Fixed Wireless vs. Fiber: A Comparison
For years, internet service providers (ISPs) and consumers alike considered fiber broadband the gold standard for reliable, high-performance broadband. However, deploying fiber in certain environments, like rural regions or extremely densely populated urban areas, is both time-consuming and expensive, leaving many users without high-speed internet access.
Recent advancements in fixed wireless access (FWA) technology make it a strong alternative in regions where difficult terrain or existing underground infrastructure limits the feasibility of fiber deployments. This blog compares fixed wireless vs. fiber based on deployment cost and speed, network coverage, reliability, and performance and discusses how FWA can help bridge the digital divide.
Comparing Fixed Wireless vs. Fiber
| Fixed Wireless | Fiber | |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment Cost | Inexpensive to deploy; can use existing towers, buildings, and wireless infrastructure | Burying fiber lines requires trenching, which is expensive and can involve extensive right-of-way permitting |
| Deployment Speed | Can be deployed within days using existing radio towers, and immediately provides access to users within line of sight | Can take months to obtain permits, dig trenches, lay cables, and provide last-mile infrastructure to reach user premises |
| Coverage Areas | Wireless signals reach users in remote regions, across difficult terrain, and within high-density urban environments | Laying cable is unfeasible in locations with mountainous terrain, land use restrictions, and existing city infrastructure |
| Reliability | Newer solutions use adaptive modulation and distributed massive MIMO to mitigate weather disruptions and line-of-sight issues | Typically reliable, but can go down from fiber cuts due to natural disasters, construction accidents, and other events |
| Performance | New fixed wireless technologies offer multi-gigabit speeds that are comparable to fiber broadband | Fiber broadband typically offers the fastest internet speeds, though it depends on the carrier and service location |
Fixed Wireless vs. Fiber: Deployment Cost
Deploying fiber optic infrastructure is costly because of the substantial labor required to dig trenches for hundreds or thousands of miles of cable. In addition, service providers must pay for access to private property and public lands that lie between them and their customers. These costs increase significantly in areas with high population densities and/or hard, rocky terrain, making it too expensive to reach all homes and businesses.
Deploying fixed wireless infrastructure is often far less expensive because it usually doesn’t involve laying new cables. FWA base stations can be installed on existing cellular radio towers, and the customer premises equipment (CPE) attaches easily to telephone poles and buildings, reducing the need for new construction and keeping labor costs down. New fixed wireless deployments often begin generating revenue within a few months, whereas seeing the ROI from fiber deployments can take years.
Read this case study to learn how DigitalPath used FWA to deliver high-speed internet access to over 7,000 rural households in Northern California.
Fixed Wireless vs. Fiber: Deployment Speed
Obtaining right-of-way permits for new fiber deployments can extend projects for months beyond the time scheduled to dig trenches and lay cable. Fiber lines must also reach each individual residence and business, which can significantly increase deployment times.
Fixed wireless is far less time-consuming and labor-intensive to install because it uses existing infrastructure. Plus, the placement of base stations and CPE devices provides users with immediate broadband internet access, without the need for last-mile cable.
Fixed Wireless vs. Fiber: Coverage Areas
Laying fiber optic cable is unfeasible in many areas due to treacherous terrain, land use restrictions (particularly around national parks and tribal areas), high population densities that would be disrupted by construction, or individual consumers in extremely remote locations.
Because fixed wireless requires no trenching, it’s possible to deliver FWA broadband to remote, rural areas and locations with rocky terrains. Mounting base stations and CPE on buildings also makes it easier to deploy broadband in high-density urban environments without disrupting residents.
Fixed Wireless vs. Fiber: Reliability
Fiber earns high marks in reliability because underground cables remain unaffected by strong winds, heavy rainfall, or downed trees. However, fiber lines can-–and do–-get severed by earthquakes, landslides, and other major natural disasters, not to mention construction accidents or even rodents.
Although not impervious to weather disruptions, most fixed wireless infrastructure reliability issues are caused by poor line-of-sight between base stations and customer equipment, especially in high-density urban environments. Newer FWA solutions like Tarana Wireless’s G1 platform use advanced technology like adaptive modulation, distributed massive MIMO, and perfect multipath integration to mitigate weather disruptions, interference, and line-of-sight issues.
Read this case study to learn how the City of Cleveland used Tarana G1 FWA to provide city-wide, high-speed internet access.
Fixed Wireless vs. Fiber: Performance
Fiber broadband delivers superior internet speeds and bandwidth compared to traditional fixed wireless networks. However, recent fixed wireless innovations have allowed leading FWA providers to shrink (or even eliminate) the performance gap.
For example, the FCC recently opened the 6GHz band to unlicensed FWA operators, granting providers access to a significant amount of “clean” spectrum and allowing them to deliver gigabit wireless speeds with reduced interference. In addition, Tarana’s next-generation fixed wireless access (ngFWA) platform improves performance by applying signal processing across time, frequency, and spatial domains to provide a perfect channel–even in non-line-of-site environments or poor weather conditions.
Bridging the Digital Divide With Fixed Wireless
High-speed internet access is no longer a luxury, but a fundamental requirement to make basic economic transactions, access educational opportunities, and obtain healthcare and other vital services. However, millions of Americans-–especially those living in rural and tribal communities-–lack reliable broadband service. Fixed wireless allows ISPs to deploy high-speed broadband more quickly and cost-effectively than fiber, making it easier to bridge the digital divide.
Superior FWA Performance With Tarana Wireless & WAV
Tarana’s G1 platform is the world’s first next-generation fixed wireless access solution, providing fiber-class broadband internet access in challenging deployments. G1 uses industry-first technology like distributed massive MIMO, perfect multipath integration, and asynchronous burst interference cancellation (ABIC) to minimize interference and deliver superior performance. Plus, the Tarana Cloud Suite (TCS) streamlines planning, deployment, and management to help maximize operational efficiency.
As a trusted Tarana distributor, WAV can help you find the best ngFWA products to address your unique deployment requirements and challenges. WAV maintains the largest and most consistent stocking position in the wireless networking market and provides world-class customer support to accelerate deployments while reducing headaches.
Contact WAV to learn more about the benefits of fixed wireless vs. fiber with Tarana’s G1 ngFWA platform.
Learn more about Next Generation Fixed Wireless Access (ngFWA)
6GHz Spectrum: Benefits, Challenges, and Opportunities
Learn about the benefits of the 6GHz spectrum for fixed wireless operators before describing potential challenges and how to overcome them.
View Details
Fixed Wireless Access Companies Compared
This article assesses fixed wireless access equipment suppliers and ranks the top six based on maximum throughput, interference canceling technology, non-line-of-sight (NLOS) capability, beamforming capacity, and access points per tower.
View Details
BEAD Program & State Allocations for Funding
Explore how the Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) allocated $42.45 billion to the states.
View Details
Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program Explained
This guide explains the TBCP program, who can apply, and what types of broadband projects it funds before describing the broadband technologies best suited for deployments on tribal lands.
View Details
Non-Line of Sight (NLOS) Broadband Wireless Solution
Compare between LOS and NLOS in terms of distance, density, interference, frequencies, propagation, signal quality, and other characteristics.
View Details
