While I admit I haven't poured a great deal of time into it I'm not finding anything on the speeds of Cabmiums 3Ghz 450 (what speeds can it deliver to customers/CPE) or what is expected when CBRS becomes a thing.
I did find a infographic that showed CNRanger compared to 450m and while it shows that 450m will deliver more bandwidth to the customer it doesn't say how much bandwidth.
This is a bit of a difficult question... you have to consider that there are several release versions of LTE eNb software and hardware (similar to 450, 450i, and 450m) and over a dozen UE CAT levels (similar to 450, 450i and 450b). You also have to consider aggregate AP throughput and headline client data rates for both the downlink and uplink (as they differ with certain radios).
For the base stations...
In LOS conditions, when comparing the same channel width sizes, PMP450 will easily beat any LTE manufacturer's (including cnRanger ATM) Release 9 eNb and CAT4 UE's. This is due to PMP450 supporting 256QAM on downlink and uplink, along with 2x2 MIMO on the uplink. Even after cnRanger is fully optimized and running Release 10+ on eNb and higher CAT level UE's (level 6 and beyond)... PMP450m will still have the upper hand (at least for awhile, and this assumes no further 450 development or optimizations, which is highly unlikely) when it comes to aggregate throughput.
Another note... the PMP450m 3GHz will support channel widths up to 40MHz... vs. an LTE R9/CAT4 setup can only use a maximum 20MHz channel/carrier and is not capable of MU-MIMO. As you can guess... this increases the max aggregate capacity delta between each platform considerably.
Things can change a bit on the client side...
There are hardware and software factors with PMP450 SM's that can result in lower client bandwidth then LTE... an example would be using original 450 SM's that are limited to around 40-50mbps due to processing limitations, this figure gets worse when NAT, filtering, or other CPU/PPS intensive services are used.... a CAT4 UE can push faster data rates at just over 100mbps on the downlink using a single 20MHz carrier with NAT and other services enabled. Things change however, if you're using a 450b or 450i radio, these radios have a much faster processor (FPGA) and will give you client downlink data rates comparable or better then a CAT4 UE (better if using a larger then 20MHz channel width). To further muddy things, ANY version of 450 will beat a CAT4 UE on headline uplink bandwidth (due to CAT4 UE's meager 16QAM 1T uplink limitations). Things change however once you get into CAT6 UE's and beyond.... when you start looking at UE's with 4R and 2T chains, and the ability to use 256QAM... but then you have to use a more advanced eNb, and carrier aggregation to get benefits. Using a CAT6 UE on a Release 9 eNb will not result in any meaningful gains, and it will perform as if it's a CAT4 UE.
All that aside...
The easiest way to compare performance between 450, 450i, 450m and cnRanger (in its infancy) is to download the newest version of LinkPlanner which now has preliminary cnRanger support. NOTE! cnRanger is only available for licensed EBS/BRS 2.XGHz bands ATM... so you'll need to take this into account when you're comparing platforms.
So, the highest teir I could possibly offer customers using 3Ghz 450m is 100Mbps 'ish ?
Using PMP450m 3GHz @ 30 or 40MHz and using a 450i or 450b SM (release sometime this October)... you could get more then 100mbps... as an example, the PMP450 capacity planner shows 151.9mbps capacity (130mbps DL/21.9mbps UL) when using a 450b on a 40MHz channel width. I have not personally done any net throughput tests with this size channel width as it is very difficult to get a 40MHz chunk 3GHz spectrum. For CBRS, worst case scenario you'll get a single 10MHz channel (well, the real worst case would be that all GAA is used up and there's no spectrum for you)... if there are little to no CBRS users in your area, there will be a better likelihood that the SAS will authorize you to get 2x or 3x 10MHz adjacent chunks for 20MHz or 30MHz operation.
Well that's pretty underwhelming, I was hoping it had improved more since the last time I looked at it. It's pretty much the same as our 900Mhz 450i if we could actually use more than 10Mhz channels (except 450m costs a lot more)... Even our little towns have 250Mbps cable for $80 a month and bigger cities (by bigger city , population 5,000) has Gigabit cable for $100 a month.
Isn't Cambium working on a 60Ghz product ? Maybe that will be ready when I start our next roll out of micropops.
I do appreciate you taking the time to provide all that information. Thanks !
So I do have to point out that you did ask for best client throughput. The aggregate throughput of a 450m 3GHz AP using a 30 or 40MHz channel width and an optimal spread of clients will give you 430+mbps, and 600+mbps of capacity (respectively).
And YES, Cambium is coming out with a 60GHz PtMP product based off of FaceBook's Terragraph technology.
>So I do have to point out that you did ask for best client throughput.
That is what I am most interested in. We have used enough Canopy / 450 gear over the years to understand 450's ability to very reliably deliver claimed rates under heavy load is greater than Ubiquiti's by a crazy amount and probably considerably better than ePMP also. I'm doing fiber fed micropops though, with probably an average of 10 - 12 customers on each AP so what makes the 450 so great doesn't really help me as much as just raw bandwidth delivered to a small number of CPE's at 100's of feet instead of 10,000's of feet.
Thanks again though, you provided a lot of useful info that I didn't even know I needed/wanted to know.