An international team led by Northeastern University, with participation from IMDEA Networks, TU Berlin, University of Porto, University of Oslo, Politecnico di Torino, Technical University of Denmark, and Hewlett Packard Labs, sought the answer. For a year, they measured performance in several cities across Europe and North America. The conclusion: 5G is widely deployed in major urban centers, but its benefits don't always translate into a better experience than 4G.
“We collected controlled and crowdsourced data in eight cities [Berlin, Turin, Oslo, Porto, Madrid, Vancouver, Boston and the Bay Area] and found a surprising geographical and operator-level variation: some networks offer excellent 5G uplink performance, while others offer little or no improvement over LTE,” explains Imran Khan, a predoctoral researcher at Northeastern University and first author of the paper.
Claudio Fiandrino, assistant professor at IMDEA Networks, summarizes it this way: “5G deployment in major cities has stabilized, but that stability has not yet translated into consistent latency advantages over 4G/LTE: the reality is more varied than marketing suggests.”
The study combines large-scale collective measurements with a controlled millimeter-wave campaign, which adds breadth and depth to the results. And the picture it paints is uneven: in many places, 5G does not offer clear latency advantages over LTE. The differences are due less to the “5G” label than to operator decisions, such as spectrum band, deployment density, or the use of cloud and edge technologies.
Beyond the technical results, the study focuses on what this means for users and policymakers: “For many current users and real-world applications, switching to 5G will not automatically guarantee lower latency or better responsiveness. Some 5G cells offer lower latency, but in others, performance may be similar to or even worse than LTE, depending on the operator and location. Therefore, decisions about latency-sensitive services must be based on real-world measurements, not just on technological advancements ,” explains Fiandrino.
The team also warns about the risks of making the leap to 6G too soon. “There is a risk of wasted investment and unmet public expectations; inadequate allocation of resources toward promoted features instead of solving operational problems (coverage gaps, backhaul/edge placement, spectrum fragmentation); and potential policy and market decisions based on optimistic promises rather than tangible reality. This could also undermine trust if future generations (6G) are promoted prematurely,” warns the IMDEA Networks researcher.
The authors insist that the solution lies in early and large-scale measurement. It's crucial to focus on the actual user experience before moving forward and to resolve operational and implementation issues before transitioning to the next generation. 6G policies and investments should be guided by transparent and reproducible results.
In short, the study confirms that 5G is not yet “mature.” As Fiandrino emphasizes: “In terms of coverage and deployment stability, 5G appears to be mature in major cities, but it has not yet fully reached maturity in terms of reliability, delivering clear advantages in performance and user experience compared to 4G, especially regarding latency. Therefore, maturity is conditional: deployed, yes; consistently superior performance, not yet.”
In short, the study concludes that while 5G deployment and stability appear mature in many urban areas, the benefits in terms of performance (particularly latency) are still uneven. As Fiandrino points out: “In terms of coverage and deployment stability, 5G seems mature in major cities, but it has not yet reached full maturity in terms of reliability, clear performance advantages, and user experience compared to 4G, especially regarding latency. Therefore, maturity is conditional: deployed, yes; consistently superior performance, not yet.”.
Source(s): IMDEA Networks Institute
