still have huge issues with calls switching from 3G to 2G and dropping and that will probably always remain a major problem for them selling mobile phones but I am sure they could be a good option for mobile data until the 900Mhz 3G becomes available which will be far more robust although LTE might arrive before the squabbles about the reallocation of 900Mhz is resolved.

Dropped calls when going from a 3G to 2G area is Three's biggest Achilles heel for sure, (aside from their CS of course, although that's not a technical problem with the network...) however in my experience if you remain within a 3G coverage area calls are very reliable and the call quality is excellent - it's only the inability to roam to 2G mid call that is causing the problems.

The only true solution to this is for 850/900Mhz 3G coverage - if Three are able to roll out 850/900Mhz coverage from all their current sites (in parallel with their existing 2100Mhz equipment, to maximize capacity) the problem will be resolved and they can finally abandon their 2G roaming agreement with Orange and stand on their own feet.

Technically, 3G on 850/900Mhz with go further and penetrate buildings better than 2G on 1800Mhz, so 3G only coverage on the lower frequencies would be better than what they get now from Orange's 2G on 1800Mhz. (Although still slightly inferior to 2G on 900Mhz, ala O2 and Vodafone, but probably made up for with Three's greater cell density)

There is a precedent for a 3G only network that stands on it's own without roaming agreements - Telecom New Zealand built a brand new 850Mhz 3G network last year that has nationwide 3G only coverage on 850Mhz in all areas, with additional 2100Mhz coverage for more bandwidth in higher density areas. No 2G fallback, no roaming agreements, and yet it has better coverage than the existing 2G/3G network run by Vodafone New Zealand, and although they had a few technical problems early on they've really nailed it now.

We could be looking at about a 4-5 year wait for widespread 850/900Mhz 3G to happen here though - probably another 2 years of wrangling over frequencies and license auctions, then at least 2 years for a network to revisit all their sites installing new 850/900Mhz kit. Until that time Three will have to limp along with some sort of roaming agreement...



3 should be reaping the benefits of the smartphone data consumption now but I fear their past performance might be too much in terms of form for anyone who has sampled their vioce and text services to trust them with a heafty £30-£40 a month contract for 24 months. I would'nt.
Neither would I, and I use Three now. But guess what, I wouldn't trust any of the networks with expensive long term contracts either - looks how quickly someone like Vodafone can fall from grace.

Technology is moving so fast in the mobile industry now that phones are hand held computers instead of devices for making and receiving calls. No longer are people happy with the same call/sms only phone for years, (I had the same Nokia 6100 for nearly 5 years before getting an iPhone...) many people are now locked into yearly or bi-yearly smartphone upgrades and each new generation places more and more demands on the networks. Those networks that aren't constantly scurrying to keep their network upgrades ahead of demand will fall from grace in the same way Vodafone seem to be doing now...


See, thats the trouble that Three face. I'll very tentatively risk a SIM-only 30-day contract with them, but then again not for my primary mobile number. I've taken out a low-cost 18 month contract with the MiFi, but wouldn't think of doing so for my primary mobile.

Their brand reputation has been ruined by their very own off-shore CS team and it would take a great deal of effort to change it. Three need to inspire the public's confidence. Right now I'm almost terrified of risking a commitment to them of anything longer than 30 days. I am not alone.

Just one more reason to go SIM free in an era of change and uncertainty ? Who knows what's around the corner - a network that could be running satisfactorily today may crumble a year or two from now due to lack of infrastructure investment foresight (these things seem to go in cycles) - there's no shame in being the rat that jumped from the sinking ship to the ship floating back to the surface - phone networks are here to provide phone/data service to us after all, not to demand blind brand loyalty from us. By staying with SIM free phones I leave my options fully open to jump ship at any time, and jump back again if the situation warrants it...:)

[The Mullet of G]

I'd agree with much of that. For my own part I am a complete company tart. That is, I do not hold any loyalty whatsoever to any company that is selling me product for which they are taking my hard earned readies. If they want my business then they will damned well have to earn it. Period.

And so, with Vodafone I have had a good few years. Previous to that I had a couple of bad years, jumped ship to Orange, a big mistake, jumped ship to Three which was okay until they started messing me around and then jumped back to Vodafone from which point all has been good. Until of late that is.

This last few months has seen Vodafone lose its sheen in my eye. The propositions have become less attractive by each month. Almost punitive rules and tariff changes are being introduced, and worse still retrospectively. The final nails are now the network lack of performance which have been going on for several weeks, and with no formal announcement by Vodafone of what is going on. Dissatisfaction is being registered everywhere. Vodafone is trading on its brand reputation but that is now at some risk as word spreads.

Vodafone are a massive company and it would take a lot to actually harm them. But if the Enterprise is as unable to use their mobile networks as successfully as are their retail customers they will feel the pain when those contracts come up for renewal. They cannot sign up to Enterprise SLA with a network that they cannot control from time to time! Now that will hurt.

I think thats probably the best way to be, brand loyalty can be expensive and you rarely get rewarded for that loyalty these days. I think as we move forward brand loyalty is becoming less important in a lot of areas, where people simply want the best they can get at the best price, and if they don't feel they are getting that they will quickly jump ship.

I had great times with Vodafone, I was with them for the majority of my early contract years, then it all started going down hill, instead of it being my friends on lesser networks who couldn't get signal, it was now me. Also the CS really went south, they were taking direct debits before the stated date or a week or 2 after, and it was costing me around �35 in bank charges everytime they did, upon calling CS they were unhelpful and felt I should be the one jumping through hoops.

I think you hit the nail on the head pretty much, the nit picking rule and tariff changes coupled with the recent poor service is bound to leave a bad taste in the mouth, and it doesn't help that Vodafone aren't forth coming with answers. Like you say Vodafone are massive and it will take a lot to harm them, but it will eventually show up in the bottom line and they will have to take action, hope its sooner rather than later though. :)


Text...


I don't usually read text walls, but I made an exception and you make some really good points. I think the overwhelming feeling is that Three are a great option for data on a 30 day sim, but as a long term prospect for a main phone, not so much so. Its a shame that they are effectively undoing all their good work by being cheap with CS, they surely can't be saving anywhere near as much money as they must be losing due to it.

[Hands0n]

I think the overwhelming feeling is that Three are a great option for data on a 30 day sim, but as a long term prospect for a main phone, not so much so. Its a shame that they are effectively undoing all their good work by being cheap with CS, they surely can't be saving anywhere near as much money as they must be losing due to it.

I also think that the CS function in India is also holding back any growth and development plans that Three have. Each customer experience as exhibited in that completely typical YouTube video is a serious bit of bad PR spread across many. As the tech savvy start to record and present such experiences on the social media sites the damage to Three's brand reputation will become more pronounced.

I really want to see Three become the brilliantly successful 3G company that it set out to be seven years ago. But that plan was all but sabotaged by their off-shore CS operation and has continued to be to this very day. I despair.