Download - DT Benchmark

RF South Confidential

Inter Operator

Inter-operator Benchmarking


Inter Operator Benchmarking Report

Hyderabad

Report Compiled by

Muhammad Adeel Ahmed

of 28

Report


Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................

1.1 NETWORKS UNDER TEST ................................

1.2 SAMPLING METHODOLOGY ................................

1.3 DRIVE TEST LOCATION ................................

2.0 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

2.1 DRIVE TEST CALL SUMMARY ................................

2.2 BENCHMARKING SUMMARY ................................

3.0 NETWORK ACCESSIBILITY (I

3.1 RXLEV PLOTS ................................

3.2 RXLEV VALUES AND DISTRIBUTIONS

3.3 C/I PLOTS ................................

3.4 C/I VALUES AND DISTRIBUTIONS

4.0 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY

4.1 CALL SETUP SUCCESS RATE ................................

4.2 CALL SETUP TIME ................................

5.0 NETWORK RETAINABILITY

5.1 RXQUAL PLOTS ................................

5.2 RXQUAL VALUES AND DISTRIBUTIONS

5.3 DROPPED CALL LOCATIONS................................

5.4 DROPPED CALL VALUES ................................

5.5 SPEECH CODEC VALUES ................................

6.0 CONCLUSION................................



................................................................................................

................................................................................................

................................................................................................

................................................................................................

MENT SUMMARY ................................................................................................

................................................................................................

................................................................................................

ORK ACCESSIBILITY (IDLE MODE) ................................................................

.............................................................................................................................

ISTRIBUTIONS ................................................................

...............................................................................................................................

ISTRIBUTIONS ...........................................................................................

ILITY ................................................................................................

................................................................................................

................................................................................................

ILITY ...............................................................................................

........................................................................................................................

ISTRIBUTIONS ................................................................

................................................................................................

................................................................................................

................................................................................................

........................................................................................................................

of 28

..................................................3

............................................3

.........................................3

...............................................4

.................................5

......................................5

........................................5

........................................6

.............................6

.........................................................8

............................... 10

........................... 12

.................................. 14

..................................... 14

..................................................... 15

............................... 15

........................ 16

.................................................... 18

...................................... 20

............................................ 22

............................................ 24

........................ 28


1.0 Introduction

This report provides results of inter o

calls from field measurements conducted

1.1 Networks under Test

Area Operator

Hyderabad Telenor

Hyderabad Mobilink

Hyderabad Ufone

Hyderabad Warid

1.2 Sampling Methodology

Type of Measurement Duration of Call (

Idle Mode

Dedicated Mode Short Call



This report provides results of inter operator benchmarking against QOS parameters for voice

calls from field measurements conducted for all GSM operators in Hyderabad.

1.1 Networks under Test

Sampling Methodology

Duration of Call (Sec) Idle Time (Sec) Equipment Used

NA all Tems 8.0 without external

120 10 Tems 8.0 without external antenna

of 28

parameters for voice

Equipment Used

out external antenna

Tems 8.0 without external antenna


1.3 Drive Test Location

Drive Test Route of Hyderabad City is shown below on a Google Earth Raster Image.



Drive Test Route of Hyderabad City is shown below on a Google Earth Raster Image.

of 28


2.0 Management Summary

The testing for QOS parameters was divided into three distinct

Accessibility, Service Accessibility and Network

means that Network should have sufficient radio conditions (Typically Level and C/I) so that

mobile can camp onto the Network without going into emergency mode.

is user perceived successful call attempts

audios , not responding, error in connection, Network Busy) and

that once the subscriber is using the Network what kind of quality of service he/

on the Network (specifically focusing o

2.1 Drive Test Call Summary

Events

Call Attempts

Successful Call Setup

Blocked Call

Dropped Call

Note*: Successful call setup = Call Attempts

2.2 Benchmarking Summary

Rxlev >-75dbm

C/I >= 12

RxQual Sub < 5

Avg Call SetupTime (secs)

Dropped Call Rate

Handover Success Rate

Call Setup Success Rate



Management Summary

The testing for QOS parameters was divided into three distinct categories

Accessibility, Service Accessibility and Network Sustainability. Network Accessibility


mobile can camp onto the Network without going into emergency mode. Service Accessibility

is user perceived successful call attempts (typically problems like open and closed loop no

audios , not responding, error in connection, Network Busy) and Network Re

that once the subscriber is using the Network what kind of quality of service he/

specifically focusing on drops after call is connected and breakups

2.1 Drive Test Call Summary

Telenor Mobilink Ufone Warid

251 274 267

246 266 253

5 8 14

6 18 21

setup = Call Attempts – Blocked Calls.

2.2 Benchmarking Summary

Telenor Mobilink Ufone Warid

80.7% 74.9% 83.4% 86%

61.9% 53.4% 81.6% 82.7

75.5% 80.7% 87.2% 90%

Avg Call SetupTime (secs) 12.0 6.0 6.0 6.0

Dropped Call Rate 2.4% 6.8% 8.3% 4%

Handover Success Rate 94% 96% 98.7% 97.5

Call Setup Success Rate 98.0% 97.1% 94.7% 93.2

of 28

categories: Network

Network Accessibility typically


Service Accessibility

like open and closed loop no

Network Retainability is

that once the subscriber is using the Network what kind of quality of service he/she experiences

n drops after call is connected and breakups).

Warid

265

247

18

10

Warid

%

82.7%

%

.0

%

97.5%

93.2%


3.0 Network Accessibility

3.1 RxLev Plots

Legends RxLev

Telenor



Accessibility (Idle Mode)

0 to -67

-67 to -75

-75 to -85

-85 to -95

-95 to -110

of 28


Mobilink

Ufone



of 28


3.2 RxLev Values and Distributions

0 to -67

-67 to -75

-75 to -85

-85 to -95

-95 to -110

Warid



and Distributions

Telenor Mobilink Ufone

53.3% 45.7% 60.0%

27.4% 29.2% 23.3%

17.3% 20.7% 14.5%

1.9% 4.0% 2.1%

0% 0.4% 0%

of 28

Warid

61.3%

24.7%

13%

1%

0%


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Telenor



Mobilink Ufone

Rx Level (dBm)

of 28

Warid


3.3 C/I Plots

Legends C/I Plots

Telenor



12 to 31

9 to 12

4 to 9

0 to 4

of 28


Mobilink

Ufone



of 28


3.4 C/I Values and Distributions

C/I

12 to 31

9 to 12

4 to 9

0 to 4

Warid



C/I Values and Distributions


61.9% 53.4% 81.6%

18.6% 17.4% 10.4%

14.8% 18.6% 6.5%

4.7% 10.5% 1.5%

of 28

Warid

82.7%

9.8%

5.9%

1.5%


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Telenor



Mobilink Ufone Warid

C/I Worst

of 28

Warid


4.0 Service Accessibility

Service Accessibility is user perceived

closed loop, no audios, not responding, error in connection, Network Busy)

4.1 Call Setup Success Rate

Event


90%

91%

92%

93%

94%

95%

96%

97%

98%

99%

Telenor




Accessibility

Service Accessibility is user perceived successful call attempts (typically problems like open and

responding, error in connection, Network Busy).

4.1 Call Setup Success Rate


98.0% 97.1% 94.7%



of 28

successful call attempts (typically problems like open and

Warid

93.2%


4.2 Call Setup Time

Event

Call Setup Time ( Secs)

5.0 Network Retainability

Network Retainability is that once the subscriber is using the Network what kind of quality of

service he/she experiences on the Network (specifically focusing on drops after call is connected

and breakups.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Telenor




12.0 6.0 6.0

5.0 Network Retainability

tainability is that once the subscriber is using the Network what kind of quality of

on the Network (specifically focusing on drops after call is connected


Call Setup Time (sec)

of 28

Warid

6.0

tainability is that once the subscriber is using the Network what kind of quality of

on the Network (specifically focusing on drops after call is connected

Warid


5.1 RxQual Plots

RxQual Legend

Telenor



0 to 4

5 to 6

6 to 7

of 28


Mobilink

Ufone



of 28


5.2 RxQual Values and Distributions

Quality

0 to 4

5 to 6

6 to 7

Warid



Values and Distributions


75.5% 80.7% 87.2%

8.7% 9.8% 5.3%

15.8% 9.5% 7.4%

of 28

Warid

90%

4.2%

5.8%


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Telenor



Mobilink Ufone

Rx Quality

of 28

Warid


5.3 Dropped Call Locations

Dropped Calls are marked with red arrows on the raster image.

Note: These Dropped calls are taken from long call samples only.

Telenor



Dropped Call Locations

Dropped Calls are marked with red arrows on the raster image.

calls are taken from long call samples only.

of 28


Mobilink

Ufone



of 28


5.4 Dropped Call Values

These values are taken from short calls

Event

Dropped Calls

Warid



short calls.


6 18 21

of 28

Warid

10


0

5

10

15

20

25

Telenor

Number of Dropped Calls




Number of Dropped Calls

of 28

Warid


5.5 Speech Codec Values

Telenor



Values

HR

FR

EFR

AMR HR

AMR FR

of 28


Mobilink

Ufone



of 28


Channel Type

HR

FR

EFR

AMR HR

AMR FR

Warid




0% 32.1% 0%

0% 0% 0%

0% 67.9% 0%

53.9% 0% 27.7%

46.1% 0% 72.3%

of 28

Warid

0%

0%

2.9%

1.2%

95.9%


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Telenor



Mobilink Ufone

Speech Codec

of 28

Warid


6.0 Conclusion

It can be seen from the report Telenor leads the other operators in terms of DCR and CSSR, Howe

Telenor is ranked 3rd

in Quality and Rxlev

in Hyderabad city in terms of DCR and CSSR



be seen from the report Telenor leads the other operators in terms of DCR and CSSR, Howe

in Quality and Rxlevels. So it can simply be concluded that Telenor is Best Network

in terms of DCR and CSSR.

of 28

be seen from the report Telenor leads the other operators in terms of DCR and CSSR, However

can simply be concluded that Telenor is Best Network

Download - DT Benchmark

Top Related